How do you find the context for describing that there might be a civil emergency here and now? The New York Times has to treat the white House, Donald Trump's White House, Donald Trump, the president of the United States, as a reasonable enterprise. Because if you stop seeing it as a reasonable enterprise, that is a civil emergency. Michael. Joanna. Oh my goodness. So much to discuss from the 25th Amendment to Orban to the Strait of Hormuz to is Trump God? Is he not? God and the Pope? Well, let's maybe begin with the more down to earth is Trump crazy? Which I think is suddenly a open season question. We know this, that it's open season because The New York Times, which for ten years has treated him as the president of the United States in New York Times. Tomes. Are you starting to imitate the New York Times? Well, that's what everything in The New York Times sounds like makes everything an issue of great significance and great importance and a great gravity. Even Donald Trump, I quote, I quite like the great gravity to say the least. But the times had a story yesterday, I think, in which they basically openly asked, and I've been saying for, well, for ten years now, I've been saying that a proper headline in the New York Times should be president of the United States is crazy. And they almost got to that yesterday talking about his his in the headline, his erratic behavior. Now let's go to erratic behavior. When the president of the United States is displaying erratic behavior, that would be cause for, shall we say, concern. It would. And I think that we have seen, we have seen a clear I mean, we have seen ten years of erratic behavior. But I think it is coming faster and more furious in these past number of weeks, probably prompted by the war. Which is going terribly, of course. And he doesn't know what to do, and he doesn't know how to get out of it. But also, I think prompted by a whole set of, set of other things, Minneapolis ice, the, the, the, the failing economy, the, the dimwits that surround him, which he has now been forced to forced to fire. So I think he is in a corner and that has that has meant he's flailing out erratically. Okay. And he's still surrounded by some dimwits. Let's not. The list is long. I mean, he is he is not surrounded by anyone who is not dim. So we have many, many same words to go through. Yes, many dim ways to go. Sounds like a line from a Sonny and Cher song, I think. Man. What was that song? Many rivers to cross, many dimwits to go. Anyway, I think we're showing our age. Oh, what I'm always saying. My age. I don't care at this point. You know who is showing his age? The president is showing his age now. He's appearing as Jesus in posts on Truth Social, which he, there was so much outrage about it that that he withdrew it. And of course, attacking the Pope and saying that the Pope's position on this is, I mean, position on crime, as if he'd been running for the mayor of New York City. I mean, I mean, he was just so clearly controlled himself. But to attack the pope, the American pope, the popular American pope. Yeah. The first the first American pope who understands America and who understands Donald Trump. And now he's got some conspiracy theory that because Obama is from Chicago, Obama is somehow running the Pope and because the Pope is from Chicago. Okay. Well, let's go to erratic behavior and go to the point that these kinds of things and let's let's go back to the, the end of civility. Remember, he was ending civilization as as as we know it. Well, only and only in Iran. He wasn't planning to end civilization anywhere else. It was targeted at the end of civilization. But he was threatening it. Yeah, I think the end of civilization. One place might have a cascading effect, of course, but I don't think he thinks that. But anyway, it is. It doesn't mean that he meant the that he was ending civilization. It actually, and this is an important point. What he says is more and more distinct from cut off from separate from reality. Right. And and so that would be another indication of erratic behavior, another indication that he, he is in this place and reality is in this place, which would be alarming. Well, and as we've repeatedly said, he's trying to run the presidency as if it were a reality show, which to some extent works for certain things, but it doesn't work when you're on a sinking at this point. Well, I was going to say it doesn't work when you're harnessing the American military when you're pulling warships. No, but I think that's an off off point. I mean, that would be if he were running the presidency as a reality TV show. That would be a strategy, however objectionable. But what he is doing has no strategy. Comes from nowhere. It is just, just little bursts, mini stroke like, bursts in his head. There is no strategy. There is no plan. There is no conception of what's going on. It is erratic behavior. Well, that's why that's why we said we're trying to go inside Trump's head three times a week. The other thing that is different is that people are calling it out, right. Tucker Carlson's calling it out. Marjorie Taylor Greene is calling it out. The appalling Alex Jones is calling it out. Megan Kelly is calling it out. But the New York Times is calling. And then I was going to come