PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like you. Hi, I’m Harrison Waters, and I’m the producer of The World and Everything in It. If you just started listening to the program in 2023, I want to start off by saying, thanks for listening. And I want to welcome you to express the value you’ve received by making a first time donation to WORLD. Keep listening to learn how you can participate in the mission to produce sound journalism grounded in facts and biblical truth. I hope you enjoy today’s program.
MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning! What if government damages your credit rating? Can you sue to save your reputation? The Supreme Court looks into a seemingly easy question:
JUSTICE KEGAN: What Congress has done is authorize a suit against natural persons, enterprises, and governments.
NICK EICHER, HOST: Also today the Monday Moneybeat: an economist takes the reins of an economic basket-case, Argentina. And the WORLD History Book: today, the assassination of JFK:
CRONKITE: From Dallas, Texas. The flash, apparently official, President Kennedy died at one p.m.
REICHARD: It’s Monday, November 27th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.
EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!
REICHARD: Up next, Kristen Flavin with today’s news.
SOUND: [Israelis celebrating]
KRISTEN FLAVIN, NEWS ANCHOR: Israeli Prisoner Swap » Israelis in Tel Aviv rejoicing at the release of a third group of hostages who were kidnapped by Hamas during an attack early last month.
The warring sides agreed last week to halt fighting in Gaza allow humanitarian aid into the region and exchange Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners.
U.S. President Joe Biden applauded the exchange and celebrated the release of one hostage in particular.
BIDEN: Two days ago, one of our fellow Americans, a little girl named Abigail, who turned four years old, she spent her birthday, that birthday, and at least 50 days before that held hostage by Hamas. Today, she’s free.
Israel today is expected to trade the last of 150 Palestinian prisoners… for the last of 50 hostages Hamas said it would release.
SOUND: [Palestinians celebrating]
Some of the Palestinian prisoners Israel has already released arrived in the West Bank yesterday to celebrations from local residents.
The truce between Israel and the Islamic terror group could be extended, if Hamas agrees to release 10 more hostages per day.
NETANYAHU: [Speaking Hebrew]
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said yesterday that after the truce expires Israel will once again resume its war to eliminate Hamas.
SOUND: [Explosions]
Russia-Ukraine latest » In Kyiv, explosions rang out above the city over the weekend as Russia launched its largest drone attack on the Ukrainian capital since the start of the war.
The Ukrainian air force said its air defenses shot down almost all of more than 60 drones in the attack.
Still, falling debris damaged buildings and injured civilians across the city.
RESIDENT: [Speaking Ukrainian] The window opened and the entire blast wave and fire were in our corridor. We managed to run away with the child. Thank God we are all safe and alive.
A Kyiv resident described the moment an explosion blew out the windows of her building, saying she managed to grab a child and flee to safety.
The mayor of the city said one of those injured in the attack was just 11 years old.
On Sunday, Russia reported a smaller-scale drone attack inside its border, which it blamed on Ukraine. Officials said no one was hurt.
China flu » Chinese officials say an unusually bad cold and flu season is behind a concerning surge of respiratory illness in the country.
Jin Dong-yan is a professor at Hong Kong University.
JIN DONG-YAN: So far there is zero evidence that there is a new virus being circulated in Beijing or elsewhere.
The World Health Organization asked country officials for more information after reports surfaced of a spike in pneumonia cases.
Officials said Sunday that flu, RSV, and pneumonia are circulating widely, especially among children.
The outbreak is receiving heightened attention partly due to China’s lack of transparency at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Chauvin stabbing » The former police officer who was convicted in the 2020 murder of George Floyd is recovering from a prison attack. WORLD’s Josh Schumacher reports.
JOSH SCHUMACHER: Derek Chauvin was hospitalized Friday after another inmate stabbed him at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tuscon, Arizona.
Chauvin, a former Minneapolis officer, is serving two sentences of 20-plus years on federal and state charges in Floyd’s killing.
The African-American man’s death in police custody ignited anti-police protests in 2020. The Minnesota attorney general’s office said Chauvin is expected to survive.
For WORLD, I’m Josh Schumacher.
Holiday Travel » Millions of Americans passed through U.S. airports during what was expected to be a record-breaking Thanksgiving travel weekend.
Spokeswoman for Los Angeles World Airports Victoria Spilabotte:
Spilabotte: Each day we met or exceeded our expectations for passenger volume. And that has put us on track. We’ll record holiday numbers when compared to 2019.
