tv Inauguration Preview CSPAN January 19, 2017 8:01pm-9:06pm EST
listen on the free c-span radio app. a politics, public policy and culture program from a conservative perspective. that will be coming up tonight at 9:00 eastern time right here on c-span. some of the events we have already been covering on this inauguration eve started with the arrivals. this was president-elect donald will fitiving with his -- with his family.
; these are scenes of the first family. donald trump and melania trump arriving at joint base andrews. that was from earlier today, kicking off a number of events that happened today, including a special concert that was held by the presidential inaugural committee. we will show you some of that in just a little bit. also again tonight, 9:00 eastern time, we will have a live radio program the -- program out of iowa. you can watch it here on c-span and also online, www.c-span.org. one of the other events he attended shortly after arriving in washington, d.c., was the wreathlaying. look at a tweet here. we will show that in just a bit. here some of the wreathlaying earlier today. president-elect donald trump at arlington cemetery to lay a
wreath at the tomb of the unknown. the only constitutional inaugurationor the ceremonies is that the president takes the oath of office. that happening tomorrow. we will have live coverage. the ceremony will take place around 11:30 a.m. eastern. we will get to the wreathlaying at the arlington national cemetery, the tomb of the unknown. donald trump was here. he laid the wreath with his vice president-elect mike pence. he was preceded by his family who wait at the bottom. here is a look.
>> and the president-elect and the vice president-elect laying a wreath at the tomb of the unknown. this is from earlier today. just showing some of today's event on c-span. from theearlier today incoming white house press secretary, sean spicer. he gave a preview of the president-elect's speech tomorrow. practice is over. sean spicer meets the press.
he started aggressively with media outlets. the incoming white house press secretary spent weeks sharpening himself to be the tip of the spear in donald trump's war with the "dishonest media" but he became -- but he came unarmed to his first face-to-face in counter with the white house press. today come on the eve of the night duration the former republican national committee spokesman underwent his first test in a room at the trump transition headquarters, where the stage and lectern were specifically designed to mimic the dimensions of the brady briefing room at the white house. here's just some of the soon to be press secretary's comments. spicer: the president-elect continues to make edits to his inaugural address. we will have further updates for you on that pyramid it was asked yesterday in a speech. it will be a personal and statement about his
vision for the country. he will discuss what it means to be an american, the challenge that he will face as members of the middle class. he will talk infrastructure and education, and our manufacturing base. i think it's going to be less of an agenda and more of a philosophical document, a vision where he sees the country. the proper role of government, the proper role of citizens. so look forward to that tomorrow. >> if you've been watching the c-span network over the past week or checking in on our video library, you have seen a number of confirmation hearings underway for the president-elect soon to be cabinet. sean spicer talked a little bit about how that process has been going. same press conference that use all right there. he talked about democrats' stall tactics. mr. spicer: there is no excuse for the delay tactics and frankly the partisanship that is being exhibited by the democrats. there is a time in a place for it. i get it. but hold them to the standard
that they were held in 2008, you recognize the fact that they are continuing to deploy delay tactic after delay tactic, which is in good for the government. i saw a poll yesterday were over 50% of the people believe that the economic and security teams should be confirmed immediately. and the idea that they are delay enough for the calls into question their desire to have a government in continuity. it since not just a signal to the folks around the united states, but around the world that we are not -- that they are questioning the accountability of continuity of government. we have a plan to ensure that every department, there is a key individual ready. think it's disappointing that they have chosen to do this. i noted this before. if you look at the questions that are being asked in these confirmation hearings, it is not about substance. it is not about policy. it is not about the issues in front of that department. and about partisan attacks ethical questions.
these people have had their paperwork in their quality and caliber and integrity is unquestionable. and to see some of the it's -- some of the attacks and the issues not to be on teachers and schools and homeland, there are so many issues to be moving on. using the stall tactics, it is not in the country's best interest. >> that is sean spicer, donald presss choice to be secretary. an article here from "town hall," and a democrats have little to no options when it comes to blocking donald trump's nominees. they can create a lot of noise in the hopes of putting pressure on republicans.
