Referendum Giustizia con Antonio Di Pietro | Pulp Podcast #50

0:00The best part of waking up? A full cup of Folger's coffee and music on full blast. Wake me up, wake me up and say me Wake the baby, wake the baby Wake the baby, wake the baby Wake the baby, wake the baby Wake the baby, wake the baby The first part of waking up Is for just in your car Shop folders cake up pods and more at your nearest retailer Why are we talking about us? Did I talk about someone? We can talk about who we want We are a multitudine, we can talk about us then we can evolve to who we want Then what is the intelligence of the group? It is the most intelligent and the intellectual of the podcast's reference I have been watching it for a long time No, but I have seen it on my television Why? I know how many times I say We also have Silvio

1:00The dog is called Silvio An omaggio It is an omaggio But I have more idea to do it The girls of a big theory theory of the complete omelie on the crosscut of the titanium with the Cerberian papa but with the wind in pop-up and arrive at the sugar Balpo podcast Introducing the flag of the first public Hello everyone, girls Welcome back to Balpo podcast Today is an incredible episode sponsored by the Meloni government because as it is covered by many girls from the cotton field we are paid from this government to do propaganda at the same time on the three sides There is a lot of money left we are choosing obviously in the sense that we have had two eyes and one day they are going to say

2:00Oh, how? I am selling them, they are like this No, let me tell you, guys yes, how do I do it? I am part of the community yes, Salve, good morning to everyone something has brought something something has brought something from Darci It is a moment and we have here a hospital but it is absolutely random to have helped the right and all these years we make a plausa of Antonio of Pietro But why did I have to stop from the beginning? It was ironic let me explain the context we are here the context is that it has made an article of the daily fact in which he says that I would have been paid from the government to do propaganda for him wrong that in this podcast we have had Gerardo Colombo for the night and for the night I told you before talking about referring to him obviously because today we will talk I would like to ask you here what have you done in all these years? Where have you gone? From how much water? Let's say there has been

3:00a long period in which a few of his presence has been limited I have also returned to this topic referring to him I for two times as soon as I start talking the answer will be because you call here so I for two times in my life I have been criticized and it has been when I have been criticized for a couple of years and when I have been criticized for 4 or 5 years I have been criticized for 4 or 5 years because I have been criticized for the first time I have been called to answer of my actions and I ask for the answer and I do part of the category of people for me it is easy because you know that there is so I have dedicated that time to defend my ideas

4:00of my vulnerability within the process between 8 I have been all these years with data for information that they have tried in general I do not want to solve but it works and then in how much time? in how much time? I am struggling I am struggling there is a person who is the day after I have been able to find out what I want 100.000 years I said oh the guy who? Fed other Fed other Fed other Fed that we say we did it for Ditto but our days we're talking about good thoughts but we're talking about good thoughts tell me about the thing you know that one day you left with the idea I thought I had to say, not to say that, but to say that the law is not to be human. That is a crime of insurance. I was not allowed to accept this because I was only alone. I was told that I was not allowed to speak Italian.

5:01I only did it because I was not allowed to speak Italian. I did not speak English. I did not speak English. For me to have told you that I was not allowed to speak. That was a crime of insurance. That was sent here to compensate the first public. Let's talk about a fact that the risk of the terrorism has been in place. We are talking in 1998 and 99. Yes, think about it. But all these processes that have been for defamation, how hard are they? There is one that started in 1998, the part, let's say, in which I have to solve, that was defamed, that if it was concluded in 2002, and then we started with the practice of reparation. We are in 1998, we are now in 2006, in March of next year. Yes, and here is a topic. That is, why the justice machine in this country continues to be inevitably and necessarily so slow?

6:01I tell you the truth. In every instance of a judge, or of a public minister, let's do a public minister who has done it, but it's okay for everyone. This is the table. You have to imagine that it is only one, at least about 1,200 people. If one doesn't do anything else, you have to imagine the fascists, not all of them. So, after 1,200 people, maybe you do one because you like the most, because it's more interesting, because it's more important to do all the others. In the end, what happens? It happens 5, 10, 15 years, and it doesn't work out, because it's always different. How does it do to make justice work? It's complicated, the number of magistrates, it's complicated, the number of collaborators, it's complicated, it's not complicated. It's not complicated. It's complicated, but it's possible to succeed. It's complicated.

7:02The financial resources, if it allows, it's more complicated, even better, the structural resources, but it's not a problem. Because if a population of our country produces 60,000 of the income to be paid, you have 40,000 votes, it's going to be bad for those who don't agree. Sure. And to find the right way to leave another one, you have to make the same effort tomorrow. Let's say, to increase the team of magistrates and increase the cars, because they will arrive at the end of the day. Let's increase the structure of the support with the force of the police and so on. We want to invest in justice. We don't have anything to reform. We need to put ourselves in the right place, and we need to be motivated. Sure. And in the list of directors, so also, because before I said to him, he paid another one, I don't even know how to say it. I don't have the newspaper papers,

8:03I don't have the newspaper papers, I don't have the newspaper papers. I respect the work of the journalist. I also respect the work of the journalist. You should know that I... I have the ability to do politics, because a certain point of interest I did a part of Italy, and it was a transition game, because a personal game, hard as a basketball game, for definition. It would have been for a good period, the real and only opposition to the government. I'm not proud of it, I would do it a thousand times, but... I've also given it a lot. I repeat, but I need to have the responsibility, the humility, if it's a personal game, to its role in the internal of a historical phase. Otherwise, I had to transform it into a political ideology. I think there are too many political ideologies to put an end to it. It had a function at that time. I could do it a thousand times. I could do it a thousand times under this aspect. There was a vote with the gift, let's say, of the first public that someone gave it to me.

9:04It was given to me by the doctor who discovered the tumor, not the tumor that was given to the Italian Lord. I said this personally, let's say, I put myself to do politics at that time. After the fact that there were people who said to me that they did not give it to me, they reported it to me every day, but I have always respected the day of the protest. I have been repeated. I have taken it out of the politicians, because they have been accused of something strange, that they have been reported to a TV broadcast. Report. Report. And I didn't do it because of the report. But no more. I prefer to live. I say it here. I have to do it all. I want to live in a country where there are ten, hundreds of thousands of people. No more, if there is no more. That is, journalism does its own mistake. To me, it is easy. It is easy, but I don't tell anyone. But it is easy that people apparently believe,

10:05they tell a false story, so who doesn't believe you? I don't know if you can see it. Okay, but this is the case of the report. No. The report is a story, they have told you what to do. I took a test. I took a test. That's what I did. You had a way to do it. Yes, but I took it out of the way. Who has told you? There are two hundred and fifty processes. I drink all of them, but I have to put the pieces of the... I have to put them in the bathroom. No, but I have to put the pieces of the sentence. Because I never do that, but I don't like it. Yes, I'm crazy. Because the sentence, then, when you are published, you ask them in solidarity, who wins the case and who loses the case, you ask for the pieces, but that person loses the case. I just don't like it. But I don't like the sentence. I want to do it. Yes, exactly, exactly. I want to ask you a question, a narration brought by Berlusconi, which for years has been a bit of a challenge.

