The World and Everything in It: June 3, 2024

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like me. My name is Mary Anne, and I live in sunny South Carolina. I work with senior adults helping them to live their best life. I hope you are inspired and informed by today's program.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning! Today a case that touches on basic human relationships, basic government responsibilities, and drawing lines when they conflict …

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS: …how would you go about weighing the interest in marriage with the interest in national security? You know, that's like apples and giraffes.

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Later, the Monday Moneybeat and WORLD History Book: 80 years ago this week, the Allies land in France.

AUDIO: … And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.

REICHARD: It’s Monday, June 3rd. 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, Kent Covington with today’s news.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Israel-Gaza » Israeli leaders are considering a plan that could lead to a ceasefire in Gaza.

Israel's security cabinet huddled last night to discuss a cease-fire deal pitched by the White House. The plan would move forward in three phases.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said in phase one:

KIRBY: You get some hostages coming out, initial hostages. You get some calm, you get some more humanitarian assistance, maybe up to 600 trucks. And then the two sides can start talking about phase two.

The next stage would see all remaining hostages released for a permanent ceasefire, followed by a final stage that would see bodies returned in exchange for a large Gaza reconstruction project.

The Israeli reaction to the proposal has reportedly been mixed. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government have not fully embraced the plan, especially the phase-two call for a permanent ceasefire.

Hamas reacted, saying that they view the White House plan as a positive thing.

SOUND: [NYC parade]

Israel Day NYC » Meantime, in Manhattan on Sunday …

SOUND: [NYC parade]

The NYPD police band performing in a parade in support of Israel. Thousands turned out for the Israel Day parade along Fifth Avenue under tight security. Marchers chanted for the release of Israeli hostages.

And New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said she stands with them.

HOCHUL:  These families have suffered every single night, wondering the fate of their loved ones. It is cruel. It is inhumane. And we stand together, united as a state, that says, let these families be in peace. Let them be with their loved ones.

It was the first large-scale Jewish event in the city since the start of the war in Gaza. New York Senator, and of course Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer told attendees:

SCHUMER:  Let me say one more thing. Who has caused this evil? Who has taken Hamas? Who has taken them? It's Hamas. Let us say that Hamas is evil and we will defeat Hamas.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has just accepted an invitation from Schumer and other leaders in Washington to address a joint session of Congress soon.

Ukraine accuses China » Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has accused China of helping Russia to disrupt a Swiss-organized peace conference on the war in Ukraine.

ZELENSKYY:  We are disappointed that some world leaders have not yet confirmed their participation in the peace summit. Unfortunately, there are also attempts to disrupt the summit.

Zelenskyy made the remarks after speaking at an annual Asia-Pacific security conference. He’s hoping to persuade Asian countries to attend the peace conference. Russia is not taking part in the talks and Vladimir Putin has mocked the planned talks.

Border executive actions »  Air Force One will take off tomorrow for Normandy as President Biden prepares to commemorate the 80th anniversary of D-Day.

But before he departs, he will reportedly announce new executive actions for the southern border. No word yet on what those will be.

But House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday:

JOHNSON: It's too little too late. Now he's trying to desperately show the American people somehow that he wants to address the issue that he himself created.

Biden and Democrats have been working to shift public perception of who’s to blame for the border crisis, blasting Republicans for not accepting a Senate Border bill. Democrats charge that by not adopting it, Republicans have proven they’re not serious about fixing the problem.

Polls show that border security is a top issue on the minds of voters this year, and that most trust Donald Trump and Republicans more on that issue.

Trump appeal » And speaking of Donald Trump, the fallout continues over last week’s guilty verdict in his criminal fraud trial in New York. Trump attorney Will Scharf:

SCHARF:  I think this case is replete with reversible error. We plan to vigorously defend President Trump's rights in the appellate courts all the way up to the U. S. Supreme Court if necessary.

 Trump's lawyers have already floated some of the possible grounds on which they will appeal Trump's conviction. Those include their perception of Judge Juan Marchand's bias. The judge made 35 donations to Democratic causes during the 2020 election cycle, and his daughter has worked for a Democratic consulting firm.