on to that. The New York Times is finally calling it out and saying, there's something not right here. Hillary Clinton, for the most part, a script I had down popped up yesterday to say there is something really wrong here. And and 25th amendment is now trending both in conversation and online as to how do people handle this. And you can also see it in the faces of the people around him. Look at Marco Rubio's face. He looks terrified, puzzled, confused, bewildered, having to deal with this strange creature of Donald Trump. You saw them at the fight match on Saturday as JD Vance was coming back, with nothing gained as yet from the talks in Pakistan. Where was Donald Trump? He was at a UFC fight with Marco Rubio, showing him texts on his phone. And you know, there's we we we've seen a version of this this before. And we saw it in the Biden administration when, when I mean, there were first the those kinds of sotto voce reports and rumors about his, Senate lack of attention, senility, whatever you wanted to call it, clearly, clearly a dysfunction. And then that started to break out into a more public ways. And then we saw it in person and of obviously, obviously the debate. So we we are we're we're at a moment in American politics when we are actually dealing with this, this issue of people being of of men in the high positions, being too old, of the stress of high positions taking its toll before our eyes. And I think that's where we are in the, in the, in the Trump administration. And they're there there is a thing. And for anyone who has gone through, through the experience of having an an older, an older relative go through a series of obvious personality changes, what you see is that your behavior pattern, your your kind of strange, more extreme behavior patterns, which you might have displayed all through your life, suddenly become become more pronounced, more extreme, more frequent. And I think that that's obvious. Obviously, what we're seeing here is a real problem most of us have to reckon with at some point. Your personal data like your home address, your phone number, even your sexual orientation and religious beliefs are likely online right now being sold to the highest bidder. But fear not, you do have agency within Cockney. In Cockney automatically hunts down your personal info and removes it from hundreds of data brokers. They can't profit off you if they can't find you, and if you find your info on a specific site that isn't already covered, you can send in Cockney a link and a dedicated privacy expert will handle the removal for you. So what are you waiting for? Reduce your risk of identity theft and try in Cockney and stop those annoying spam calls in their tracks. Acts now to get an exclusive 60% off with an annual in Cockney plan. Just go to in cockney.com/beast or click the link in the episode description box. Well, and the other interesting comparison with Biden was that Biden was clearly having issues. In fact, I remember seeing him two years ago at the white House. They had a small event for creators, which I went to, and he was clearly very frail. He came to talk to everybody for about 25 minutes. What does that mean, creators? It means sort of people who had larger social media followings than me, I think. And Jon Favreau and Jon Lovett were both there, and we were talking about it at the time. And, and Biden's issue, not only did he look slightly vacant, but he also just moved with such apparent difficulties that that it was sort of alarming how Biden's people handled it was to hide him. They just kept him away from people. And I think that he only actually gave something like six interviews during his presidency. Whereas Trump insists on being front and center and talking to people all the time. So it becomes more and more obvious. Well, actually, that in itself is a symptom where he right where he more in control of that. I think he would say let's let's be let's be a little careful about how we how how he's presented. Let's not give him opportunities to go off script. Let's close down the goddamn social media account. Well, let's close down social media. But also, you can see it when he talks to people. So he insists on having press conferences all the time. He always going back to the back of the plane. Air Force One to talk to journalists because as you've pointed out frequently and never stops talking. So we have a baseline, as Doctor John Gardner's pointed out several times on the Daily Beast podcast, we have a baseline against which to judge him. That's what's unusual here, and it's a very big baseline. And he's been in in public life for so long that we know he's trained, we can see it. And that's what's fascinating about it. And he's become more grandiose, less inhibited. That crazy, the crazy truth social he sent out when he was like, open the fuckin straight, you crazy bastards. I mean, that was a different level of aggression. So he's become more aggressive, more grandiose that the the post of him being Jesus Christ. Now what does what do we do? What does the country do? I mean, this is that was a question obviously with, with with Biden. And it was not, not answered in a satisfactory manner. So this is this is a kind of a separate question from Trump himself. Although Trump is, is now