11:06Then, at the time, the real time, the magistrate of the protagonism, is a very funny literature. I will talk more about the magistrates with the beauty of looking for fame, or, let's say, the frailness of being corrupt from a popular inch. Let's put it this way. According to you, it is a scenario that comes in which way you can contrast. I'll give you an example. I make many recipes, I make Corona, and this pseudo inch of the Signorini Alfonso. I think there has been a popular mode of people that are scandalized by the rapidity with which there is a process of a tribunal. Things that have been done anyone else would not have arrived. I, for example, had the same habit of speaking with Fabrizio and there has never been a tribunal

12:06in the past. Do you have any requests that have more results or that have given precedence simply because there is an access reflector. I have registered to tell you about it. From the testimony of some people in the newspapers and clear that when there are these thousand fascists the Constitution imposes the obligation of the Signorini Alfonso. But it is not that contemporaneously that you take everything and you have to take it. And in fact it is often understood that it takes those who have more visibility. It is fair and correct to be able to be more necessary because it is true that you have to follow what rules even before the rules

13:06the rights of blood the rights of terrorists the rights of mafia the economic ones can also fall even the rights that have the personality because it is a union or a tragedy a defamation so if something so taught but not taught the obligation of the penal action to give a job to the state especially the state if I say that when there are those thousand fascists in the public that I have to take it is clear that there is more visibility after the days as news but also because sometimes you have to proceed maybe in a position and as if they are famous people there are so many news so we have to proceed we have to proceed

14:06I personally do not have the regionalism as far as this is the difference I see from my time today from my time the days after I refer to the days before often I see the days after the magistrate do you see the days before the days before the magistrate? I see the problem and I also respect the past that we have the sustainability of such the city and thanks to the media it is too easy to have a greater speed to the magistrate but there is nothing to do to create the law in the public opinion and in times in the public opinion it is the real process the popular process is the real process from the other quarter there are Jews especially the legal groups

15:06there are the popular Jews which are very common so take a look in the cloth of that that the lord who was a very common when he came to Marthelato he was discovered that she was discovered So the problem is that then the processes are made in television, not in the hauls, in the proposals. I personally am the idea that if you remember the manifesto of the manifesto of the manifesto, what will happen after the manifesto? The manifesto that is made? One day in prayer. Oh! I think a day in prayer has been born. One day in prayer is already there. But it has become one of the programs of the manifesto of the manifesto of the manifesto. I want to say something, so I enter into the context of the man, I beg you, I beg you, I beg you. I heard something, a day in prayer. Now the young people don't know what the prayer is.

16:09But the prayer is an organ for a judicial authority. We have already been told to talk about the judicial authority and the minister's public. For the penal part. In the 19th century, we say fascist, because that was the great minister. He was also a figure, we are the priest. The priest who, for the whole series of events, a little minor, was the fascist, the singer. That is, he was the one who turned the blinds to the end. He decided to be a director. He was a PM and a judge. He was a PM and all of them together. But also, in addition, he was called a inquisitorial system, which in which, that is, even for serious events, the minister's public was going to interact with the subjects where he was doing the blinds to the bottom and he was called a judge and a instructor, who made the blinds to the bottom. He looked at the mirror and said, I mean, now I say so.

17:11I want to say that he decided on what he was doing. The bipolarism of the career. Yes, of course. In a certain way, he realized that he had reached the republican era, in which he did not continue to follow that model in which the person who was on the top was the only singer. With so many efforts, in 1989, I was not the one who did it. So it was not the one who did it. Yes, I did not put my hair on top. Because I did not put my hair on top. In 1989, a part of the year, in the middle of the resistance that he was called, he was going to jump. He said, let's do the accusatory system. The pretzels were eliminated. And all those who watch the accusation, the blinds, to see who did the blinds, went to the republican era. But all those who watch. But if we see that he is just himself, we see if he is guilty, if we listen to you, but if we listen to another part, and we see that he was right, we call him judge. We call him judge. These two. Now we are the singer. And so, what do you do? Do you ask me about this?

18:12What I wanted to say, but it was not related to this. It was maybe, in the case of the example that we have brought before. That is, I have a type of measure, as this podcast can be. I can potentially every day, to make the blinds. First, but the justice also comes from a single sentence for defamation. The life of those people. That is, I have been threatened. I have been threatened. I have been threatened. I have been threatened. Do you want me to explain it to you? No, no, no. For the future. We have an ideology. But the world, our country, is talking about a deriva. This was my question. I have seen that it is a part of one that has suffered the consequences. Did you hear that? I, of the information, let's say, is it legalized? No. I don't do it. I have suffered a lot. I have suffered. Of course. I have also suffered. Of course. If you did, I don't know. The fruit came from the fruit. Did you do the public minister or did you give it to him?

19:12And I didn't look at anyone. So, at the end, I did my duty. There is, say, thank you, a public minister, who has made his duty a consensus. Because if you did the duty, who is free, thank you. Hello, you are beautiful. No, but my question is this. Have you seen that it has suffered the consequences of the years? Have you seen that the world has changed? I have suffered. I have suffered. I have suffered. I am not only good, but I am one who, say that it has suffered. It has become realized. Good, really. I have seen it has also suffered. This kind of means, which we have in fact, according to you today, that way you can put the speed of these means with perhaps the force linked to the defamation. Look, from the beginning of an example, I believe, to say that, in my view, there is nothing worse than putting it on. I have a person that I respect a lot today more than ever because I have not realized what he said, the barbarian person, the barbarian person, if it is successful, days do repeat, if it is successful, days do do, they will vote, because the

20:19public ministers will be under the policy, which is not mistaken with those who are written. On the other hand, the video has been canceled, then it will be closed. There has been a period that on the station, on the station, on the Central of Milan, there has been a six to three. You, you, a public minister, subject to the policy, vote no, if you do not, then he has actually said that, in order to read the book of history, as always, but the book of history is a thing, we still think about in Chrome that I have been told. Well, if it is hidden in the system of the information, he has censored, limiting them and access to some of them. I believe that it is wrong. No one says that he wants, no one is responsible for it, because there is nothing wrong with knowing that someone must ask someone else to speak, because it is that point. Who has given it to say this? Here, who controls the controller? So I prefer a reasonable information, in which it is said that it is all that you want, but you do not limit, becoming him, those who