For his part, the former president says he remains confident that he’ll ultimately be cleared of wrongdoing.

TRUMP:  Everyone tells me this is the easiest case they've ever seen to overturn.

Trump verdict reaction » Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill House Speaker Mike Johnson says leaders in the Republican-led House have asked the man who pursued the charges against Trump, Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg to appear at a hearing.

JOHNSON:  And the purpose of the hearing is to investigate what these prosecutors are doing at the state and federal level to go, to use politics, you know, political retribution in the court system to go after political opponents of federal officials like Donald Trump.

That Judiciary Committee hearing is scheduled for June 13th.

But the top Democrat in the chamber says it’s a waste of time. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said 12 Americans weighed the facts before them.

JEFFRIES: And came to a unanimous decision as it relates to convicting Donald Trump on 34 felony counts.

Democrats say the verdict showed no one is above the law.

I’m Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: Supreme Court arguments on this week’s 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 3rd day of June, 2024. We’re so glad you’ve joined us today. Good morning! I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning to you! I’m Mary Reichard and it’s time for Legal Docket.

Today, the last of the oral arguments of this term!

I’ll say, if you’ve listened each Monday since October, you’ll have heard something about everything.

That’s our commitment here at Reichard Law, to touch on every single case the Supreme Court hears. And if you’ve followed along to this point, I’ll add my personal congratulations, a virtual handshake, and honorary degree.

I feel like I should give a short commencement address, but we still have our final three oral arguments.

EICHER: I think that’s a great commencement message and life lesson, Dean Reichard: there’s always more to do!

So let’s do it. The first of the three cases is one that was argued and decided already. The high court making quick work of this one—a death penalty case that had come to the court for a second time.

Thornell versus Jones is the case name. Danny Jones killed two people more than 30 years ago using a baseball bat. He was convicted and given the death penalty and his sentence has been tied up in appeals ever since.

Jones’s latest appeal is about what he said was poor quality work done by his trial attorney. He says that lawyer didn’t do a good enough job showing evidence of his traumatic childhood that included head injuries and drug abuse.

Those are called in the law mitigating factors, things that lessen the culpability of a criminal act. So he wants a new sentencing hearing that might result in a lesser sentence—life in prison, the best and possibly most likely outcome.

REICHARD:  I think that’s a great commencement message and life lesson, Dean Reichard: there’s always more to do!

So let’s do it. The first of the three cases is one that was argued and decided already … the high court making quick work of this one—a death penalty case that had come to the court for a second time.

Thornell versus Jones is the case name. Danny Jones killed two people more than 30 years ago … using a baseball bat. He was convicted and given the death penalty … and his sentence has been tied up in appeals ever since.

Jones’s latest appeal is about what he said was poor quality work done by his trial attorney. He says that lawyer didn’t do a good enough job showing evidence of his traumatic childhood that included head injuries and drug abuse.

Those are called in the law mitigating factors, things that lessen the culpability of a criminal act. So he wants a new sentencing hearing that might result in a lesser sentence—life in prison, the best and possibly most likely outcome.

REICHARD: He won’t get it. The justices ruled quickly. It was 6-to-3 against Jones, the court finding that the trial court adequately balanced the weight of aggravating circumstances against the weight of those mitigating factors.

You mentioned mitigating factors lessening culpability. Aggravating circumstances increase the culpability of a criminal act.

Here, that included Jones’s killing multiple people (including a child) in a particularly cruel and depraved way. Another aggravating circumstance was that his motivation was money.

During oral argument in April, Justice Samuel Alito seemed incredulous over the argument that Jones’s lawyer made.

JUSTICE ALITO: So let’s think of a case where the defendant is sort of like Hannibal Lecter, all right? You've got a defendant who has kidnapped and hideously tortured 25 children, and sent messages to the media saying, 'I love to kill, and I'll always kill if I have the chance.' You've got the most horrible aggravating evidence that you possibly can have. Then you say that all that's necessary in order to get resentenced is for the defendant to come up with evidence that a reasonable sentencer might deem relevant to the defendant's moral capability? That's your argument?