the, other prying piece of evidence. But what happens when the president of the United States goes mad? Now that this is one of these hypothetical questions that has long been asked, long been and various times madness has been hinted at, but never, never has there been a situation where we have figured out how to address this. Whatever doesn't show, just what do we do? We have two and a half years left of this term and a president who is significant. I mean, in, in in which there is every reason to believe and for every reasonable person to believe that something has something is seriously off here and dangerous and really dangerous because he's careened us into a war that the country doesn't understand, and that he hasn't explained the reason for why that he can't get out of, and that he can't get in a situation he cannot get out of, which we will obviously get to, in this discussion. Right. And he's now blockaded the Strait of Hormuz. So no tankers are going in and out effectively closing down 20% of the world's oil supply. So is this a cabinet? This has to come from the cabinet, doesn't it? Well, theoretically, but obviously it can come from from, from leaders in, in the Congress. I mean, I think it comes from all over. I mean, as it's, as it did with, with with Biden, I mean, it it kind of percolates up and becomes an unavoidable thing. I mean, there are there were kind of two steps. It's unavoidable. There it is. You'll see it. And then what to do about it? I mean, what to do about it is, is, well, this must be unknown when you're having conversations with people at the white House. Are they all saying denial? They're all in denial. I was saying he's I mean, this is this is this is big. I mean, even even to people who are having relatively frank discussions with me. And these are people, again, who I've known for a long time. And it's, you know, we're all in this together sense. And everybody acknowledges that Trump is unique. Let's put it that way. But but this goes a step further. I mean, to, to begin to accept that, that the country that the country's president and in this case, the country's strongman, the man at the center of everything who has put himself at the center of everything is off his rocker, is a is a is a seriously new ball game. Well, what was interesting about Biden too was the timing. So it all became really evident that that his team around him were very successful in hiding it for the most part. So there was sort of loud whispers, but nobody had really called it until maybe a few people had had warned about it. But but it was during the debate which was obviously in the run up to the election, that it became completely evident. And then there was the opportunity to do something about it, which is what happened because of the timing. As you say, we've got two and a half years still to go, but we do have the midterms, and House Republicans are clearly feeling an enormous amount of pressure. This war is unpopular. Prices are up, gas is up. ISIS is taking their friends and neighbors, and putting them in detention. So how? Well, they. Hold on, hold on. Are they exerting pressure on their leaders? Is this something that Mike Johnson and Johnson should be handling? Well, they should. But but they they way they work for justice. And there just is I and I feel for there is no model for this. There is no you know, I mean politics is a, you know, politics is a pattern. Politics is, is doing what has been done before, that that's the nature of it. And that's actually good. I mean, in Trump, what's bad about Trump? Or one of the things, the many things is bad about Trump is that he follows none of those rules and patterns. But those guys do. So what they have, they literally have no idea. I mean, as as they have as little idea as we might have. So there's there's no professional level here of, of of process of approach, of analysis. Nobody knows. So let's go to the, to the political side because ultimately that's the only way we have of dealing with this is to is to vote against him and vote against his party. So I mean, I mean, I think this defeat of Viktor Orban, is is a kind of, you know, a form. It's a formal moment in the history of Trumpism in MAGA, and, in this in and populism in general. And it one of the things that it says is, is that that, that the enthusiasm for this, the whatever emotions, this harness has run its course and it's run and, and I think politics now really, as much as at any time exists as a set of global themes. And and so that theme, the theme as it's played out in, in Hungary, which is why so many MAGA people embraced Viktor, so many American MAGA people embraced Viktor Orban, is that that theme is, is, is, has very much played out here. And so it's completely I mean, I think it would be ridiculous not not not to acknowledge this. And I think all of the MAGA people are acknowledging this, that if it has run its course there and, and Orban has been ahead of, you know, he was you know, well, he's been in power for 16 years. Trump before Trump. So, so the Trump before Trump is out now that Trump who is Trump is up for reevaluation. Let's say. Well and the guy who's replacing Orban isn't it's not actually a Democrat. He's also from a conservative. He also has a conservative overview, but