21:25decide, who must say white, who must say black. Yes, above all, it is to note the peculiarity of the intervention, that is, if the internet was a place in which the fact-checking came, in a way, to understand all the themes, to say, okay, the fact that this specific topic has come to the net of what is said barbarian is weird. We try to a little bit of context, the video of barbarian has been checked by David Puente, I have opened it, which has been hidden here from us, and why is it open? Here is the meta-collaboration of a meta-collaboration. Yes, yes, yes. But now I want to say something. Well, let's go, let's go, let's open all the power, guys, but it's not me. Come on, guys, give it. Well, as this has been censored, the video has been canceled from the platform. Yes, and I want to say, respect, respect for barbarians, but that's it, it's dead, it's a thing that's wrong, if it is the problem, if one says one thing,

22:28let's say, these guys are black, they say it is a political, but they do not see that they are not black. If one says it is a magistrate, if one says it is a historical, they have done it wrong, it comes in dubious, that is, in my ear that there are 93 years, you hear speak, say white to a politician, black to a magistrate, it is brought spontaneously to believe more to the magistrate, why? The magistrate, according to me, in these times a little less, to the historical with a little more. No, but let me get to the end, or also to the historical, why? Because these are more credible, then the gravesty that is being made in this moment, that there are personality, professionalism, structure, one of these is the biggest, which allows the fourth power of the state, the national and magistrate association, which is almost the total of magistrates, which is to make the idea of ​​the property, not part of a false proposal, materially false. And now this is serious, why? Because you profit from the

23:32credibility that is in itself, the magistrate, that you have not built, but you have built that, that is, they put it into life, that is, they put it into dignity, that is, they put it into dignity. And with that dignity, you induce, who is going to vote on the basis of a fact that it will continue to tell you, I can tell you, I can tell you that you don't like me, as you are on your hair, but I can't tell you that it is calm. The example is that I tell you, I tell you that you have hair in many ways, that is, I want to tell you, disaster, I would be mine, when I look at you, I see a person, I don't get it all. A single question on open fact checking, because it has said something important to Peter, that is, there is the thing, that is, I don't know, I don't know, I don't do it like Luca, then the thing that has said important is the disparity of treatment also on social in this case of meta, it is too political and not political, because in reality it was used more hard in the front of Barbero, because this fact checking tendentially does not come on content, it makes you happy, because it gives me

24:34pacifical. The part of the public, yes, according to me, the part of meta is not possible, but this is also a important question, if it says so. No, but I agree, but also there, if it is clear, if it says so, it is a good thing, it is a bad thing. No, no, of course, of course, Professor Barbero, he says it, the national association. No, no, of course. It is a proposal, as if he was there. Yes, but it is just that it is a bad thing to say, but it is an episode that is quite similar to dates. But if it is connected to the other discourse of speed, right? Exactly. I, for example, are not absolutely agree with the work that tendentially makes Corona, but also there, potentially block that type of video, it is a bad thing. But at the same time, how do you make this concept? I have seen it, I repeat, of information in my opinion, the fact that it is not possible to be true, or

25:39also punitively written, this is a few excuses, it is written by Professor Barbero, because it is punitive. In good faith, that is, he says that he did it in good faith. The validation, after the criticism, in my view, it should never be censored. censored. censored as a couple. That must be, let's say, shared. And when a false fact will be told, to do the criticism, then it should not be contested by the criticism. He said that this reform, put the public minister under the policy. Now, under the policy, even worse, under the government, under the executive, under the policy that you want. The policy that we all know. Another thing that we have seen here, Gerardo Colombo, his ex colleague, and we have also seen Nicolas Gratteri. All are two, anyway, also here, this podcast, they are more or less, they have brought the same line of Barbero, really, look, that this reform would accentuate the power of the choice of the magistrates

26:40in the hands of the politicians. Here, let's say, from Peter, finally, we have a voice for the No. What does it say to us? Why? Excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me. We finally have a voice for the No. What does it say to us? Why, if it is under the assertions of Gratteri, Barbero and Gerardo, according to which this reform would accentuate the power of the chosen magistrates in the hands of the political class, it is false. Now, I am with you. And then, where do you go from? Where is written? If you want to say something else, if you want to respond to this question, when, according to me, the Italians are interested in everything else. Yes, but... What is this? What are you doing? I'm looking at you. What? I'm looking at you. I'm looking at you. I'm looking at you. Wait a second. According to me, the real issue... Well, first, I respond to this question, then I ask you another question

27:41on the question of the penal responsibility of the magistrates. Caution, Columbus, I respect, I respect... Thank you, Barber. Can we say that you were just in Bieber of the magistrate, Verona? Then I repeat, that's very hard to say. You were a bit like Bakstreet Boys of the magistrate, the Avengers. Where have you been in the past? And I'm looking for you. Because their love is the examples. But what about you? I'm not a fan of the game, I'm not a fan of the game. You were a bit of an oasis of the Oasis. I understand. Oasis, if you can, I'll explain it. IPU! IPU! Guys, you're talking about a person who has been trying for 75 years, to try to make the morning with the evening, trying to study as much as possible the work I did. So I don't have time to think about this thing. Do you hear me? Yes. Where did you write this thing? We'll talk about it later.

28:41We'll talk about it later. We've played it in the end. I'll explain this to you later. The discussion is about the reform of the Constitution, the Constitution, and the first laws that are above all. Now, the Constitution, also reformed, is valid in this legislative process, that is, the remaining Constitution, the governments, the majority are remaining. So, when the first thing I allow you to say is, vote, vote, no, you're going to vote, because it's a law that interests you. And so, you have to see if it comes or not it comes to you. I don't want to vote for the press game. What do you know, sir? I don't want to vote for you. I don't want to vote for you. It's not that. It's the mistake of personalizing a referendum. In fact, those who put us on the top floor, I'll send them to a protest. Because, well, I said to the Lord,

29:41the 19th century, the 19th century, the 19th century, the 18th century, when they said, let's do the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system. We'rezhening to vote our voices together, under the Constitution of the Magistrate. They are the so-called judicial states that there are non-distreats that have to do the various actions. Well, all these organizations have to be together, the public and the judges. Now, how much do you go into a law of justice in order to process yourself?

30:41That is, the judge, and there is the public minister, who is here, not here. But in reality, they are not in the same container. Yes, I judge, they are together and the judge should give the public to the public and the public minister. The public minister should give the judge to the judge on the disciplinary plan on the plan of the promotion of the decision-making plan. The separation of the careers is all different from the separation of the functions. How much do they say, but there is already, there are three or four years from the Magistrates. Yes, they say that there are few. This is not the separation of the careers. There is a separation of the arbitrage of the judge, but above all, above all, what they are doing, they are doing judges, above all, they say who listens to us. The problem is that when you are in a law of justice you do the process,

31:41because there is then the lawyer, who is against you, against you, and so on. The judge is called the judge for the indictment, or the judge for the judge for the criminal. You have to judge someone who does the public to the minister. That's what you did. It's worth it. That's what you did. You can be a lawyer. That's what you did. That's what you did. You can be a lawyer. That's what you did. That's what you did. That morning the duty is to be discrimination, which is important. Or by nofo of justice, and by sheer strait's character. Does everyone know the fact that, people areهم, or at least they know the husband of anyone? The right of common sense. I can tell you the truth. I do agree with Pietro. Yes. I can tell you. I can disagree with you. You are Ник.