again, that is from "town hall," an article about what chuck schumer calls the "swamp cabinet." here is some of his news conference from earlier in the day. schumer: early on in the transition, senate republicans said they hope they can confirm as many as seven cabinet nominees on inauguration day. they said that is what president obama got. so we should get the same treatment, they said. but over the last several weeks, republicans have made a mockery of the cabinet hearing process. trying to jam through nominees and -- in truncated hearings, nominees with serious complex of issues -- serious conflict of interest. americanimportant, the
people their chance to question in here from these nominees. if there was ever a group of cabinet nominees that cry out for regular desk to rigorous scrutiny, it is this one. the president-elect's cabinet is a swamp cabinet full of billionaires and bankers that have conflict of interest and ethical lapses as far as the eye can see. congressman mulvaney failed to pay taxes on a household worker. the exact same issue that caused past nominees to withdraw. punishment price is facing serious scrutiny for trading stock with one hand and pushing legislation to boost the stock with the other. bessie devos has refused to pay an old election fine. and by the way, the fact that her hearing was so appalling to so many americans, 15 million out just a video
of a couple of the questions, 15 million people have seen it. if you go on the social media, trump supporters are saying why the heck did he nominate her? rex tillerson has refused to recuse himself for matters relating to exxon mobil for the length of his term. amazing. .ead of the biggest oil company and after one year, he can do things to help it again. his work there, decades. and just this morning, we learned that stephen h and tried in the his holdings cayman islands from the senate finance committee. the list goes on and on. and every day, there's another report of a major ethical lapse among the nominees for the cabinet, the swamp cabinet. isn'tesident-elect draining the swamp with his cabinet picks. he is filling it up, contrary to everything he promised during his campaign.
these issues and others deserve to be thoroughly and rigorously reviewed by the senate. senate democrats asked for multiple rounds of questions, multiple days of hearings, outside witnesses, and to have review a nominee's completed paperwork before a hearing is held, particularly in light of the fact that so many of these folks have such complicated paperwork you can't he just review it in a day. i would remind my republican friends that the only real billionaire and -- billionaire in president obama's cabinet, penny pritzker, took six months to clear her ethical conflicts and file papers. so we have made some progress on a few fronts. but the more we learned about the nominees, the more important a thorough, fair process became.
cleare more became republicans were simply trying to jam through these nominees out of sight of the american people. they are not really proud of this cabinet. so they want the hearings to be as quick, as short and as bunched up as they can be. even though, back in 2000 nine, republicans asked the democrats not to have any hearings -- 2009 , republicans asked the kick -- the democrats to not have any a review.efore fromrs stymied members asking questions of both ms. devos and mr. price. one report was that there are only 7 -- for the public in the hearing of mr. pruitt. from top to bottom, it's clear.
republicans were attempting to orchestrate a cover above the president-elect's swamp cabinet. senate democrats and the american people won't stand for it. so the inauguration is tomorrow. and here is what we are prepared to do. senators on both sides of the aisle have expressed support for the president-elect's key national security nominees. we expect to be able to vote on general kelly and general mattis tomorrow and look forward to beginning the debate on congressman pompeo in hopes that he can also receive a quick vote. it is possible that some other noncontroversial nominees could be considered relatively quickly. we intend toe, have a full and rigorous debate on the president-elect's remaining nominees.
senate republicans did not want to have a full debate on the merits of these nominees in committee. but they should be prepared to do so on the floor of the united states senate. i understand republicans are saying they wouldn't have chosen any of obama's nominees, but allowed them to be confirmed. let me be clear, democrats will allow the confirmations and those for nominees who have not been chosen by our party. but what we will not support our nominees who are so extreme in their viewpoints or their noncompliance with ethics laws and practice that they have demonstrated themselves to be unfit. we will not be dilatory for the sake of it. and we are hopeful that nominees will fully answer the remaining questions that their hearings have raised and that some will even come back for another round of questioning. that type of cooperation could speed things up on the floor.