he's pro-europe he's pro-democracy and he's pro going after Orban for corruption and grift. Well, I mean, it's what the MAGA people are saying. He's he's a conservative. He's not I mean, I mean, I mean, it's there's there's night and day. I mean, he the I mean, the only thing that you can say is that he was in Orban, Partizan for a good part of his, of, of the last many years. But then he very much broke from, from, from Orban pronounced Orban. The problem pronounced a whole range of Orban policies, anti-democratic and and basically came out that guy is an authoritarian and a crypto fascist and, and drawing the line there now. So it's would be interesting to see. Is there someone, in the Republican Party who's going to draw that, that line? I mean, we're not we're not seeing anything like that yet. We are seeing the, the, the people to the right of Trump, the MAGA people trying to trying to, What what are they? I mean, I mean, I mean, a a essentially they're trying to clear the way of Trump for, for more MAGA policies. So it's it's a different dynamic, but nevertheless, it is what we are. I think the, the, the point that we are at right now is an understanding that something is going wrong here. Something's going wrong mentally with Trump. Something is going wrong on a on a broad range of policy issues. With Trump. Something is going wrong with the, the, the the way the Trump base is now looking at Trump. This, you know, I mean, I've said before and I want to keep saying it again, the story that we are now seeing is the eclipse of Trump. That's what we're that's the dramatic story that's going on every day. And I wonder if the people sitting around him and dealing with him on a daily basis, if they're all internally thinking, is there a moment when I come forward and deliver the first knife into his chest, whatever that looks like? The problem, the problem with that is that none of these people have a a separate political life from Donald Trump. They are. And this is this is the the nature of this beast is they go down with the ship. Is it possible to break from Donald Trump? I don't I don't really see see that it that it is of course we have the MAGA people who have broken from from from Donald Trump. And that's a that's a different that's a variation on, on on a theme. But it's significantly a significantly different one. I mean, they are. Yeah. I'm that's that's just the kind of right wing fictionalization. But but also and also if you're JD Vance, you probably know that you're not popular enough to pull off some kind of outrageous coup that we really certainly haven't seen in modern American politics, where you, where I guess you just declare it and say, yeah, well, I think that's not going to happen in a million years. I guess Rubio might think that he has a base. He has a big enough base among Latino voters and neocons and institutional conservatives who don't like Donald Trump. To think that he might be able to pull it off, pull one off, pull off, saying the president's brain is missing and we need to get about it. Let's not even go there. It's just a waste of time. It's not even a, it just, it can't happen because it's never happened. Because no one would know how to make it happen. These are not, you know, Marco Rubio is not, is not Mr.. Mr. Rebel and Mr., brilliant political strategist to figure that out. No, no one is going to figure that out. What Marco Rubio is hoping is that Donald Trump can limp along and his own base, as you, as you describe it, then will be there to, to give him the support. So as Donald Trump fades, you know, so as a lame duck presence, Marco Rubio will rise. Now, I find that also doubtful. But that's the that's that's the singular path he sees for himself. Well, I know the American and the British systems are different, but no one ever would have thought that Margaret Thatcher would be taken down in the way that she was. It came as a surprise. It was quick. It was swift. And, I'm just going to tell you, I you know, it's I just say not even worth going there. Okay. And I, I just, I think the kind of thing, a thing that that is a, you know, a scenario that will never happen. You have to just accept the fact that there are things that are not cannot happen in life. We can't fly. We can't get rid of the president via the 25th amendment. Not going to happen. So what else? So deal with the reality of of of of what this what the reality is. The reality is that one person who feels they have nothing to lose or who feels they're ambitious enough or feels they can see the crack in the window, pushes against it. It takes one person and then everybody falls in behind them. That's what I think could happen, and I don't think it's an impossibility. And I think people have a way of surprisingly, it is an absolute possibility. It doesn't take one person. That's also a misunderstanding, and it takes many, many, many, many people working in, in concert. And, and we just haven't seen any indication of that other than on the far, far. Right. So I think it is true. I mean, I think I think, I, I, you know, I think his erratic behavior is just one other element that erodes his, his standing in popularity and his polls, and, and which even creates the, the possibility that he will lose the Senate. So if he