The Transportation Security Administration says roughly 30 million Americans could pass through airport security checkpoints over the holiday season.
Gas Prices/Black Friday shopping » Travelers who hit the highways for Thanksgiving paid a little less for gas than last week. AAA says the nationwide average price for a gallon of regular unleaded is $3.25 cents per gallon, down from $3.31 cents per gallon last week.
California still has the highest statewide average price at $4.90 cents per gallon. Texas has the lowest statewide average price at $2.71 cents.
As prices crept down at the pump, Black Friday shoppers bemoaned high costs elsewhere.
FISHER: This year things are a little tighter, so we’re spending less than we normally would. And there hasn’t been a lot of the great deals that we are used to seeing.
But Adobe Analytics reported that consumers spent almost 10 billion dollars in online purchases on Black Friday this year. That’s up nearly 8 percent from last year.
I’m Kristen Flavin.
Straight ahead: Veteran benefits and credit scores on Legal Docket. Plus, the Monday Moneybeat.
This is The World and Everything in It.
NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s The World and Everything in It for this 27th day of November, 2023. We’re so glad you’ve joined us today. Good morning! I’m Nick Eicher.
MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. You’ve probably heard the expression “long-time listener, first-time caller” … well, we are looking for first-time donors today and tomorrow … and I stress tomorrow because (a) that’s Giving Tuesday and (b) it’s the last opportunity for first-time donors to make a double-impact — because of the generous offer of a first-time-donor match!
EICHER: Right, we have thousands of WORLD donors who support our work and we are grateful for every one. But of the many reasons WORLD Movers support us so generously is because they want to see us reach new readers, viewers, and listeners. And new WORLD Movers. So that’s why our friends are offering to match dollar-for-dollar every new gift that comes in … starting Thanksgiving Day and all the way through what’s known as “Giving Tuesday” … an antidote to “Black Friday” and “Cyber Monday” … to emphasize charitable giving, along with all the consumer spending that has come to characterize our holiday seasons.
REICHARD: In all humility, we want to suggest WORLD is a deserving part of your charitable giving this year. If you’ve never given to support our work before, we’re asking you to make a first-time gift today or tomorrow on Giving Tuesday.
It takes significant resources to compete with all the other big media, and to compete in the marketplace with journalism that is openly and honestly coming at it from a Biblical perspective on all of life. Sound journalism grounded in facts and Biblical truth, that’s our call. And if you’ve benefited from our work, would you take a part in that work by supporting it with a first-time gift of any amount today or tomorrow. wng.org/newdonor.
EICHER: Speaking of resources, we do devote (and by “we,” Mary, I mean you and your team of legal experts. I’m just along for the ride) but we do devote significant resources to helping you understand our constitutional legal system. So let’s get at that straight away, because it’s time for Legal Docket, where we cover every single oral argument heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The justices are back on the bench today after a two week break. Seven arguments are scheduled for this next part of the session. That includes addressing the opioid crisis. The Court is tackling a high-profile bankruptcy case involving the makers of OxyContin, Purdue Pharma. Additionally, it’s addressing the scope and meaning of the government’s power to tax given in the 16th Amendment in a tax case we’ll be telling you about.
But today, we’ll cover two oral arguments heard by the U.S. Supreme Court this month.
The first one is titled Rudisill v McDonough.
RIEHCARD: James Rudisill is a decorated U.S. Army veteran who served three different times, starting before the 9/11 terrorist attacks through 2011.
As such, Rudisill is entitled to a benefit program enacted in 1984, called the Montgomery GI Bill.
Another more generous benefit enacted in 2008 is called the Post 9/11 Bill.
Each offers “x” number of months of education benefits and Rudisill wants to access both up to a four-year maximum.
EICHER: But the federal government argues Rudisill must choose one or the other. Not both at the same time.
In legal parlance, he must make an “election” between the two. Here’s government lawyer Vivek Suri:
VIVEK SURI: This is explicit in the text of Section 3322(a). I’ll read the relevant portion aloud. “An individual entitled to educational assistance under this chapter”—that’s Post-9/11 — “who is also eligible for educational assistance under Chapter 30”— that’s Montgomery—then it goes on, “shall elect under which chapter or provisions to receive educational assistance.”