The three liberal justices dissented, among whom was Justice Elena Kagan, who during oral argument had this to say to the killer’s attorney:

JUSTICE KAGAN: … the circuit court is supposed to weigh the mitigating evidence against the aggravating evidence. And here, you know, the circuit court once said that that was what it was doing, but then it completely ignores all the aggravating evidence which was substantial in this case.

EICHER: Still, she joined the dissenters led by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Their view was that although the lower court was wrong to ignore aggravating circumstances, the right thing to do now is vacate the judgment and give the case back to the Ninth Circuit.

Justice Sotomayor said as much at oral argument:

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: We’re not fact finders, and we generally don’t weigh evidence. There’s thousands of pages in this record.

REICHARD: But lawyer for the Arizona Department of Corrections Jason Lewis had the winning argument that enough is enough:

JASON LEWIS: I think concepts of finality would dictate that the circuit court has had this case for so long, and has spent so much time granting relief on certain issues, reserving other ones, and then having it sent back continuously — it has to end at some point.

And so it has. Mr. Jones appears to have exhausted his appeals, at least for now.

EICHER: Case Number two: Department of State vs. Muñoz, one of several immigration disputes the court’s heard recently.

Generally speaking, courts are not permitted to second guess why a non-citizen would be denied a visa. In legal terms, that’s called the “doctrine of consular nonreviewability.” In plainer terms, it’s a message to the courts that this is none of your business.

Of course there’s an exception to that general rule of nonreviewability for non-citizen spouses. If those visas are denied, the government has to give a reason for it.

REICHARD: Here, an American citizen sued the State Department because her husband, a citizen of El Salvador, was denied a visa.

No reason given, just a citation of the law giving the consulate authority to deny him. That law says denial can be made when the consulate knows or reasonably believes the alien wants to come into the U.S. for unlawful purposes.

Lawyer for Muñoz, Eric Lee:

ERIC LEE: Ms. Muñoz has a constitutional liberty interest in living with her husband. We do not claim that this interest gives her the right to immigrate her husband regardless of his inadmissibility, but the importance of cohabitation to marriage means that the government is required to provide procedural protections when it burdens the underlying right.

EICHER: But government lawyer Curtis Gannon argued the scope of the immigration caseload speaks to another need entirely:

CURTIS GANNON: Last fiscal year, the Department of State issued 11 million immigrant and nonimmigrant visas. It also refused 62,000 visa applications on the basis of one or more of the inadmissibility grounds including applications from approximately 5400 noncitizens seeking to live with their U.S. citizen spouses or fiances.

REICHARD: Gannon pointing out that it is wholly within the government’s power and authority … and not at all what the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held. That court said that the denial of a visa for her husband affected the wife’s rights pertaining to her marriage—and that the State Department’s mere citation of a statute was no legitimate reason to avoid court review.

Chief Justice John Roberts wondered how to balance all those interests:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: …how would you go about weighing the interest in marriage with the interest in national security? You know, that's like apples and giraffes.

EICHER: Several justices appeared to agree that some limited judicial review was appropriate, but that Muñoz was asking for too much.

Justice Alito made the same point the Chief Justice did:

JUSTICE ALITO: How do you weigh the liberty interests that you are asserting against the government's interest in denying visas to people who would present a danger when they get to the United States? How do we weigh that? In --if Respondent's husband were a citizen, it wouldn't matter whether he was a member of MS-13 or any other gang or whatever the government suspected him of being involved in criminal activities. She could live with him unless he were in prison, right? So it's an absolute --it's a -- it's a very, very extensive right. Now you’re translating this into the situation where it’s the opportunity to come here.

REICHARD: It came out later in the proceedings below that the State Department suspected her husband of belonging to a gang. The wife denies that, but she did receive notice of it. And that’s probably enough to satisfy due process, as the government argues here.

Given the tenor of the questions from most of the justices, I think the wife is going to be disappointed, although I look for the court to clarify the reasons why.

EICHER: Okay, the last argument of the term,Snyder v United States. Here’s a blunt way to put the question presented: Are politicians allowed to work for tips?