haveuld much prefer to full questions with these nominees in hearings because they are there. but if we can't, the floor will be the place we have to bring to light the key issues that i've mentioned. and a look at some of those nominees and the confirmation hearings. the senate returns tomorrow, 4:00 eastern time, on inauguration day for voting on cabinet nominations, retired general james mattis for defense secretary, retired general john kelly for homeland security secretary. and also, they will begin debate republican commerce men mike pompeo for cia director with a possible confirmation vote by monday. one of the hearings that we did bring to you today and you can find online at www.c-span.org was a hearing for the energy secretary nominee, rick perry, former governor of texas.
as npr reports, rick perry says he no longer wants to dissolve the agency that he once said he wants to abolish. and even changing his mind at his confirmation hearing as president-elect's pay gas secretary of energy. he says he no long walk -- he no longer wants to do away with the department. at least that's what he tried to say. it recalls reports in 2011 during a presidential campaign debate, if he could only remember the names of two of the three agencies he wanted to get rid of, during his testimony today, he had an interesting exchange with minnesota senator al franken. and here is that. senator franken: if i may in my limited time, i have a couple of other issues i would like to touch upon. i have learned a great deal about -- parry: if i may in my limited time, i have a couple of other issues i would like to
touch upon. i have spoken several times to theetary moniz about operation. i've spoken to his predecessors. and if confirmed, my desire is to lead this agency in a thoughtful manner, surrounding myself with the expertise on the core functions of the department. overst statements, made five years ago about abolishing the department of energy, do not reflect my current thinking. in fact, after being briefed on so many of the vital functions of the department of energy, ira get -- i regret recommending its elimination. if confirmed, i will enter this role excited and passionate about advocating and advancing doe,ore missions of the drawing greater attention to the vital role played by the agency and the hard-working men and women who dedicate themselves in pursuit. senator franken: thank you for coming into my office.
did you enjoy meeting me? [laughter] parry: i hope you are as much as on that day is as you were on your couch. senator franken: well. [laughter] : may i rephrase that, sir? sen. franken: please. please. [laughter] oh, my lord. perry: i think we found our saturday night live soundbite. [laughter] franken: let's move on. one of the fun things on the couch was when you said -- [laughter] owed a lotenergy boom to the department of energy. this is something i think my colleagues on the other side have almost gotten sick of me
saying. validator.e a great we talked about this, so i know that you agree that the department of energy was an enormous factor in the shale boom. is that right? i would suggest to you that there were technologies that were moved forward at the universities our in the private sector then took and implemented together that shale revolution to occur. sector had ate substantial amount to do with that. george mitchell, who is a texas geologist, was a great example of an individual who heard scientists -- and i'm sure his private sector friends -- time
after time and saying you're wasting your time and your money. but he believed in it. much credit to him as i did the doe and i think the doe has a role to play. sen. franken: has a matter fact, the vice president of his cup and he said this. "doe started it and other people took the ball and ran with it. you cannot dimension -- you cannot diminish doe's involvement." reason i say this, both points of importance, research from doe and solving all these problems that we have, that's why these reports -- i hope these reports on cuts on the doe are not true in the new administration.
i want to go to climate change. office,cussed in my climate change is an existential threat, one of the most serious challenges of our time. your 2010 book, you claim "we have been experiencing a cooling trend." it was just announced yesterday that this is the hottest year on record. in the yearore that before that. the first time three years in a row. in your book you said, "i don't believe we have the settled science by any sense of the imagination. calling co to a pollutant is doing a disservice to the country and i believe a disservice to the world." your testimony that your views have been evolving on this. note that man is responsible for some climate change. how much climate change to you
think the science shows is due to human activity? me -- be itfr from far from a sitting in front of you today and coming to be a climate scientist. i won't do that. senator franken: i don't think you will ever be a climate scientist, but you will be the head of the department. mr. perry: that's right. we will have to hire very good scientist. senator franken: well 90% of scientists -- climate scientists say that this is real. of the century, we will be reaching 3.5 celsius increases in temperature and that will be disastrous. i don't want that for my grandchildren. let me put that 97% in context. a recent survey found that only 95% of scientists are sure that cigarettes cause cancer. that signs on me climate change is pretty
definitive. -- science on climate change is pretty definitive. i just don't want -- and i know my time is out to -- i don't economys idea of the and addressing climate change are at odds at all. state, peopleyour stay in your communities that have wind. those towers are big. they are tall. only young people can go up with and keep young people in your community. to -- i don't know if you have any grandchildren yet. mr. perry: a little early for that. they were just married in october. senator franken: yes, too early. [laughter] you see, i am not a mathematician. [laughter]
my time is over. it's done. mr. perry: thank you, sir. >> a funny exchange at the start and at the finish with senate -- minnesota senator al franken with former texas governor rick perry. we will have more of his exchange with washington state senator maria cantwell. but more from the npr article talking about his stance on energy and the epa, saying this wasn't the only message that differed from his past views.