32:42Unfortunately, the question of barbarism. The fact that they have censored the video of barbarism, if the fact is, it has a political standpoint, these are the tests of Minkia because they have made a favor, and who is for the NO? Obviously, because they are not going to look at the merit of what he has said barbarism, but they look at the censor. And now I want to ask you, but why? Because who is for the NO? He says that the choice of the ministerial publics would be focused on the hands of the politicians. The all-new 2026 Toyota RAV4 is here, building on everything drivers know and love about Toyota. With a redesigned look and modern tech that makes life behind the wheel easier than ever, the new RAV4 comes standard as a hybrid, providing smooth, efficient performance for both city streets and longer journeys. Enjoy the legendary reliability Toyota is known for in the all-new 2026 RAV4. Learn and shop more at toyota.com. Toyota, let's go places.

34:07The suggestion. Now, as long as the suggestion is made in a beginning of the game, it is a suggestion. But if it is made with reference to the constitutional modify, it is a serious fact. Here is why I do not condemn who raccoons, if not, motivating them starting from a false fact. Many do it in good faith, I have seen the fact that barbarism in good faith. But I invite, I invite citizens, I have now seen all the internet, take the Constitution of Italy, Article 104 of the Constitution of Italy, I read it so wrongly, Article 104, the first one, the magistrate, constitutes an order, it is, but it is clear, the magistrate constitutes an order, an autonomous independent order from each other to power. When it comes to reform, if we vote like change, the magistrate constitutes an order, an autonomous independent order from each other to power. It is composed, it is the magistrate of the giant race of the race. You know me and say where

35:11it changes, that is, with the constitutional reform, if it remains autonomous and independent, not only if it remains, even with the obligation of the penal action with those limits that, if not for the Italy and the fascists, now it is not where it will be mandatory, it remains the duty of the public to look for even the favor of the indigate, when I try to find it, but if I do not want to find it, now I find it, it is, I will say it again in D.P. 3, which is a very good thing, but you can see that you know a lot of chaos of those barbarians. I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. So, the norm, the norm, D.P. 6, how much do you predict, they say, because you are present, they say, some look that the public communist will end up in politics, this they say in some way, but they say they become super police, now I have to make it clear that,

36:11apart from the fact that it is not super armed, super police, it is not super police, it is not super dangerous, because they have understood why they have to be super police, but I tell you one thing more, well, let's say that super police in the history we have also heard with the United States, yes, but this, this, this, this, this constitution says this, no, no, no, no, it is a relationship, it is a question of the leader, thank you for the question of the leader, but this constitution, our constitution says, it is believed in the 19th century, it is said today, the judicial authority, the disposed of the police, the judicial authority, that is, what you can do tomorrow, you can already do it today, the word disposed, what do I mean, I use you and I do what I have to do, of course, so it does not mean that today it is not disposed, today it is disposed, but why, because today after the reform of the system accusatory, they have created a card that the GIP or the GOOP has created, that is, every time that the government says that today and tomorrow it can and it must be done, if it has the freedom

37:15of people, it must always pass through the value of a judge, so as I say that there are super powers, no, there are powers that the laws agree on the limits in which every time you have to go on the freedom of a person, he cannot do it, he must also go to do it directly, he must ask for a judge, it is better than that judge, whether it is open or why, because if they do not follow the line of the magistrate, Mr. Minister, well said the Lord, but I already asked for three months, but I already asked for six months of interception on the phone, it makes me understand that you are looking for the hair in the eye, and now that I tell you, no, because I only do it if it is a public minister, but I do it for three years, the end of the year, I will take care of it, but this is what I think, you have matured it, because you have been a public minister, then, as I said, you have had repercussions, even your choices, your operation from a political woman, from a magistrate woman, this is what I think, you have matured it from a public minister or when

38:19it has become imputated, that is, the matter has been imputated, it has made you change your idea to the public minister. No, no, no, I absolutely do not, then I started to understand one thing, I will tell you one thing, who knows if you are going to see what the criminal procedure is going to happen, at the first chapter, there are the subjects, that is, those who are here, then start, the police did it, as if they were policemen, but the magistrate did it, the testimony did it, the indagent did it, the imputant did it, the parties did it, the parties did it, the lawyers did it, the lawyers did it, the lawyers did it, the parties did it, the parties did it, the parties did it, the parties did it, they were mad, I said, 70, 55 years, so you believe me, we need a justice that not only is transparent, this separation of the careers and this possibility that

39:20which has brought this change to the Constitution, which is the cut-out of the civil war. It is incorporated from the inside of the CSM, that section that is occupied by disciplinarian and magistrates. Remember when you say, public minister, and judges, in Aula, they are separated, but then they can judge in the CSM, they are together. Even in the legislature, there is a section, here they are all together. They are all together and decide if the right or wrong behavior is the right way. This reform prevails to a different organ that is called Alta Corte disciplinary, where it is incorporated by the Council of the Magistrate and therefore we have an organ that is more independent in judging how the public behaves. It is a bit what I want in Italian. How do you behave? Why do you talk to the Lord?

40:22I don't know if you know, but probably in these days I want to tell the story, not mine. This is a novelty. We know a scoop. Awesome. I don't know if I have a diary on a daily basis. I believe in doubt, but I don't remember it. Excuse me for a second. There is an interview from the judge of Patalino. Who, then, does not tell you anything? No. You know what? The judge of Patalino. It was one of the two judges who authorized me to arrest them at the time. No one talks about it. Today, if you go out with a fire, because I have never done anything like that. If you see the explosion, you will see it. Yes, you will see it. You will see it. You will see it. You will see it. On fire. Today, on fire. We have now about 30 judges.

41:2330 judges are registered. Is it one of the two judges? No, we all remember it. But there was also Andrea Patalino. Who? When I asked the judges of the court, she said yes. No. She said yes. But all the judges always say yes. Now, it is true that there are many judges in my opinion. There are many judges in my opinion. But it is not a judge's fault if I arrived there. With the tests. I want to say it. Everybody says, but you are wrong in arresting many judges. Do you want to understand that all the judges in the court were all wrong? That is, it is not a judge's fault. Yes. I am very angry. I do not understand. It is not like having destroyed political. But I was an idiot who tried to cure the tumor. The tumor that destroyed politics. It is the tumor on the conditions. But I will not change the discourse. I can not. I cannot do this. I have to ask for this. I have to ask for this. I have to ask for this. I have to ask a bit of this. I have to ask for this. I have to ask for this.