REICHARD: Seems straightforward enough. And the government says Rudisill would need to “exhaust” the first program benefit before he could claim the second one.
But Rudisill’s lawyer Misha Tsytlin says the government is shortchanging veterans. He points to other language within the same law requiring a different analysis:
TSYTLIN: Congress awarded veterans who served after the September 11th attacks with an entitlement to wartime benefits befitting their wartime service.
With all respect, a “may elect” clause is simply not—not how Congress revokes clear statutory entitlements and certainly not in the Byzantine manner that the VA suggests. Further, the exhaustion requirement that is—the linchpin of the VA’s interpretation finds no ground in the statutory text and produces absurd results, such as punishing veterans with less wartime benefits for simply having served the nation longer.
REICHARD: The crux of the problem comes down to what Congress meant by the words “may” and “shall” in this and other statutes on the books.
Listen to this exchange between Justice Neil Gorsuch and government lawyer Suri. Parts of the law say “may” and other parts say “shall:”
GORSUCH: So why isn’t it an option to a veteran simply not to elect at all?
SURI: The reason that doesn’t work—
GORSUCH: “May” usually means “may,” doesn’t it?
SURI: I agree that “may” means “may.”
GORSUCH: And “may”—“may” implies normally that you don’t have an obligation to do anything, right?
EICHER: Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to think the government’s argument didn’t pass the smell test.
ROBERTS: Well, but that still doesn’t make all that much sense because he’s getting those other benefits because he had—a couple additional tours of duty. So maybe, you know, he’s entitled to both of them, but because of this other provision there, he can’t get both at the same time. But it seems to me to be a pretty raw deal to say, if you hadn’t done anything other than the 9/11, you would be entitled to this. But because you served additional period of time, you don’t get the whole 9/11.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh pointed out that benefits can’t be unlimited. But his colleagues seemed more worried about harming a veteran. Justice Elena Kagan put it this way:
KAGAN: It just seems utterly arbitrary.
REICHARD: I think the government is going to take a haircut on this one. If so, nearly two million veterans could access more taxpayer-provided tuition money for college.
We’re covering two cases, so here’s our last one for today, dealing with credit reports. The question this case presents is whether the federal government can be sued for violating the federal law that governs credit reports.
Here are the facts: Reginald Kirtz says he’s paid off loans he had from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But his credit report reflected that he had loans that were past due.
Kirtz notified the credit report company TransUnion, which as required by law notified the federal agency. But he got no response, and meantime his credit score stayed low.
EICHER: If this had been a private lender, Kirtz could sue in federal court. He’d have that right under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. It regulates credit reporting and protects consumer privacy. But Kirtz wants to sue a government agency lender.
The government claims sovereign immunity, and therefore immune from any lawsuit to force compliance with the law.
Lawyer Nandan Joshi represents Kirtz:
JOSHI: The Fair Credit Reporting Act imposes civil liability on any person that negligently or willfully fails to comply with FCRA’s requirements. It expressly defines “person” to include any government agency. The term “person” is equivalent to its definition, and when FCRA’s definition of “person” is plugged into FCRA’s civil liability provisions, those provisions create causes of action against federal agencies that are clear and specific enough to waive sovereign immunity.
But lawyer Benjamin Snyder for the government framed the question differently:
SNYDER: The question in this case is whether Congress unambiguously waived the sovereign immunity of the United States when it amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act in 1996 to provide that any person who violates FCRA’s requirements is liable for money damages. The answer to that question is no.
REICHARD: Going on to say we know Congress didn’t waive sovereign immunity because there are no “overwhelming implications” to justify it.
Maybe so, but Justice Clarence Thomas went back to basics:
THOMAS: Mr. Snyder, the — putting aside sovereign immunity, the statute refers to — defines a person as any individual, et cetera, and any government or governmental subdivision or agency. Putting aside the issue of sovereign immunity, wouldn’t that suggest that it applies to the — the U.S. Government?
SNYDER: So we accept that that’s a plausible reading.
A plausible reading, but not the correct reading. Snyder argued what’s needed is something explicit. For example, the statute saying, “The United States is not immune from liability.”
Yet Justice Elena Kagan wasn’t buying it:
KAGAN: You know, it’s statutory interpretation 101 that we take a defined term, we plug the definition in, and that’s what the meaning of the statute is. So that’s what the meaning of the statute is.