It’s a little surprising that we wouldn’t know the answer … but the analysis is not so cut and dried, because of how vague the law is on this point.

Here are the facts. Twelve years ago, the mayor of Portage, Indiana, asked for bids to buy garbage trucks for the city. The company that won the bid offered the mayor $13,000 and he accepted it. Is that a “tip” or is that more what it sounds like?

A jury would later convict Mayor Jim Snyder of federal funds bribery under 18 U.S.C. 666(a)(1)(B), to be precise.

REICHARD: We note the exact section of the statute, because the lawyers will refer to it a few times as we analyze the case.

Snyder said the money was for his “consultation services.” He said that’s nothing like a quid pro quo—meaning a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something. What he received was merely a gift of appreciation.

He appealed, pointing to the law under which he was convicted. That law speaks of bribery, not gratuities. And he says he wasn’t bribed.

His lawyer, Lisa Blatt, says the government in the past argued “corrupt” means simply “with knowledge.” And now it means wrongful, immoral, or depraved.

LISA BLATT: Regardless, the government's new definition is implausible and stunningly vague. No gratuity statute -- that's none whatsoever -- uses the word "corruptly" and for good reason. The government can't tell you what gifts are corrupt. What gift is too much for the doctor who saves your life?

EICHER: Blatt pounded away on the implications. If the court ruled against her client, it’s not going to affect just her client.

BLATT: P 3 Section 666 applies to 19 million state, local, and tribal officials and anyone else whose employer receives federal benefits. Congress did not plausibly subject all of the people to 10 years in prison just for accepting gifts, especially when federal officials face only two years for accepting gifts under 201(c).

For the other side, the government argues Congress put in the statute the words “influence” and “reward,” specifically to capture officials who accept gratuities.

Listen to Assistant U.S. Solicitor General Colleen Sinzdak:

COLLEEN SINZDAK: The federal government needs to ensure that money it appropriates to local govts for public benefits is allocated in a way that maximizes the benefits to its citizens, not the rewards for local officials. Congress therefore enacted Section 666 to bar officials from corruptly accepting payments with the intent to be influenced or rewarded in connection with their official duties.

So a police chief who sends his officers to foil a burglary at a store and then demands the store owner pay him $10K for his officers’ work, he acts with the intent to be rewarded. And a mayor who steers a contract for particular business and then asks that business to pay him $13K for the contract acts with the intent to be rewarded, whether or not the contractor agreed to give him the reward before the contract closed.

But most justices saw a big flaw. Justice Brett Kavanaugh:

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: …when you put “corruptly” in, now you don’t know where the line is. You don’t know if the concert tickets, the game tickets, the gift card to Starbucks, whatever, where is the line, and so there’s vagueness. That creates the problem that there is here.

Sinzdak tried to reassure the court that the law only kicks in over a $5000 amount—and besides, there’s always prosecutorial discretion so that things don’t get too politically vindictive.

An argument that really didn’t hold water. Chief Justice John Roberts:

JUSTICE ROBERTS: We’ve had several cases where we’ve made the very clear point that we don’t rely on the good faith of the prosecutors in deciding cases like this.

REICHARD: I dunno. The chief might’ve been thinking of the prosecutors going after Donald Trump.

But then it may just be Supreme Court precedent on this matter. After all, the court overturned the bribery conviction of Virginia Governor Bob McDonell and his wife for accepting gifts.

The high court’s shown over and over it doesn’t like broad and vague laws where you don’t know what’s right and what’s wrong.

EICHER: Sindak for the government encouraged the justices not to focus on what she called the fringe cases, where it’s hard for the government to show consciousness of wrongdoing.

But Justice Kavanaugh was ready for that …

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: You said these fringe cases as compared to this case. I think the quote “fringe cases” are the everyday concern.

REICHARD: Harry Truman is said to have quipped: “Show me a man who gets rich by being a politician, I'll show you a crook.”

Would that we had more leaders who put service before self. But I do think the justices will hand victory to the mayor—not because he did his job well, but because Congress didn’t do its job well enough by writing a law that’s too broad.