42:23I am forced to do the entire judge. I did not know it. I can ask for this. I can ask for this. You have to be honest. I have always been honest. No, don't worry about it. You do not listen to me when you are the last judge. No, no. But listen to what he says, you see, you stop the appearance, but the David has things to say. When you go to a court of justice where there are people who come from the people to do justice, you are in that mood, if you sit in that mood, this makes you understand how you have to be. Because, to me, I accept, I look like a drug addict, anyway, I don't say anything. He is very, I have already seen him, because I have already entered in the Italian case, so I am socially accepted.

43:29You are right, we are mobilizing in this moment to do all the points of view in relation to each other. But my question is spontaneous. I have seen what he says constantly, I am 75 years old, I am 75 years old. How can I do it? How can I do it? How can I have such mobilization? And the second question, because I also go on the intentions, the process of intentions, I will not do it, I will do it. How can I do it? So, the government is mobilizing so many relationships. Maybe it was. But there is no need to agree. But here, the area of magistrates has an incision potential, probably for role role and not. The area of opposition is a potentially huge area, why? Because when you are in a position like this, no, what do you think? It is not a big reason to motivate you. No, not even for the No, but I want to go to the law. I want to go to the law. But I, instead of, I see those of you, instead of doing too little, because it is constantly the government, constantly the majority.

44:32And if you want to speak what? Of course, I know. The Dere Tano. If you want to speak, because it says, if it is good to ask for work and I am wrong. If it is bad, but I, in case it is a result, if it is bad, I do not know my mother. So, I did not really see the slogan in the cross, to go into the neighborhood, one hallucinant in which they put a wooded robot. Now, after the reform, there will not be any problem anymore. That is, there will be things to go into the neighborhood, and from the labor, labor. Why is this such a transport, when you are in prison, it is a challenge? It is a mission, we believe, firmly, as I said, Federico, the matured in the course of time, I have always supported this. I have started my activity before the Ministry of Defense, before many other things. I have certainly been the Ministry of Defense, the Public Ministry, I have seen, from the inside, the importance of the role of the Public Ministry, that is, what is in my hand, remember, that at the end, everything that is worth it,

45:35and all on the basis of some access to the Ministry. So, when they say that the Public Ministry is under the policy, it is a dialectic shock, because the Public Ministry is worth hundreds times more than the policy of the law of the Constitution. The Public Ministry can only close it in two ways. Or another Public Ministry is a acquittal authority, they cannot close it in any way. When one does something, it is a magistrate, but also when they close it. So, respect what one does, do something good, do something good, that can respect what, can have an open responsibility, penal, civil, disciplinary, if you want, penal, civil, disciplinary. So, what is there that does not go? When they look at the magistrate, respect the citizen community, for example, in the United States, in the United States, in the United States, in the United States,

46:37we take the example, the magistrate who has indicated has ruined the life of the court. What is the difference? That is, that for how much respect the penal responsibility, the magistrate responds like all the others, except that he should try his penal responsibility. Every penal responsibility is painful, it must be of the subjective element of the pain, but there is a responsibility that currently does not exist. Exactly, because it is a process of intention, it is a process of intention, how do you say it has done with pain? Well, there is also a bubble. Yes, but how do I do it? It is like the scam, at least you do not see an interest, but there is someone from the past. Let's see, I am saying, penal responsibility, civil responsibility, civil responsibility, of the providence, there is no salt that is not achieved in a penal responsibility, it is a penal fact,

47:37because otherwise it is a validation that he has given it. In fact, there are the other organizations in the United States. The disciplinary responsibility is still missing, why? Because at the end of the day, the inside of the CSM, the inside of the office, and therefore this reform has helped. Even this is worth the money, because this reform, this responsibility of disciplinary will be judged. From an external organization. Where the vote is in the responsibility, penal and guilty, because if you have already managed to do it, answer the real one. Well, you have already answered the right answer. It is in two adjectives. It is an adjective, let's see. Negligence, negligence, or in preparation. So, in negligence, in imprudence, these are not punishments. But you can guess the truth of people. The case is not possible.

48:37All the people, they are provoked, it is consequence. Sometimes, of a different value. But the biggest part is sometimes, of an act of negligence. Let's say, negligence, imprudence, are three. I also do it from the technical point of view. Because somewhere that has been directed, this is the negligence, imprudence and imperity. This is the responsibility of the colonists. These three things today, today the magistrate does not respond. They do not respond. In fact, they do not respond. Because I did this, but there is another one in another way. And this, I think, that first I have to face. And that's why I said, why don't we look at the case of Padalino? After that, thank you for what you did. I asked you to do the ministerial public at Torino. To do the ministerial public at Torino. But it was good. So, he had already done the indigene for the judge, for the indigene, for the eliminator, and reprending the strictity. What did you do, Padalino? Did you do what you did with me?

49:37Was it good? Did you do the question? Did you transfer to Torino? Did you do that? Did you do the ministerial public? Good, very good. At some point, I asked the ministerial public to do the ministerial public. I never did the ministerial public. For the attention, the 98% of magistrates are written in the National Society of Magistrates. He, no. And also me. I was not written. He read a little, what's up? No, I didn't find it. I found it. I found it. I said Padalino. I said it. I said it. I said it. I apologize for having ignored the years of correntism and mediation. Evil! But no! There is no positive. No! It's all the same. I was going to be sent to law. You were wrong. No. Because I've always found this, the order is... Do you ever ever had that? I said it, it would be good, that's it. Who? People are asking. So, you know... Well, I already told you I'm a fascist, I'm a governent son.

50:38I'm wrong. I'm going to find it. I found it. Here you go. I ignored the generations of the current, then I said, it's from the mediatic race, until when they were on the top. I said, I've not seen the currentism and the damage of the mediatic race, guys, then let's talk about this. Until when they were on the top, I make a fool of myself and tell my boss, the positive, the positive, referring to a vote. The separation of the necessary careers

51:40and sacrosanth, the shortage of the power of the current. Okay, I'm not going to do it anymore. I'm sorry, I have to do it. Right, right, right. I'm going to tell you the dream, guys. Yes, guys. It's my turn. No, it's much more beautiful. In fact, the question, 12 days, I started to get there, first I saw that I wanted to go to compare and then I saw the judge, for corruption. Archa, Miserya. Why? I'm sorry. The... Well, there's a doubt. It was a doubt. It was a doubt. Four years ago, it happened suddenly in the infirmary. Yes, of course. The same thing happened to the judge. The judge was going to do the gippa Milan. The PM, as he was going to the attorney, competent for the judge, for the magistrate of the judge. Milan. That's why the judge's colleagues, those PM colleagues who went to him to ask for the arrest, had to evaluate his behavior. Because they went to Milan, the same colleagues who asked him to arrest someone, had to judge him

52:40and they sent him to the judge. Yes, of course. After four years, it happened suddenly. But... It's the judge's life now. It's the judge's life. It's the judge's life. No, no, no, no. It's not the judge's life. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. Ah. It's his demand for career progression. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. Yes. I have to inform you because you want the magistrate that's still inside you. Pay attention. We don't have to go from one extreme to the other. We have to adjust the disciplinary responsibility and the only way to adjust that is to give you an organ as much as possible. Without it, we have to give you an organ that is against good. So, when you want to say we also say how good this organ is, what works. How do you look at the responsibility of the penalty? We have said that clearly for that painful thing, always, that guilty attention. Take a look at your example.