SNYDER: So, Justice Kagan, if the question here were just what the meaning of the words in the cause of action were, I—I would agree with you.
But, here, you’re not asking just what do the words mean; you’re asking about the necessary logical implication of what Congress has done.
KAGAN: Well, the—the necessary logical implication of what Congress has done is authorize a suit against people, persons, as defined in the definitions section. Then you go to the definitions section, and then you discover that what Congress has done is authorize a suit against natural persons, enterprises, and governments.
EICHER: Snydner’s argument for sovereign immunity gained some traction with Justice Samuel Alito. Listen:
ALITO: This may be a frolic and a detour, but have there been real cases in which the United States has criminally prosecuted itself?
SNYDER: I am not aware of any.
ALITO: I mean, if—if such a case came here, what would—it’s Monday morning. (Laughter.) I’m having trouble getting a grasp on this. How would this work? You would be arguing on one side and one of your colleagues would be on the other side, and you’d be arguing against each other?
REICHARD: And Chief Justice Roberts questioned the consequence of that in this exchange with Joshi for the aggrieved Kirtz:
ROBERTS: I think it’s an unavoidable consequence of your interpretation that the statute authorizes criminal prosecution of the United States. Now, if there were such a prosecution and the United States were convicted, what would the pre-sentencing report look like? (Laughter)
I’ll not venture a guess on how this one’ll turn out. It could literally go either way. Good arguments on both sides.
And that’s this week’s Legal Docket!
MARY REICHARD, HOST: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: The Monday Moneybeat.
NICK EICHER, HOST: Alright, time now to talk business markets and the economy with financial analyst and advisor David Bahnsen. David is head of the wealth management firm, the Bahnsen Group and he is here now. David, good morning.
DAVID BAHNSEN: Good morning, Nick. Good to be with you.
EICHER: So, David, let’s begin today with the election of Javier Milei in Argentina. He campaigned with a chainsaw to emphasize his commitment to cutting government excess. He spoke of tethering Argentina’s economy to the dollar. Probably the most recognizable politician, at least I think I’ve seen in a while. I did enjoy his flourish that he styles his hair, I don’t know if you heard this one, David, with the invisible hand of Adam Smith. And when you look at that mop of hair, you think an economist would have a little more respect for Smith. But, of course, he brings the inevitable comparisons to Donald Trump, because of the media’s collective one track mind, but Milei is to be sworn in in December, and we may be in for what I think it would be an interesting ride. What do you think are the positives and negatives of Milei’s rise? And what could we learn from watching an economist rise to power in one of the true economic basket case countries of the world?
BAHNSEN: Well, there’s definitely a risk and a reward here. I think it would be incredible news to Donald Trump that he’d be compared to a libertarian, and one who is even in the past identified as an anarcho capitalist is not exactly the governmental philosophy I think most people had of the Trump administration. And yet this gentleman in Argentina, I think the opportunity is to lead by example with a philosophy of limited government and fiscal prudence that can permeate what has been an incredibly distressed region economically for many years. But the risk—and this is something I probably care about as much as anything I could get into with WORLD listeners—is in execution. I don’t think having a philosophy of limited government is enough. And when you have an issue, like what Argentina has with excessive indebtedness, with hyperinflation, with decades of governmental malfeasance, you can’t just come in with a baseball bat and clean house and have everything get better immediately. There has to be a wisdom, a poise, a thoughtfulness and intentionality. And in the implementation, and I’m very fond of the line for Christians and all spectrums of life, that piety is no substitute for technique. Ultimately, if you come in cheerleading for a philosophy of limited government and execute poorly without the appropriate gradualism, then the people will rebel against the limited government and ask for more statism. And this is the testimony of history. And so I think he wants to do a lot of the right things, but I hope he will do them in the right way and in the right timeline, so that you don’t get the pendulum reversing the other way.
EICHER: I did see some stories about how he’s moderating some of his rhetoric. There have been a couple of stories about that. But can you address yourself to the topic and I know that this has been walked back just a bit, too. But one of the central features, at least of his political campaign, was the notion of tying Argentina to the dollar or dollarizing and moving away from the peso. Can in two or three minutes, can you explain how that would work?