loses both houses of Congress, then it's a kind of a different story about what's going to what's going to happen here. But that's on the other side of next November. Well, I, all I would say is that the thing that Donald Trump has done is made people look at politics differently. And I think there are probably people out there looking at Donald Trump thinking, I think I could I think I could push him over at some Yahoo! Well, I don't I'm not sure because you don't always know who they're going to be. And often these people surprise you, but you just don't know the scale of other people. I have no idea. Okay, so in the last ten years, I bet JD Vance is having conversations with people on the West Coast all the time who are saying at some point, JD, you're going to have to push the fucker down the stairs in, talking metaphorically, not specifically, obviously. And all it would take would be Trump falling down the stairs of Air Force One. And goodness knows, we saw Biden doing that. Although he would fall off them oddly. But you can see Trump clinging on for dear life. It's such a good metaphor of him coming down the stairs. Do you think this is why Melania gave her peculiar statement last week? I never known Jeffrey Epstein. Who is Jeffrey Epstein? I've never heard of him. No photos exist of me and Jeffrey Epstein. I, I mean, it's still it's still is a remarkable development. So in terms of, in terms of, in terms of who could, who could, pull the cord on Donald Trump or push him down the stairs, there actually probably is one person. It is. And it is his wife. She could just pull our hand away as he's clinging to her as they walk down Air Force One steps, which Judith Treacher is what she's doing that I mean, for all the analysis of that, of that statement, and all of the theories, none of which have been specifically borne out, by the way, I still think the more and more the most credible one is that this is just another aspect of things falling apart. She wants to distance herself. She wants to set herself up as very much separate from her husband, the president. She has her own life, her own career, her own dreams, and she does not want to be pulled down by him. Now, if all that were true, what I have done, what she did, no, because it just confused the situation and seemed to and seem to to attach her more clearly to these issues. But nobody has ever said she's the brightest bulb in the world. Well, maybe she's just thinking I want divorce, I want divorce, I mean, she may just want out at this point. And as you pointed out, she's got her own brand now. She got Melania the book. She got Melania the movie. She could have Melania, the website we've had Melania the meme coin, though sadly hasn't done as well as perhaps she'd hoped. I think there was a 90% drop in value, but she could have. Yeah. No, I think the divorce, I think, would be a would be a major story. Melania that would be the thing that would that would propel her into a whole new level of, of, notoriety and maybe even sympathy. It's hard to think of being sympathetic to Melania Trump, but who knows? Yeah, there weren't many people that came out and analyzed her, statement sympathetically. I think most of them felt she was trying to distance herself from a terrible story, but also fascinating to bring it back into the public eye. And, of course, he said that he wouldn't have probably done it like that. He talked to her for two minutes. You said you probably thought they didn't talk at all. The whole thing is very bizarre, very bizarre. But she she clearly, I think, doesn't like Trump on the bizarreness. And keep that in mind. Bizarre things don't happen. Bizarre things happen as a reflection of something else. And and so what is she doing here? And I don't believe well, we don't have particular reason to believe that it involves getting ahead of of any one particular story. It, it it's it may be setting, setting herself up for something else, but it all it just all may be a sign of things falling apart. I think it's Melania TVC. She wants her own brand, her own channel on QVC, cooking Christmas decorations and, you know, little wooden tchotchkes from Slovenia. Yes. But I'm not sure this gets her. This gets her, as this just made her formally, directly, dramatically part of the Epstein story. Right, right. So y well, we'll continue. I mean, this is not gone. This is not going away. This this story. Okay. Well, the the Melania story, the Melanie the marriage story, I think remains a of of, you know, one of those fundamental, black holes of the Trump administration. Well, that we should address. Yeah. I was going to say after we spoke on Saturday, I thought we should do a special episode, which is just focused on their marriage. What do we know? And we should take it from the moment that they met through to her coming out and saying, I never knew Jeffrey Epstein. He is my husband is unifier. He is unifier. Yeah. You know, I mean, I have a, a Substack piece, part of these Epstein Diaries that I read yesterday, I'm writing that's up this, this this week. And it's about the 80s and 90s, which is that exact moment when Melania comes into the picture and basically the moment that she's that that the point about that, that UN statement was pay no attention to the 1990s. And, and