53:42It's not that every time that a judge in the upper hand gets hit by the judge of the lower hand and the court in the tribunal wants to say that the first judge, who can be a jib, can be a tribunal, or the castration of the court. It's not that that the first decision must be punished because it is wronged. It's logical that there are three types of judges and as such, that there is also a reform of the first judge. I don't know if I'm wrong. I don't want to say, but that judge is guilty. So, the problem is where it is. It's in fact that how is it worth the importance of negligence, or the imperity, respect to the simple error of physiological and then the error wants to do something else. Respect to the error of physiological non-dovuto, neo-importance, neo-neglicence, today it is predicted that it decides a judge of other

54:43distressed. But it's made completely neutral. So much to provoke that case that happened in Patalino. Because it's true that he made the jib a Milan. It's true that he went to Torino, but at the moment in which he had to be judged, he was judged by his own colleagues of Milan. And it happened also to me. I, at the moment in which I had been manipulated, I was put under a pressure process. But when I did my reasons and I in the confrontations that I was accused, they sent me to Milano. And then I, my colleagues, my colleagues, some had made a part of the act of manipulation. They had to criticize me. And of course, in that case, I had to even not be able to see it. Because this I can't say. To not be able to see it. But they didn't make a choice there. Certainly. Well, in fact, the documentary.

55:43Certainly. And this. Score more with the college branded Venmo debit card and earn up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash. Got paid back. With the Venmo debit card, you can instantly access your balance and spend on what you want, like game day snacks, gear, tickets, and more. The more you do, the more cash back you can earn. Plus, there's no monthly fear minimum balance. Sign up now at Venmo.com slash college card. The Venmo mastercard is issued by the Bank Court Bank NA. Select schools available. Venmo stash terms and exclusions apply at Venmo.me slash stash terms. Max, $100 cash back per month. That's what I want to say. But here, I have to do a point of entry, because I'm always talking about the publicism and the publicism. Yes. The citizens who listen to some arguments. Do you want to defend those who say everything? Who listens to me? Maybe the citizens who listen to the other judges that we mentioned before say, yes, mom, what's wrong with me? I'm so famous. I don't finish in the federation with Jack LaFuria, what's wrong with me? No, you don't know.

56:43No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. No, you don't know. I think that's going on wrong because I think there are certain scenarios that can't be excluded for anyone. There can be some obvious problems because then you have a movement that can have some mediatic relevance and a walk and some mediatic process. I don't know how to say a few people are famous in the PM, it can happen to each of them or to each other. In real life, it turns out it can happen to a person that is connected to the individual. It leaves lost in the mediation of the case. You can happen to be under the procedure, okay, and to raise what he said, the three, the three heads of gold, but not really to be able to defend myself, but I guarantee you, guard David, that according to me, do you believe that this thing is not a person, but who has entered into the liter of a process, these things have been hindered

57:48of any other thing, according to me, these things touch it and how. Sure, I was talking about all those who have entered into this inferno machine. But it is not a person who has never been... But it is not a person who has been hindered. It is not a person who has been hindered. But it is not a person who has been hindered. It is a question from Peter, that is, I am seeing a lot of advertising in relation to the CEO, or to the CEO, who is also the CEO. Because Olo is making money in the type of person. They have arrested him. Yes, now he will do two years, even if he is a citizen, at least we do not want him, who does not have any sense, as he said before, or a type of, let's say, tell him that he is not interested in the person who maybe has ever done a civil process, which is the majority of the money. I tell you, the citizens who I am talking about, my sister, when you say bad things, like I said, I have been looking at you for 93 years, almost 94 years, I do not think there are big problems. But it is better to live in a country in which there is a point of reference,

58:52in which you can make yourself, to have confidence. I think of it and I think of it as my own teacher. I am not doing it for an idea. But it is just a defense of the magistrate, because if it is true, as it is true, that in my time, the magistrate, 97% of citizens, lives from Peter, I said. Today, if you want to do... No, no. It is a Sunday. It is a Sunday that the credibility of the magistrate is fed up with a little. A little. A little, because of this. Why is this happening? Certainly, because it has been a political period important, from the time of manipulation today, in which, whoever was in the government institution, instead of defending himself in the process of defending himself, from the process is against the magistrates. So, this, in order to alter the mind, has been reduced and a double. As well as the system of information, if it is always more polarized, and therefore there has been a martyrdom,

59:52and also this has reduced the credibility. But what I remember, with my ex colleagues, is that it is possible, that you have never seen, perhaps the courage, the responsibility of an autocratic gesture. Do you understand what happened? It is this because of the capitalism, the language of patriotism. Yes, yes, yes, the slang. The law, the Constitution, the law of the Constitution, the good sense. It has taught us that the role of the public minister, like we can remember it. It is like a little baby. A little baby? What does it do? When it comes to the baby? when you had to leave. No, when you came to death. If you didn't come to death, you were right. The public minister, for the constitutional law, should intervene to hide a real person. Who committed it? So, to say that the real person was already committed. Not to intervene first, because otherwise it's one, it's no longer a public minister of the society.

1:00:52From the airport, from the airport, from the airport that it must be a real person. Because otherwise it's a police station. If the public minister instead of trying to hide, it's not a real person. It's a real person. It's a real person. Change everything. It's a police station. If you leave, you'll see it. But what do I want to say to you? That in the moment in which this is the autocratic thing that this magistrate is doing, this is the magistrate of today. Dear people of the public minister, you agree that it's very often, you have a field that doesn't belong to you. The so-called prevention of the ethical state. You agree that you're going to investigate in these last 30 years not to discover that it's committed, but if someone committed it, and you have it back as a prison, as my friend David, and then at the end you've found the bogated prison. So what do I want to say with this? If this is the issue, to give you the ability to make the magistrate

1:01:52or I'm being magistrate between all the things you want. We have to do it in a way of responsibility. Where I had to do the CSM right at the time, when I discovered the case of Palamare. Instead, if I turned around, we had told him, but he had put it out, and that's true. It was a child of a system of Palamare. Then we discovered Palamare that we had intercepted Palamare. But if my colleague said that we had intercepted, he knew that we had intercepted Palamare. And then we discovered another thing. So what do I want to say with this? A gesture of responsibility to bring the magistrate to the credibility and break this system. To break the system. To break the system. To break the system. To break the system. To break the system. To break the system. To break the system.

