Speaker 1: Dozens of you writing to me saying David Janke, UGA, your friend Janke UGA is running
for president. What? He was born in Turkey. Is he even eligible to be president of the United
States? What is this all about? Let's discuss it. I interviewed my friend Jack Cougar a couple of
weeks ago. He expressed significant disgust at Joe Biden being the Democratic nominee. Genk believes
Joe Biden cannot win, which I disagree with. I think he can win. He won in 2020 when many
people said he couldn't win. And Janke believes that running Joe Biden is a very bad idea. And
Jenks latest decision is that he is going to run for president. Jenks idea is if he can get
himself up to 20 or 25% support in the Democratic primary, people will realize that Biden can't win
and then the Democratic Party will push Biden out and select Josh SHAPIRO or Andy Beshear or someone
else to replace Joe Biden. Now, I have everybody should do whatever they thinks is best for the
political movement they support. I don't think this is going to work the way Janke thinks. And
he's welcome back on the show any time. I think there's two layers to this strategy and then
legality of Genk even running. I am not a lawyer, to be very clear. I'm just giving my opinion
based on legal opinions I've read. Number one, the strategy is Janke gets himself to 20 to 25%. Then
the Democratic Party will get rid of Joe Biden. I don't know how Genk will get 20% support in a
Democratic primary against incumbent Joe Biden. When robert f kennedy Jr. With a life legacy
and the Kennedy name only ever got up to 20% and much of it was on the back of Republican voters,
not democratic voters. Drop to 10%. Did rfk jr. And now ended up bailing out of the democratic
primary altogether. And he's running as an independent. So genk is saying i can get
more support than rfk jr. And rfk jr had a bunch of support from republicans. I don't know that
Democrats are necessarily going to be saying, yeah, I'm going to go to Genk from Joe Biden,
especially when I don't believe Genk is eligible to be president. Now, I'm also not eligible Genk
in. I are not eligible for the same reason we were both born in other countries to non-citizens of
the United States. When Genk was born in Turkey, he was born to two parents who were not American
citizens. When I was born in Argentina, I was born to two parents who were not at the time, American
citizens. Now, what is the argument legally that Genk is making for why he can be president? It's
a case called Schneider the Rusk from 1964. Now in Schneider v Rusk, the Supreme Court dealt
with Is it constitutional to revoke someone's citizenship if they are a naturalized citizen,
if they reside in their country of origin? And what this relates to was that there was
a different standard. If you were a natural born American citizen and you went and lived in, say,
Turkey. There was no mechanism through which your American citizenship could be removed.
Contrast that with if you were born in Turkey at the time, came to the U.S. and became a citizen
and then moved back to Turkey permanently, you could have your citizenship removed. This case,
Schneider V Rusk had the Supreme Court finding that that was unconstitutional,
that there shouldn't be different provisions with regard to the revoke having citizenship
revoked based on being natural born citizen or a naturalized citizen. What Genc is arguing,
if I understand correctly, is that that case finds that any separate treatment of a natural
born citizen versus a naturalized citizen would by default be unconstitutional. Therefore, if
you can't treat naturalized citizens differently when it comes to they move elsewhere and you take
their citizenship, you also can't deprive them of the right to run for president. The problem with
this is that the provisions are different. There is a specific provision in the Constitution which
says no person except a natural born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the
adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of the president. So naturalized
citizens are not eligible to run for president. Schneider V Rusk did not challenge that. It didn't
change that. It didn't deal with it whatsoever. It does not allow. Well for a naturalized citizen to
run for president because it just doesn't address that issue. Now, what I do think Janke believes
is he could challenge the presidency rule in the Constitution on the basis of this case,
even though the case doesn't say anything about it. He could use that case, go to the Supreme
Court and say, I actually am eligible. The legal reviews of Schneider v Rusk that I found disagree
with that. And my instinct is that if there were something to that legal argument, maybe Arnold
Schwarzenegger would have explored it and we would have seen a serious challenge to this before. So
I. Jencks Great, in so many different ways. A friend of mine. I don't see him getting the 20%
support he thinks that he would be able to get in order to push by now. And I don't see him making
any progress on determining that he is legally able to run for president. Same thing applies to
me. I'm not eligible to run for president. I don't believe junkies. I don't believe
Arnold is. Let me know your thoughts. We'll do a follow up if there's interest in this story.