BAHNSEN: While many, many countries do it. I mean, dollarization is essentially a way for emerging market countries to try to hedge their risk of getting to a point where their currency weakens a great deal against the dollar. A lot of these countries have denominated their debt in dollars, and certainly as major portion, not all but a very heavy portion, of their global trade is denominated in dollars. And so a way to help hedge the risk of your currency being whipsawed around compared to a currency in which you need to transact a lot is to link your currency to the dollar, so that you’re going to go up or down with that currency. And China has done it at different points of time. And then other points of time they will de-dollarize when it is in their interest to do so. But dollarization is a common strategy for emerging markets who are seeking to avoid the risks of being on an island with their own currency that won’t have the same stability and obviously can’t have the same capital flows. The mechanics of how a country does it, by the way, a very technical and I think pretty boring, but it’s not very hard to do. I mean, you essentially, first make the commitment to do so, and then you go about perpetrating open market transactions that will keep you in a flat ratio to the dollar.
EICHER: Well, it’d be worth watching for sure. And another thing I think worth watching is just sort of this interesting chain of events with the OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman. Of course, you know the story a couple of weeks ago, the board fired him, evidently without warning, and reasoning that didn’t make a ton of sense, publicly. Employees tried to pull off a counter coup to get him back. Pardon me. Pull off a counter coup to try to get him back. Open AI’s biggest investor Microsoft hired him. I think this lasted a couple of days. Employees threatened to quit from OpenAI unless Sam Altman were to come back. And then by Wednesday morning of last week, he is back. The old board is out, the new board is in. Is this just the wild west of tech, or do you see any kind of deeper meaning here?
BAHNSEN: No, this is completely idiosyncratic to the fact that OpenAI was run by an 501(c)(3) nonprofit that claimed its objective in the world was some sort of world peace and harmony and, and all these types of things. They didn’t actually use the same nomenclature as Effective Altruism, that FTX and Sam Bateman-Freid and the the kind of crypto do-gooders that are now all in prison used. But it spoke to this structure that said capitalism or a free enterprise system can’t be relied upon to do good with something as dangerous as AI. So we will set up as a 501(c)(3), a nonprofit that has a board and its agenda will be to do good for the world. Okay, that sounds lovely. But then this nonprofit owned a little for-profit entity called OpenAI that had chat GPT, that did an $86 billion valuation. Well, that sounds like a not-for-profit to me, taking tens of billions from Microsoft and having an $86 billion valuation. It all comes from a total ignorance about the nature of markets. That somehow profit pursuit is evil, but if you can pharisaically attach this notion of do-gooder-ism to it, that kind of virtue signaling somehow put you in a moral superiority. And that’s where this conflict came from. Is guess what? You have Microsoft as an investor, you have hundreds of programmers and employees, that it’s news to them they’re not supposed to be trying to get more enterprise value, more stock options, more, you know, aspiration. And the CEO and the board have this conflict and it put everybody through this three or four days soap opera, that resulted in of course, as it always will, with the people with the checkbooks winning. It stems from the fallacy to begin with that somehow markets are an inadequate arbiter of where this ought to go. AI has a lot of complexity around it. There’s a lot of moral ramifications as there are with any market activity. But this was a classic failure of a structure that was rooted in rank Phariseeism.
EICHER: Well, David, we ran out of time to talk about this last week, and admittedly so it’s kind of old news. But I think important to this whole question of inflation and the Fed and interest rates, the consumer price index for October came out. And I especially wanted to talk about this, because it is seen as a sign that the Fed is now going to feel less pressure on interest rates, at least to raise them. Because now at 3.2% Consumer Price Index year on year the October numbers represented the coolest consumer inflation numbers since July. Specifically, New York Times writer Jeanna Smialek noted that a closely watched measure of housing costs moderated after unexpectedly ticking up in September. So the question is, is this—that CPI number for October—is this the long-awaited adjustment in shelter prices that will finally satisfy the Feds desired 2% inflation target? What did you make of those figures?