And that’s this week’s Legal Docket!

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Monday, June 3rd. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day. Good morning. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. 

It’s time to talk business, markets, and the economy with financial analyst and adviser David Bahnsen. He’s head of the wealth management firm The Bahnsen Group and he’s here now.

David, good morning!

DAVID BAHNSEN: Good morning. Good to be with you.

EICHER: David, you’ve been on this theme of uncertainty and volatility in the economy generally and in the markets specifically, but as we go into a new month is there any reason to think that’s going to change?

BAHNSEN: Well, yeah, the month of May ended with quite a bit of volatility. And there's been a lot of volatility so far, in the second quarter. In the month of April, most of that volatility in the market was to the downside, and you ended up on the month being down about 5%. And then in the month of May, a lot of it had been upside volatility that hadn't reversed last week, a lot of it came back quite significantly, this week, so the month of May ended up being a big positive in markets.

So there's kind of two things I think, that are worth noting on this. One is that the total volatility, meaning where the markets were at one point all the way to whatever the lowest point it's gone, has really not been very significant. I mean, what we call a drawdown, which is the peak point of where a market was to the low point it goes in a given period of time, it's only been about 5%, and the markets average a 10% drawdown every year - on average. And yet, I would say it's worth pointing out that the week by week volatility, meaning how it's going up and down, has been enhanced. And I think that speaks, Nick, to the fact that there are different instabilities right now, everyone loves talking about what the Fed's going to do and when they're going to do it. But you know, now we are getting closer to the election. And I don't think that the election is going to be something that markets can say, “Oh, we're going down this week because of this,” or “We're going up this week because of this.” And what I mean by that is there's going to be a lot of uncertainty, there's not going to be a lot of, “because of this,” because it's going to be a close election. And you have the Senate, the House and the presidency that are all three different outcomes, that all three have a relevant market implication. But it just adds to uncertainty. And when you have uncertainty, when there's a “will they-won't they” with the Fed, when you have uncertainty with the election, and then you have uncertainty with all the geopolitical things out there, combined with a market that is already trading at 25 times last year's earnings, and 21 or 22 times next year's earnings, it makes for a more vulnerable, and certainly kind of edgy, market environment. And so I think we're gonna see that, at least in the stock market for the remainder of the year.

EICHER: We did receive a key economic report on Friday on measuring inflation. What’d you take away from it?

BAHNSEN: Well, the market, certainly the Dow, was up 574 points on Friday, one of its biggest days of the year. And you've got to remember that the April PCE number coming at the end of May is always a little anticlimactic, because we already got the CPI number. Now, I wish it wasn't that way. Because I think the PCE number matters a great deal. But again, you're only looking at a PCE right now, and what that is, is the Personal Consumption Expenditures. It's the inflation metric that the Fed says they use and prefer - and I certainly believe them and agree that it is a superior metric, but it was up 2.7% year over year. Health care is a bigger component in the PCE than it is the CPI and shelter - housing - is a much lower allocation in the PCE than the CPI. And there was an energy gain month over month, but there was a pretty nice drop in food prices in the PCE on the month and so overall, markets responded I don't think it was only to that. But nevertheless, the PCE came in with data that I think the Fed would have liked seeing even more than what they saw at the CPI earlier.

And I should point out, because we talk so much about the stock market, it's the more fun story all the time, but it was the bond yields that really matter. You know, the 10 year Treasury came back to 4.5%. Earlier in the week, it had been getting closer to 4.7. And so it's stayed between 4.3 and 4.7 for months now, and bond yields dropped quite a bit on Friday, and that caused bond prices, of course, to rally higher.

EICHER: The Wall Street Journal reported that the US economy is continuing to lose momentum … there was a story over the weekend saying the Fed might have more than inflation to worry about, and that is the cumulative effect of years of inflation catching up with consumers. What do you think about that?