so but it is very much that moment in time which defines Epstein defines Trump, and I think defines Melania. And there's a wonderful anecdote in that piece, which I did enjoy. I'm very much enjoying that series. And I what I particularly like is the is the literary allusions you make in it. But there's a great detail of where Trump and Epstein go to look at a property that Trump's father has insisted he go to look at in Brooklyn, and he, Epstein is said, well, I'll come with you, but I'm not going to be friends with you if you invest in property in in Brooklyn. And Trump goes, I just have to go because my dad tells me so. Trump arrives in a limo with a soft top and he leans out the top, and there he sees Jeffrey Epstein standing with two girls, and each of the girls has an Irish wolfhound on a on a leash and a Russian wolf. Oh, a Russian wolfhound. Sorry, I didn't okay. Or it's even, you know, a grander, It's a Russian wolfhound. Even bigger than an Irish wolf. I didn't even know that were Russian wolfhounds. Perhaps that's why I read over. Yeah, I think maybe the Russian wolfhound are, are what we now call a boar. Zoe. Well, I've no idea what a bozo is, but a Russian wolfhound. Sounds to verify. It's actually a very impressive looking dog. Oh. It is. Okay, well, he turns up with him and Trump says no dogs, no dogs. And Jeffrey Epstein says no dogs, no girls. And so, inevitably, the dogs get in the car with the girls. And in fact, I remember a story that the model, Cleo Glyde, told us of how she went to Trump's house with Jeffrey Epstein and Epstein made her and another friend both dress up as if they were nurses because he liked the idea of arriving at Donald Trump's Trump Tower appointment with two women, one on each arm, is my point, but that clearly Epstein like traveling in the pack anyway. What do we know about your case? And of course, there's been the the case against the Wall Street Journal that Trump bought against Rupert Murdoch's Journal for for writing about the birthday letter and the birthday book has been thrown out. Remember he was suing them. Yeah. No, no, no, I mean, it's obviously very relevant to my, lawsuit against, against Melania Trump. So the, the Wall Street Journal published this birthday letter from, that Trump had written to Epstein. And this was a book that had been put together for his 50th birthday by Glenn Maxwell. And it was just two pages. Three. Yeah. And it was pages and pages of people saying, Jeffrey, we love you. And in fact, quite a few people have ended up losing their jobs over it. Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador to Washington being first among them. So the, the anyway, they, they they reproduce the Trump Trump's letter to, to Epstein and then Trump declared, I didn't write that. That's not for me. Although no one else of the, of the many, many, you know, significant 100 letters from other friends, everyone acknowledged they were that they were they were they were that they have been sent by by them. They were the letters were authentic. Only Trump is saying, no, no, that's not that's fake. So, and then he sued them. Now the suit. And remember, this is against this suit, is against the background of, of of so many other media organizations that he has sued and media organizations that capitulated to him. ABC, CBS, I mean, all disgraceful, cowardly capitulated to him. And the Wall Street Journal did not, you know, Rupert Murdoch and Rupert Murdoch, all you might say about Rupert Murdoch, has been doing this for a long time. He doesn't capitulate. So, so the suit went on, but the suit was the very nature of the suit was intended to intimidate. That's what Trump does. That's the pattern that he's that he's established. You media organization, are going to say something about me, that I don't like. And I am then going to do things which will be incredibly unpleasant to you and very costly. That's intimidation. Even though and this is the key point, I don't have a I don't have a reasonable case. And this was thrown out just on the most basic grounds. And this is what he has done in so many instances, and including that the threat to me and this came through his wife, but it came through lawyers that represent Donald Trump. And that was, you know, $1 billion. We're going to we're going to sue you for $1 billion unless you retract what you've said here. And a series of, the a series of those letters, many letters like that have gone out to many people. And, and they usually capitulate because, you know, it's it's, to be sued for $1 billion is is not fun to be sued by the president. The United States is, is not fun. I, on the other hand, just because because I'm not an organization, because you're not going to get $1 billion out of me. And no matter what happens. And because I've spent my life involved with, you know, with these kinds of First Amendment issues and have a set of lawyers who've been long time, my long time lawyers who also have been involved in these issues. And and the decision was, well, screw it. You know that you can't do this. This is not this is this is neither right nor legal. And in the state of New York, there are specific laws against this, specific laws about about trying to intimidate people, in the exercise of their free speech