1:02:52To break the system. There is a fourth power, which is a private association, a private soul, a boss. It's called an M. The national and magistrate association, which is actually a private association. In reality, the 97-98 percent of the magistrate is part of it. And that is the reality, that is the one that decides today, as well as today. In other words, it is no longer an organ of culture. What can we say? What can we say? What can we say? What can we say? What can we say? If it creates an organ of power, it's internal. Where they have legitimate minds. They have a line of power. They have legitimate minds of politicians. Well, legitimate minds, but I would not do the internal values of that organ. Wait, no, it's an association. If it was a private association, culturally, they can do everything they want. They let me say... Wait, what do I do? Cultural minds. The private association, in the internal province,

1:03:52is a private association. Because even my magistrate is a citizen. And how is it a private association? If you are here, in the internal province, if you are divided by pensions, they have created a parallel line of power. A parallel line of power. Where there is the progressive pensions, the conservatory pensions, the profiteers pensions, the Christian democracy pensions. A private association, a brother, that comes there. That's right. What happened? That this is real. Unlike the political ones that... If I agree, in the internal province, then when I am evaluated, when I am evaluated. And then when I am asked to be the CSM, when I am asked to be. And we decide who must vote to be the CSM to represent. But what is the CSM? You must know that when you will be asked to be the president of Rome, wait for me, there are so many. What are those who respect you? What are those who respect you? What are those who want to be the CSM? What do I want to say with this? That this correndism has created a real power.

1:04:53Because it depends on who puts it in a position for as a minister of justice in a position. As a guard, or as a citizen. Because the citizen is not the one who does something contrary. The citizen magistrate is the one who does not. My human rights, I have been arrested in Mario Chiesa, because I wanted to give them the equivalent of 17500 euros. To read it, I had to ask you to tell me, six months with the final condition, I did it in January. I did it in the morning and I took five thousand. So, the concept depends on how you treat that office. What do you do there? Why Rome called it in the name of the people? They called it in the name of the people, and now everything was gone. There is still so much truth that in this manipulate, it is not necessary to do it in Milan. It is necessary to do Rome. Well, well, Mr. Verga, the entrepreneur in Milan was not in Milan. But the soldiers reported Rome. Yes, as we said, there are many inquiries on the Amazonery.

1:05:53So, why do I have to listen to you? Yes, because this reform establishes the strategy. And with the strategy, with the strategy, because it is very strict. It is very strict for those who go to CSM. But I do it in January. No, but everyone is written. No, they are all chosen by the politicians. On the other hand, they are chosen by the politicians. And therefore, they create a political correntism. This is the question. If the answer is yes, he wants it. But what do you think about it? I don't know. It is not a CSM controlled by the politicians. It is a policy that has not prevailed this reform. Pay attention. Now that there is a single consensus on the manager. So, there are no two. Now, from 48 to now, it has always been two-thirds and one-third. So I want to say, it is not that we are now a member of the Eigenview. We always put that law. Of course. But I don't agree with the fact

1:06:54that even if my answer is not possible, there is a strong influence. It is true. But this is what happens. It is a criticism. I think that I, finally, is the criticism to which I had the referment, also in relation to the discussion of Barbaro, which, maybe, honestly, I have it as a true answer, but the criticism is in the practical side, which is still the process of intentions to the question that is open. Because the government is pushing for the law. Look, the government, I am calling it a genocide, it is over. I mean, I say it. Of course. Of course. We cannot be discounted. Of course. For this reason, I was not when I arrived at Berlusconi. Because this project, that Berlusconi wanted to put his hair on, it is not like what he wanted. It was what he wanted. He wanted to change the article 104. He wanted to leave the Republic of the Ministry, leave the autonomy and independence, that is, allow, as it is used in Switzerland, to see how it sounds after Grand Sementaná. The progress of Grand Sementaná, the elite,

1:07:54the singer, together with the singer, who was Franca Leigh, who made both of them give it to me and give it to you. In reality, one of them has to do the Republic of the Ministry and one of them has to do the integrity. As always, who controls the control? Yes. In America. Thank God, no, in Italy. This is not what we have. We have to be proud of what we have. This is what we have. This is different from what the National Civilian wanted. Because the Civilian wanted to modify the article 104. While here, no. And then David would say, he would ask them. But because then these did not modify the article 104. Did the money from the money? But yes, the young people are definition. At least, I speak of the support, I make a very public minister. I do not exclude, I am convinced that some people of the politics are also of the Central District. They think that through this reform they finally can wage a 20 percent. That's right. This is my question. Well, I will go with the last words. There are so many bulls who

1:08:54that they wrote badly for us, we didn't write much. That they wrote well by writing badly. But look that the politician says what he wants, but then he writes, it's always a book. They know that in the center of the study of the Parliament, of the Chamber, of the Senate, of the European Parliament, of all the ministers, who are the people? Of all the magistrates for the role. These can think of what they want, but the only thing they do, they establish a greater guarantee to the public, you know, because the legend of the laws. Now, now, the Senate is going to read the laws. What does the article say about the centuries? The Jews are subject only to the laws. Reflected by the Jews, so the public, they are not. Because the Jews say something about the public, they are not. Yes, of course. But if, now, in the 104, they say that the autonomy is independent, not only on the magistrate and the judge, but also on the magistrate of the inquiry, they have given it the same power, and at the same time, there is more power than before. They will have done it for all the reasons that they want.

1:09:54But they have written it well. It is said that, for a second, they have written it to prepare themselves for the coup. But in reality, they have written it well. Now, after the United States, but this is stronger. Then they return to the Pietro Piem. To me, a public minister, who respects the laws. Who is under the post, anything that is done, but also responds to the laws. No, but they only respect it, they only respect the laws. But every thing that is done, must be evaluated by the judge. And it remains evaluated by the judge. And it exposes the judiciary policy that already exposes the judiciary policy. I believe that, in the citizens, this role of independence that acquiesce the public minister, the independence that the public minister has today. And more because, now, it is already independent from politics. From tomorrow, independent from the current, it should not be decided, if it was open, this fascist, this fascist, but it is decided that the law

1:10:54does not respond to the law. Because it is so impeached in this case, versus the law. And what is the speech? In fact, I think I have always tried to remember and to reach the goal. Even in this manipulative. In this manipulative, but in many cases, I believe that from the first day I knew that I was not able to do it. I did it the longest time to do it. But, of course, the first time I could do it, I was calm. I saw it when I was doing it right now. But for six months, we see each other here when I have to say something, but I did not do it because I was doing it. I said to myself, I am not able to do it. I am impoverished. And I said to myself, what do you do? I am impoverished. But I was not able to do it and then I could do it. I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it right now. I am not able to do it. What do I have to do?

1:11:54I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it. I am not able to do it. So, I am disfacient to live between our final touches. To achieve something you should do. You need to go to your next session. I believe you this. If you win, I will respect you, the only thing I can say is that I'm sorry, I won't vote for you, I won't vote for you. I won't vote for you, because I'm a bit of a bit of effort, and above all, when you say, but this reduces the politics of Fadi. Why? Because, if it's clear that one becomes, as it becomes credible, it says, of the misery of the misery, and everything in here will be incorrect. Let's go in the bathroom, we will refer to a bit of the question on the story of Pietro. We'll take a look at that. No, we're done. No, no, maybe you'll have three questions on the cross, I'll give you them. What does that mean?