BAHNSEN: So yeah, I think a theme that many are bringing up right now - and it's not just in the media, I mean, it's something that all of us have to be watching, as well - is not merely where inflation is, prices are and ultimately where the Fed wants to bring interest rates, but just, you know, what the byproduct of all this is in the economy. And that was the big story of 2023 is that so many people predicted a recession from Fed tightening, and it didn't happen. And now there are questions of, “Okay, the Fed’s keeping rates higher for longer; is this going to end up having an economic impact?” And there's certain data points, you know, certainly GDP growth is not at the high rate it had been in the second half of ‘23. It wasn't expected to be. But there were downward revisions in Q1 GDP, it only ended up growing about 1.3% annualized.

You know, there's two stories at once here, though. I mean, there's everyone looking to the quarter by quarter economic growth, to try to get some feel for where output and productivity are now. But there's also just the longer term structural story that I've been talking about for years, and I will be talking about for years, which is that the economy is not going back to 3%-3.1% real GDP growth year over year, where it had been for seven decades, prior to the financial crisis. You know, we haven't had a single year, so we're well below trendline growth. Right now, I think that there are data points that are a little concerning with the overall economy. But there are more data points, I mean, again, you just don't have a recession, Nick, when corporate profits are growing, jobs are growing, wages are growing.

EICHER: Right. So David, for defining terms, you noted the PCE, the Personal Consumption Expenditures, it's part of that package of government economic reports we like to look at for clues around the health of the economy. And we talk a lot about consumption, but not as much as what we have to spend on consumption, which is to say, our incomes. The government has a measure for that too. And I'd like for you to touch on the personal income component that the government publishes each month.

BAHNSEN: So every month the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the BEA, which is the Department of the Commerce Department, so this is under the federal government, an official branch of government, the BEA is tasked with putting out key economic data. And one of those things that we follow a lot and talk about in the podcast, we talked about today, was personal consumption expenditures, which is essentially a way in which they're measuring consumer spending. But every month, we also get a report on what is called Personal Income, and it's a governmental data point that is in the analysis, but it is a little different than just counting wages and salaries. It is including all sources of income, which, of course, is primarily wages and salaries, but it also can include government payments, Social Security, unemployment insurance, you know, even direct payments from Medicare and Medicaid and things of that nature. And so it gives a holistic understanding of how much income people are receiving.

Now it is, again, if all of personal income were coming only from the government, then, you know, you'd have a pretty big problem because you have to figure out where the money is being earned to get to the government to then come back to other people. The portion of personal income that comes from wages and salaries is very important to differentiate the transfer payments from what is being earned in the economy. But nevertheless, gross personal income is a way of measuring how much is getting into people's pockets across the country. And so it's an important data point, like so many others. The BEA is a nonpartisan group; I think their data has held up well over time. They also measure the personal saving rate in addition to. like I mentioned before, the PCE, so those are the major data points that they produce for us every month.

EICHER: Ok, David Bahnsen is founder, managing partner, and chief investment officer of The Bahnsen Group.

David is author of Full Time: Work and the Meaning of Life, fulltimebook.com is where you can find out more.

Thank you, David!

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much Nick. Enjoyed being with you.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Monday June 3rd. 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. Up next, the WORLD History Book. Eighty years ago this week, D-Day as it unfolded. Here’s WORLD Associate Correspondent Caleb Welde.

CALEB WELDE: Monday, June 5th, 1944. 6:07PM, Eastern Standard Time. A family sits down for dinner in Pennsylvania, while a bank teller in Oregon still has at least an hour on the clock.

The same moment is just after midnight across the Atlantic. German sentries in the French village of Carentan spot planes coming in low over the English Channel.

Paratroopers in nine hundred C-47s double check their gear above the Channel, trusting reinforcements will come at dawn.

AUDIO: [NBC BREAKING NEWS BULLETIN]

At 12:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, NBC interrupts a Hollywood dance band to report a German radio station is saying the Allies are invading. The newscasters are more convinced by 3AM.

NBC: This is Robert St. John in the NBC News Room in New York. Ladies and gentlemen, we may be approaching a fateful hour. All night long bulletins have been pouring in from Berlin, claiming that D Day is here, claiming that the invasion of Western Europe has begun.