>> here is a little bit of his exchange with maria cantwell. senator cantwell: i like day number of things you had to say. want tog i definitely bring up is disconcerting and that is what you said relating to an energy strategy. we cannot, as you said, "optimize economic growth. whil."- growth fossil fuel is having an impact on the natural resources in my stay. it is having an effect on shellfish and the ability to feed. it is having an effect on the two most devastating fire seasons my state has had in the history of our state, burning up in one indian reservation over $2 billion worth of timber. a report thatted i expect to be out this year that will tell you exactly how much this is costing the u.s.
government. and i don't think the number will be in the billions. it will be higher than that. question is, as you look at this agency, one of the predicated my comments on is the level of science investment that needs to be made to continue to do this transition. the transition team sent around a document to the department of energy basically trying to identify doe responsibilities related to, they said, climate meetings, attending framework conventions on climate change, things of that nature. juxtaposed to the fact that we are getting hacked by the russians and the republicans in the house couldn't bother to pick up a cyber security bill and passed it, i'm trying to understand where you come as energy secretary, are going to have priorities. these are two different things.
so i want to know your commitment to protecting these individuals and the scientific budget that goes along with them, and your willingness to make an investment in the effort of defending -- basically "brainting the comments the hacking on" and instead take up the mantle and defend our nation against russian attacks. mr. perry: senator, that questionnaire that you referenced went out before i was ever selected as the nominee to sit before this committee. i did not approve it. i do not approve of it. i don't need that information. i don't want that information. that is not how i manage. i have a history of working with people to find answers to challenges that face us.
my commitment to you and the members of this committee is to obviously not only reach across political aisles, but also to work with the men and women who i have an extraordinary amount of respect for at the department solutionsto find the to these many challenges that we have, whether they are on the environment, whether they are economically focused, or otherwise. cantwell: do you plan to protect the science research at doe related to climate? mr. perry: i am going to protect all the science related to all the aspects we are going to be doing. you asked about cyber. doe has a massive role to play
in that. it's an area that i also have a history with, senator. of working with the private , in my working with case, state government entities. but the doe will allow me to go to a new level, if you will, of engagement to find the ways to protect -- and i'll be honest with you, senator, i don't care who it is, what players come up whether it is a formal state or a group that is loosely associated, that if they are trying to penetrate into americans' lives, whether it is private citizens or at the highest levels of our government, you will see me engaged in an activities at the department of energy, working across agencies, for that matter, working with the doe and our are by e and r i come all
departments.nt i feel comfortable with our scientific laboratories and the men and women, the technology and the ability to stop the cyber snooping or, for that matter, the intention is to do harm to americans by penetrating into our electric grids. senator cantwell: my time is over, but to be clear, you will protect the science and the men and women related to climate. themerry: i will protect from anyone who would attack them, no matter what the reason may be at the department of energy. former governor of texas rick perry going to possibly be the next secretary of energy. that was some of his testimony earlier today.