1:12:54What do you think about this government, Meloni? How do we understand the fact that... It's not a problem, it's really weird. It's in the outside of the political spirit that you take to the other, to the other, to the other. I, of this government, as well as the previous centrosenistry, some things, other things, I don't know how I want to do it, let's say someone says something like that. Right, right, right, we're in between. What's not appreciated? I appreciate it. I appreciate it. The politics is the government's point of view. The Latin American flag. The Latin American flag. The Latin American flag. But we're certain that if it's a Latin American flag or a real political of an Italian who needs it even from America, then I, between saying yes and saying no, I prefer a few words to the alternative that I didn't understand what it is. Well, this is true, because the alternative can't be understood. No, because I want, I want, I want, I want,

1:13:56a different policy to the less, at the moment in which someone tells me the alternative, what do I want to do? Salvini, I think. I don't want to do it. I don't want to say Salvini, I don't want to say Salvini. The government thinks of Jean-Flecione Putin. When it comes to repeating, I don't want to do it. Italian citizens who, apart from doing that, if they could be in a field of jail, they would have a jail in Cuba. So, everything wants to be less than... It's not... It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. I did it from Jean-Flecione. Yes. The Latin American flag. In fact, there's a line. But, no, I mean, there's a line, which can be divided. It's not divided. It's done in total policy. We don't tell anything and we have to... The alternative, but you can't tell me. The alternative. I move war to America. I don't give it to America. I don't make more commercial activities. But I... What else? What else? I have to protest in the continuous sense to make it more secure. Tradotto. Do what you're doing in Macron, for example.

1:14:57What are you doing? It's important. It's important. It's important. Better to say what you want. Don't say anything to stinky people on the road. No. For mycientize it. Do you vote for money in Macron? No. For example, to push Trump to have the least power rather than enter in that contract, for the least. networking. Oh. Pris. I said. No way, no way. I told him you made it wrong. Didn't try either and maybe fix it.

1:15:57But we need to talk about this. No, don't. Try it. I'm a little communist. I see it a little bit. Why do we have such a thing? I have no idea of what it will do. OK. After I'm Italian, I have to take care of my country. And I know that I'm inside the country, inside the European Union. So do the little thing that always says, no, it doesn't work, and that I'm operating. I have to take care of my country, inside the country, inside the country. Conti, what cause? Conti, but not only that you have to turn the economy, but not a shareholder of the government. Do you know what kind of shareholder it is? Because it seems that it has been defending the EU. I don't know. I have defended it. I don't know. I don't say any of the terms of justice. So, I have a post. And this is the article of the news. I'm going to take care of it. I'm going to tell you. You should tell me. What do you want to see? What five days before you have to stay with someone?

1:16:58You should have discussed it. Look, I have five days to stay with you. I have to tell you why you don't have to stay with someone. Because now I'm telling you to ask you, but what is the law? Yes. And from this year, I'm telling you more. But there are people who, if you have to stay with someone, I can only do it. We have to be inside. So, please, five days, come to me. You see a bit. You see a bit. And you see a bit, if you can stay with someone. So, after this, you have to know that you have discussed it. You already started to know that you are a bit of a professional. So, that one thing is the attention. If you are fully ready, you will definitely have to take the keys. It makes you lose your mind. Another is the preventive attention. Another is the story of the capital. The story of the capital. The more you stay with me, the more you stay with me. Because if you don't want to do it, it's always that. The story of the capital can be done only in one of the three cases. Pericoa di Fuga, in the improvism document. Pericoa di Sassosial.

1:18:00OK, so... that's the minister. If... You put your papers of judge for the intelligence paper, the paper of the minister's public opinion, the minister's public opinion, is what he says below the PM. It's the people that ask you to take the counterweight, but you can't do it if you can't go to the judge's. It's a blackmail that you have to take it away. Can't I? I have to take the ball away. The public opinion only may be documents. I just asked him, he had to go out. Which judge, however, five days before he had to go to this lady, he said, I'm sorry, but he said he wanted to stay for these reasons. Let me know what you think. Now, if these are a period of improvement, a period of luck and social improvement, put them in the pan, if I say five days before, I didn't do anything, and then five days later, I'm telling you, look at me, that day I was in the hospital, I told myself that I was in the world, right? Or if I did something wrong, I inquired the tests, there's a period of improvement. And you're in peace in these five days, you don't do anything wrong when you're in the hospital.

1:19:01So, it's like, if you were in the hospital, you wouldn't be in the hospital. There's a period of luck. Hello, hello, five days before he got to the bathroom. There's social improvement. I'm going from that testimony, because you must say it because you have to stay. That testimony that I was talking about before me. That you were talking about before me? And you see that four days, that memory from the first time, I was scared, I was scared. No, I'm tired of this, I'm tired of this. I'm tired of this. What do you think of the five days today? Because I've had it, I've said, a period that's still close to the movement that then completely changes. It's a tragedy, let's say, in some way, of the five days. Look at the difference. Today, completely changed, what do you think about it? No, no, no, I personally, who makes politicians respect it, who are trying not to respect it, because there's no problem. After the five days movement, I recognize, well, it's a joy of health. If it's true, and if it's interested in the vote of the city,

1:20:03at a very delicate moment, because there was a moment that was at the vigil of a social report. Yes, exactly. And instead of carrying it out in the vitro. The conflict in the democratic participation. That movement, which is not what I said right now, but that movement has had a social function. As a social function has also had the values of values. Oh, of course. But there are historical moments that start at the beginning of a year. After which the current movement of the five days is totally revised, and if it's placed inside the political system as many games as possible. I wanted to change the system, but the end of the system has changed. And it's become one of the many games that is valid for those who can do it or not. Yes, yes, yes. So, I don't allow myself in any way to criticize that, as I don't criticize any political games. And I look exactly in concrete what that movement will produce. In me. In me. What that movement will produce? In the city, one, on justice,

1:21:05which is really... At the end of the day, No, no. That's right. The separation of the career, so it's probably the same. This change, please. Well, I feel like... I feel like saying that I recognize the unity of the people as it has become serious, as it has become a miracle with the man. We can have different ideas, without a chance to be appreciated in any way. Let's have a listen to several pariers about this to give space to them. Without being... To our own people. Let's not take the money. Let's take the last question. The man has something to say. No, but it's always the same. Thank you, Antonio Di Pietro, for being with us. We'll see you next time. Thank you, Sergio. Thank you, Sergio. Thank you, Sergio. You're welcome. Sergio, you're welcome. A bit of time. Read the cards, and when someone wants to involve you, it's a thing. He says, put it together, and make... Where is written? Thank you. Thank you.

1:22:08Very good.