3AM on the East Coast is 9 AM in France and in Austria where Hitler is just waking up. His subordinates were afraid to disturb him. He is unaware that seventy thousand troops have already waded ashore in France.

NBC: Let me read you several of the latest bulletins...

More than two thousand ships dot the English channel– not counting the three thousand landing craft unloading wave after wave of men onto beaches codenamed Omaha, Utah, Juno, Gold, and Sword.

NBC: …from the sea and from the air are stretching over the entire area between Cherbourg and Le Havre. A distance of about 60 miles.

Omaha Beach is proving the most deadly. American Rangers radio demolition teams saying the tide is coming in quickly and beach barriers are still hindering progress.

CBS Go ahead, London. This is supreme headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force. Under the command of General Eisenhower, Allied naval forces, supported by strong air forces, began landing allied armies this morning on the northern coast of France.

Moments later, an American general orders another naval artillery barrage of Omaha Beach knowing it may kill Americans already on shore. It’s now 3:30 in the morning on the East Coast.

NBC: Men and women of the United States, this is a momentous hour in world history. This is the invasion of Hitler's Europe.

A minute later,

NBC: 10 seconds. Standby..

Another official broadcast, this time from Eisenhower himself.

NBC: Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force, you are about to embark on the Great Crusade toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you.

Eisenhower recorded the broadcast several days earlier. Commanders were to read it to their soldiers en-route to the fight. Now the world listens…

NBC: The hopes and prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with you. And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking. 

7:30AM on the East Coast. NBC invites church leaders to pray for the men landing on French beaches, pastors like Norman Vincent Peale of Marble Collegiate Church in New York City.

NBC: Almighty God, God of our Fathers, we, thy people, bow humbly before thee on this fateful day of human history. As thou has guided us and blessed us in the past, so give us now we beseech thee thy blessing. In thy might and power, let us prevail.

The same hour, German soldiers surrender their positions on Omaha Beach and Americans from Utah Beach link up with the paratroopers who jumped at midnight. NBC catches up around 8:15.

NBC: American, Canadian and British troops have seized beachheads. It’s now known that American troops have knocked out enemy pillboxes and other fortifications along the Atlantic wall.

News is spreading across the world.

In Switzerland…

NBC: No one said good morning today, everywhere it was only, did you hear, they have landed, they have landed. 

A reporter on the streets of London says one girl summed up the attitude well.

NBC: She said simply, Thank God.

It’s just after 10AM. In the United States, NBC reports,

NBC: In many a quiet hamlet the church bells pealed to announce the news, and also to summon America to her knees in prayer. There was an impulse I think we all had in common, and even men and women who might have forgotten how to pray, knelt once more with their eyes toward God.

President Roosevelt briefs the press just after 4 PM in Washington. The sun has just dipped below the horizon in Normandy.

More than two thousand Americans are dead. A hundred-fifty-thousand Allied troops are on the ground.

At 10 PM, President Roosevelt addresses the nation from the White House.

FDR: In this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer. Almighty God, our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity…

He prays for more than five minutes. When he finishes he adds no further comment.

FDR: Thy will be done, Almighty God. Amen.

The war continues for another four-hundred-fifty-two days before the prayers for an end to the war are answered.

On this 80th anniversary of D-Day we end with one last prayer, broadcast at 11pm from NBC studios. A prayer for lasting peace.

NBC: We thy needy children, this day cry out to thee, in the midst of anguish, suffering, and conflict. Thou art our refuge and our hope. Forgive, oh God, the sins of us all. Purge us, as men and nation, of self interest. Then thou will be able to grant unto us patience and wisdom and hope. Then through the gospel of thy redeeming love, we may transform our lives, and the lives of men and of nations, until justice and righteousness, and peace shall be established in all the earth. In the name of Christ we pray, Amen.

That’s this week’s WORLD History book. I’m Caleb Welde.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: Some help getting beyond the talking points of former President Trump’s felony conviction. We’ll analyze the case and the merits of the appeal. And, World’s Classic Book of the Month for May: East of Eden. 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 Bible says: Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. 1 Timothy 4:7, 8

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.