the person who nominated him, who will be the president as of tomorrow afternoon, donald trump inauguration day coverage will ,tart at 7:00 a.m. eastern time january 20. that is the day that was initiated in 1937. ever since then, the inauguration has been held on the january 20 of the year following the presidential election. inauguration day used to be march 4. we bring you live coverage that you can follow right here with us on c-span starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern or go to www.c-span.org. you can find it to listen to online and on the free c-span radio app. and then at 9:00 eastern, a -- o show on
a look now at the treasury secretary nominee and one of the exchanges that happened earlier today during his confirmation hearing. at a tweet from "the huffington post," talking about a gop senator who told a democrat to lineup during a confirmation hearing that didn't go well. here's the steve mnuchin information hearing. >> on have a valium pill you might want to take the best take before the second round. >> we've got a lot of colleagues rate -- waiting. if you could be brief, that would be help pull. , from the remarks, i understand you were in charge of the great recession banks -- that, chairman, i hope the about value -- value does
valium the tone -- about does not set the tone. >> i said that to the president of the united states. i have the time, please. >> this is just outrageous. i think a little pinprick of humor might help this committee from time to time, which i engage in. the gentleman's contribution and he is a good member of the committee. we work together on the ethics committee. know,rry if i have, you incurred your wrath, sir. so we'll be all right. mr. chairman, we have many colleagues waiting. >> fine, ron.
i'm done. >> as you can see, the hearing for the secretary of the treasury had a different town from the one taken during the confirmation hearings for former texas governor rick perry for energy. take a look at this article. "the new york times" reporting that one of the issues that minute is brought up. he failed to disclose $100 million in assets, saying that pic to beent-elect's treasury failed to disclose those assets on senate finance committee disclosuredocuments. and here is some of that hearing now. >> congratulations on your nomination. i had a different line of questioning. but the information that came to
us this morning makes me concerned. you have addressed some of it, but not all of it. on december 19 of last year, you onned a notarized affidavit your questionnaire to the finance committee, certifying that it was true, accurate, and complete. question 11 of this questionnaire asked nominees to "list all -- all -- positions held as an office, position, anyt, representative, of corporation, educational or other institution." it's almost like an open book test. and yet, you did not answer in that questionnaire, listing your chair in a a corporation in the cayman. that questionnaire was corrected only after the committee staff
having done their due diligence brought the missing information to your attention. after that, you admitted to being the director of the offshore entity, a cayman islands corporation. i have a ton of other questions on policy, the first and ,oremost is truth and veracity what americans need in their treasury secretary, to make sure that they will be doing things and challenging things in the system. in essence, isn't it true that what you did here is take these companies, put them offshore so you could help your clients, who you are making money from, avoid u.s. taxation? mr. mnuchin: no, that is not true at all.
senator menendez: you just described that the purpose was to help pensions and other entities -- and the only reason to go offshore, as senator grassley said when he was the chairman of the committee, is the difference between investing in the united states and the cayman islands is the possibility of avoiding u.s. taxes. your clients, you made a very clear that you pay your taxes. i will accept your word on that. but the entities that you are helping and that you were making money from, you were helping them avoid u.s. taxes. otherwise, they could have invested here. mr. mnuchin: let mansion the first part of your question, which i will tell you -- -- i assure you that these forms were very complicated. mysaid to the best of knowledge this is true. when i certified those forms, i
thought it was correct. perhaps it was a mistake in the committee information early. i should have waited until i 278 and the ethics office. it was not just a fountain of your office. menendez: it does not tist torocket scien list all positions. i listed the entity. the fact that i didn't list that i was a director, i was not intending to hide anything. in regards to my $100 million in real estate, my lawyer, who is quite sophisticated in this stuff and has done this for many nominees before, be leaved we filled out the form correctly. senator menendez: let's get to the heart of my question. didn't you create these offshore entities that americans can take advantage of in order to help your clients, he would you were
making money from, avoid u.s. taxes? mr. mnuchin: no, not necessarily. i want to say it's important that the committee -- senator menendez: what were you doing than? mr. mnuchin: this was done so that different entities could invest. sometimes, it had nothing to do with taxes. it had to do with what they could invest in. as i said to you, if you want to put me on for the entire hedge fund and pension fund, you know, we should have an irs session to go through these issues and i would be more than happy to work with you and your offices to go through these. these are very complicated issues. senator menendez: i appreciate that, but let me make the publication simple. one does not go and make offshore entities at the end of the day other than to avoid in some form or fashion the tax laws of the united states. that's pretty simple.