BAHNSEN: Well, I think they’re basically already there, because I think that the year-over-year inflation and rents and housing, the way they measure it is with two things: one around new rents, and one around something called owners equivalent rent. And it makes up 34% of CPI. And yes, it has come down from eight to seven. But it isn’t anywhere near seven in the real world. And all that’s because of the lag effect of leases that were signed a year ago. And so, if you assume it’s 3%— which I think is generous, but I’m happy to do at 3%—of 34%, it takes away a full percentage point, 1.15% from the current inflation rate, which brings it down to a to handle of inflation. And so the lag effect of shelter is a big issue. But this doesn’t finally satisfy the Fed. The Fed knows perfectly well about this. The Fed isn’t driven by the fact that they wanted to stay tight as long as they could. Because if nothing was breaking, they figure they can get more access out of the economy. And they felt that it was concerning that more people weren’t losing their job, when if you’re trying to put downward pressure on inflation, you’re supposed to see an increase in unemployment. It stems from the view of the world they have that is rooted in what’s called the Phillips Curve. And it’s one of my biggest disagreements with Fed models, right now about this whole subject. But I do believe that there’s a 0% chance the Fed is going to raise rates again. And the entire debate in the last two weeks has shifted to when they will begin cutting. Whether that will be, there’s about a 35% chance right now in the futures market, that they’ll start cutting in March. And it’s over, well over 60% chance they’ll start cutting by the summertime of 2024. The thing people have to realize is everyone’s sitting around saying, “Oh great, the Fed’s about to cut. This is good” is it’s gonna depend on why. If they start cutting severely and drastically, it will be because this soft landing that they believed they could perfectly orchestrate eluded them. And that in fact, the unemployment numbers do start going higher, and the corporate defaults do start increasing. And so there’s still a lot of risk out there, as there always will be when you ask a central body to do the impossible. And that’s really where we continue to be with the Fed. But the good news is that you really have very, very low inflation with core goods, with intermediate goods, processed goods. And even on that shelter a number that is so grossly distorted from reality, it’s definitely coming down.
EICHER: So David, short market week with the holiday but anything else going on in the markets or in the economy generally, we should know about before we go?
BAHNSEN: Yeah, last week was a short week. And then they those types of weeks can be very distorted. But really I stand by what I’ve been saying for several weeks now. Probably several months, Nick, the 10 year bond yield was down to 4.47% going here into the Monday of this new full week, and it had been up at 5%. So it’s come down over half of a percentage point over the last several weeks. And that’s pushed a big rally in the stock market in the last month or so. So as bond yields go, so go stocks until next year. Then you get another look at corporate profits. You get another look at what the Fed will do. But right now it’s pretty much all about bond yields.
EICHER: Alright, David Bahnsen, founder Managing Partner Chief Investment Officer at the Bahnsen Group. You can keep up with David by visiting his personal website which is bahnsen.com. You can read his weekly dividend cafe, and you should, at dividendcafe.com. David, thanks so much.
BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick.
NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Monday, November 27th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.
MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. On November 21st, 1963, John F Kennedy arrives in Texas for two days of campaigning. Supporters crowd to see the popular President—with no idea what lies ahead. WORLD’s executive producer Paul Butler walks us through the events of the day the president was shot.
PAUL BUTLER, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: U.S. President John F Kennedy and first lady Jacqueline spend the first night of their Texas trip in Fort Worth at The Texas Hotel. They awaken to a light rain on Friday, November 22nd. Several thousand people are gathered outside in a nearby parking lot—hoping to catch a glimpse of the President. Kennedy obliges with a brief, unscheduled appearance.
KENNEDY AT TEXAS HOTEL: Ladies and gentlemen…there are no faint hearts in Fort Worth. I appreciate you being here this morning…
He gives a short stump speech about national defense, the space race, and the economy.
KENNEDY AT TEXAS HOTEL: In the final analysis, that strength depends on the willingness of the citizens of the United States to assume the burdens of leadership. I know one place where they are. Here in this rain in Fort Worth, Texas, we’re going forward.
SOUND: [BAND MUSIC]
Kennedy takes a few minutes to mingle throughout the crowd, shaking hands before heading back inside. He quickly changes out of his wet suit coat and heads to the first scheduled event for the day…a breakfast put on by the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce.
TV ANNOUNCER: The crowd has been here since early this morning.
After the presentation of a Stetson hat and a hearty breakfast, the President addresses the attendees:
KENNEDY: This is a very dangerous and uncertain world. As I said earlier, on three occasions in the last three years the United States has had a direct confrontation. No one can say when it will come again…
Kennedy is in Texas because he believes it is a key state to winning re-election. But democratic party leaders here are at loggerheads. Kennedy and his cabinet hope that his visit will bring the warring parties together. If the Fort Worth stop is any indication, he is well on his way to accomplishing that goal. But the conflict is much more cantankerous in Dallas…the next stop on the President’s two day trip.