even be legal, in which case we should definitely close it. you have to question whether or not that is the essence of what we want as leadership. so i would like to hear you be more determinative of saying, yes, we are going to close all of those down if i can convince the president-elect to do so in congress, because what you did may have been legal, but it was certainly to help entities and people avoid taxes. mr. mnuchin: i am absolutely committed to working with you in your office, to cut down and make sure that we don't let anybody avoid taxes. in certain cases, this was not a function of avoiding taxes. it was to create eligible investments for certain nonprofits. that i agree with you completely. i'm on board with what you said. i would be happy to work with your office to simple five the tax code. sen. menendez: on whose investments were there inevitably to avoid taxes. mr. mnuchin: it may have been an
investment issue and not a tax issue. i will work with you and your office. i am committed to do that, to make sure why people need to move entities from of we love our new worlds -- we are not creating jobs there. that's just where these entities are housed. i agree with you. less workeate a lot for the accountants and the lawyers and make americans more money and move our irs resources otherwise. >> would you agree that your new boss is famous for firing people? >> well, he has a show about it. >> it's a blurred line at this point. we are not sure where the show starts and the reality begins. you think you will hesitate to fire people if they disagree with him or he believes they are doing a bad job? mr. mnuchin: if he does agree so
it -- if he disagrees with them, no. if people do a bad job, absolutely, he should fire them. senator mccaskill: will he be able to fire? the ethics officer mr. mnuchin: the ethics officer as it relates to his trust? senator mccaskill: who would hire and fire the ethics officer if it wasn't him? mr. mnuchin: i don't have access to the trust of documents. senator mccaskill: he said that he will have an ethics officer to oversee him and the government. who is going to hire and fire his ethics officer? mr. mnuchin: it's a good question. i would be more than happy to ask him and talk to him about it and come back. i think you raised an important issue and i think you will understand that. i don't have the answer. senator mccaskill: he is not the vesting any of his interests, correct? mr. mnuchin: correct. i believe he sold his public stocks. senator mccaskill: i'm talking
about his business. is it fair to characterize him as an international businessman? mr. mnuchin: i believe so. senator mccaskill: then he will enjoy the benefit of his businesses' success while he is president. correct? mr. mnuchin: again, i believe he will do everything legally. mccaskill:, no, no. that's not my question. i question's he has said very loudly that he will go back to his business after he is president -- in fact, he said he would fire his son if they hadn't done a good job. whatever success his business enjoys during his presidency, he will get the benefit of, correct? mr. mnuchin: i missed the part about firing his sons, that that sounds like something he may have said. yes, he is the economic owner. so by definition, i would assume that he would have that. senator mccaskill: his businesses in other countries and in this country intersect
with foreign countries, correct? mr. mnuchin: so i read. senator mccaskill: isn't it true that much of his debt is held by foreign interests? mr. mnuchin: i don't know. i've only read it in the papers. sen. mccaskill: you think you should know for someone who runs the committee on foreign investments if we are talking about the commander in chief? should you, as secretary of the treasury, know what percentage of his debt -- i'm told by people who are familiar with his business that it is a huge percentage of his debt that is held by foreign interests. mr. mnuchin: well, as i said, if i am confirmed, i assure you that i will make sure that the requirements of the constitution are upheld. and i think you have a valid point about -- about understanding foreign debt and foreign things. if i am confirmed, i will research that and get back to you. would likeaskill: i a commitment for me today that you will report in his committee what percentage of the debt
against the trump enterprises is hold -- is held by foreign interests. that is your job as the secretary of treasury and i want your commitment that you will report to this committee as soon as you are able to get that information from the new president. mr. mnuchin: i'm not making the commitment today to report to the committee on anything. is,what i am willing to do to the extent i am confirmed, i am willing to speak to the chairman and make sure that whatever the committee thinks it needs i will discuss with the president. senator mccaskill of well i can assure you that the american people need to know and you and your job as secretary of the treasury, which is supposed to be determining national security interests based on foreign investment, the mac and people want to know how much debt is -- the american people want to know how much debt is owed by the trump industries to foreign investment and that will have a direct impact on our national security.
mr. mnuchin: you raise some interesting questions, which i will follow up. >> donald trump's nominee for the department of treasury. , we will have all of the events starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern. you can watch the hearing we just saw a it is under way over on c-span 2. you can watch it anytime online at www.c-span.org. this weekend, live coverage on saturday, 10:00 a.m. eastern time, join us for a number of speakers for the women's march on washington. cecile richards of planned gloria steinem are among those speakers. live coverage of that as well. coming up in just a few minutes radiopan, the steve deese show coming from iowa, a conservative perspective on andtics, public policy,
culture. and one of the other events we saw today on this eve of the inauguration, donald trump holding a concert that was held by the presidential inaugural committee was at the lincoln memorial. he was there with his family. we will take a look at his remarks at the concert and then we will join the steve deace radio show. [applause] >> thank you. mr. trump: thank you very much. thank you very much, everybody. and thank you, tom. i would like to congratulate our incurable entertainers tonight. toby and lee greenwood and all the great talent. it was really very special. thank oure to incredible military talent right here. thank you.
stand up, please. you guys were great. [applause] thank you very much. thank you. began 18 months ago. i had something to do with it, but you had much more to do with it than i did. i'm the messenger. i'm just a messenger. and we were tired -- and i love you. believe me, i love you. we all got tired of seeing what was happening. and we wanted change, but we wanted real change. and i look so forward to tomorrow. we are going to see something that is going to be so amazing. so many people have poured into washington, d.c. this started out tonight being a small, little concert. and then we had the idea maybe we will do it in front of the lincoln memorial.
i don't know if it has ever been done before, but if it has come a very seldom. and people came by the thousands and thousands and here we are tonight, all the way back. [cheering] all the way back. --it's a movement that began it's a movement that started and it's a movement like we've never seen anywhere in the world, they say. there's never been a movement like this. and it's something very, very special. and we are going to unify or country. our phrase -- you all know it -- half of you are wearing a hat. make america great again. [cheers and applause] but we are going to make america great for all of our people, everybody. everybody throughout our
country. that includes the inner cities. that includes everybody. and we are going to do a special job -- and i can only tell you didn't8 months ago, we know, a lot of people didn't know, some people had a feeling, a lot of people didn't give us much of a chance. but we understood what was happening. and that last month of the campaign, when i traveled around to every place that you can imagine, state after state after state, speech after speech. [laughter] and we had 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 people. there was never an ntc, just like tonight. we didn't have -- there was never an empty seat, just like
tonight. we all knew that last month of the campaign, i think a lot of us knew the first week of the campaign. but that last month of the campaign, we knew that something special was happening. and i can only tell you this. up.polls started going up, but they didn't want to give us credit. because they forgot about a lot of us. thehe campaign, i called it forgotten man and the forgotten woman. well, you are not forgotten anymore. that i can tell you. [cheering] i want to thank my great family, my incredible wife melania. they have been so supportive. it wasn't easy for them. they have been so supportive.
i want to thank you most importantly. i want to promise you i will work so hard. we are going to get it turned around. we are going to bring our jobs back. we are not going to let other countries take our jobs any longer. we're going to build up our brave military. we are going to strengthen our borders. things that to do haven't been done for our many many decades. i promise you it is going to change. . will see you tomorrow [cheering]
i don't care frankly if it's going to be beautiful, or rain l ike crazy. it makes no difference to me. i have a feeling it is going to be beautiful. i will see you tomorrow. i will be cheering you on. you will be cheering me on, but i will be cheering you on. what you have done his so special. all level -- all over the world they are talking about it. make ameriacto great again -- make america great again, and i will add, greater than ever before. thank you very much. enjoy the fireworks. thank you everybody. [cheering] [applause]