BOB WALKER: Good morning ladies and gentlemen, Bob Walker speaking from Dallas Love Field where a large crowd is gathered to await the arrival of the President and Mrs. John Fitzgerald Kennedy…
A throng of onlookers have been waiting at the airfield for hours. Thousands of people line the chest-high chain link fence. As the Kennedys disembark they make a beeline for the crowd.
BOB WALKER: He’s done what he’s done in several places…and gone right up to the fence to shake hands with people. It is great for the people and makes the egg shells even thinner for the secret service whose job it is to protect the man…
A well wisher gives the first lady a bouquet of red roses. She carries them with her to the waiting open-air limousine where Governor John Connally and his wife, Nellie, are already seated.
Earlier in the day, the car had a plastic bubble attached to keep out the rain…but now that the sun is out. It’s removed and the motorcade leaves for downtown.
BOB WALKER: Thousands will be on hand for that motorcade which will be in downtown Dallas. It’ll turn down Houston Street to Elm and under the Triple Underpass…
The procession is scheduled to end at the Dallas Trade Mart—10 miles away—where the President is scheduled to speak at a luncheon with Democrat party leaders and supporters.
RADIO ANNOUNCER: The President’s car is now turning on to Elm street, and it will only be a matter of minutes before he arrives at the Trade Mart.
Crowds line the streets waving American flags, and signs of support. Nellie Connally turns and says to the President: “You can’t say Dallas doesn’t love you now…” But just moments later, gunfire erupts.
RADIO ANNOUNCER: It appears as though something has happened in the motorcade route. I repeat, something has happened along the motorcade route.
WATSON: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, you’ll excuse the fact that I’m out of breath…
Dallas television station WFAA is one of the first media outlets to break the news that the President has been shot. Program manager Jay Watson had been on the scene and breaks into the regularly scheduled programming:
WATSON: Let me quote you this: Bulletin. President Kennedy and Governor John Connally have been cut down by an assassin’s bullet in downtown Dallas.
Watson tells viewers he heard at least three separate shots. Other witnesses say there was a fourth hitting the President at least once in the head. The first lady screams. The Governor is also struck in the back, but survives. A secret service agent takes a bullet and dies. The President is rushed to nearby Parkland Hospital. But he is unresponsive. A priest administers last rites.
National newsman Walter Cronkite informs the nation:
CRONKITE: From Dallas, Texas. The flash, apparently official, President Kennedy died at one pm. [PAUSE] Vice President Lyndon Johnson has left the hospital in Dallas but we do not know to where he has proceeded…
Soon after the president’s body is placed on Air Force One. At 2:38pm the somber Vice President stands in the middle of the aircraft’s crowded compartment with Jackie Kennedy by his side. She’s still wearing her blood stained dress. As Mrs. Johnson looks over his shoulder, Lyndon B. Johnson takes the oath of office—administered by US District Court Judge Sarah Hughes. The White House Press Secretary hastily records the ceremony using Air Force One’s dictaphone.
HUGHES: I do solemnly swear…that I will faithfully execute…the Office of the President of the United States…
The next day, President Kennedy’s casket is brought to the Whitehouse.
TV ANNOUNCER: At the North Portico now. The pallbearers move the casket up the steps. Mrs. Kennedy following behind the casket. The Attorney General, other members of the family, and close Presidential aides and advisors going with her.
The nation is in shock. Like this San Diego woman who talked with News 8:
SAN DIEGO WOMAN: Oh my goodness…that’s one of the most terrible calamities…not for the political side but for the human side. Why, you can’t solve anything by killing.
In the 60 years since the assassination, theories abound about who all was involved, the number of shooters, government cover ups and more. The murder of Lee Harvey Oswald just days after his arrest continues to fuel speculation. We may never know.
But the assassination of President Kennedy marks a turning point in American politics and society. It ushers in an era of waning confidence in the nation—and its institutions—that continues to reverberate today.
That’s this week’s WORLD History Book. I’m Paul Butler.
NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: The White House helped broker a deal with Hamas that brought a release of some Israeli hostages, but what’s next? We’ll talk about it with an expert. And, a school for Christian refugees from Myanmar in Ohio. That and more tomorrow.
I’m Nick Eicher.
MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.
The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.
The Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians in Thessalonica: “For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.” —1 Thessalonians 2: 11, 12
Go now in grace and peace.
WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.