rights. And that's you can't do it. New York State says you can't do it. So we sued under under those, those laws and, and, and and I expect that the same issues will present themselves as presented themselves in the Wall Street Journal case, that there is absolutely no basis on which on which to wage or threaten to wage a libel suit. So on Saturday, when you were giving us an update on the case, you said you were expecting a decision. Any moment you've raised almost $1 million on a Go Fund Me with, I think you said 25,000 people, donating because these things are expensive, lawyers are expensive. And also this is time consuming. Any, any indication of when you're going to hear. No, and there is. No, no, I mean, I keep calling my lawyers and keep saying, hey, so so do we know anything? Do we know anything? And, and all we know is that we have no power over this, that this is absolutely in the hands of a judge, a judge who can take a day, a week, a month, months to make a decision. The wrinkle in this, in this case, is that this is a Trump appointed judge who certainly, if I were a Trump appointed judge, I would not want to be ruling against, the president's wife. But we have no reason to believe that that is that's the factor either. What we do know is that there are complicated issues here that, that the judges take, you know, may well take a long time to sort, so we don't know. So again, what what's the answer today? Tomorrow, next week, next month? I guess we only know that a decision will at some point be forthcoming. Well, the wheels of the law grind slowly, as we know. So do you ever use DoorDash? Do you even know what DoorDash is? I do know what it is, yes. Yeah, because I bet your kids I don't do takeout food. Of course you do. But I bet your kids do. If your kids ever used DoorDash. Yeah. Oh, my my, my. And you think my ten year old is going to be on the phone with DoorDash? No. But from your first time, I was thinking, okay, I don't I am my, my older children are old enough so that they don't consult me about their, Well, I was food or lifestyle choices, funnily enough, I you don't do takeout very much either, or almost never. But the president apparently did. And did you see the DoorDash? It was supposed to be a stunt for the president to talk about his no tax on tips, because of course, we're approaching tax day. Or it might even be tax day. Oh, it's tomorrow. Is it, you know, an excuse for an incomprehensible, form to be filled in. It's just shockingly complicated. Anyway, a grandmother who was delivering DoorDash to the president, got caught in an awkward exchange with him. Did you see it by then? Oh, it was fascinating, actually. She. She arrives at the Oval Office with a plastic bag full of whatever they'd ordered. And he immediately says to her, with all the cameras present, and she's obviously been told, are you just need to go to the white House, meet the president. He'll say that we're not going to tax tips. And this is a great moment for you. And he promptly says to her, what do you think about trans people in sports? And the poor woman says, you know, well, I've got no views on that. I thought I was here to discuss no tax on. It's so Trump sort of lectures her. And then finally a journalist says to him, have you given her a tip because he totally forgotten he was going to give her a tip or, or perhaps thought he was going to get away with not giving her a tip. So he gives her a $100 bill. Then it transpires that she is a grand mother, and of course, all hell breaks out on social media because this is what the country has come to. Grandmothers, our grand parents are still working and having to deliver food to make ends meet. So it was a bit of a, a political thank you. I was going to say it's not a home goal. It's an own goal. Which is it? When you get your own point, not your own goal? That's that's your your country's game. Yeah. Well, anyway, the, but it's also another, another illustration of completely erratic behavior. Why why would he ask this person about trans anything? Because it just doesn't. It's just things free floating in his head. They come out like, I, I remember when my own mother was entering, severe dementia. The things that would come out were kind of extraordinary. And had no one thought. Did not was it was seldom connected to another thought. Well, you can see the grandiosity. You can see the aggression. You can see the lack of inhibition, all of which are symptoms of, early onset dementia. We know his father had dementia. I mean, Mary Trump talks about looking at Donald Trump and seeing the look in his eyes that her grandfather had, you know, as you say, families know, people know who've dealt with a relative. You see the signs and you can see it in other people. It's not so well, I think Mary Trump at this point is going to start to say, nice things about Donald Trump. So, but what she does have is a very strong memory of watching her grandfather lose his marbles. And she may not have a good relationship with Donald Trump, but what she talks very convincingly about is seeing the same family trait begin to emerge. And that's the same trait that The New York Times is finally noticed. The man is erratic, and he's also president of the United States and leader of the free world. Yeah. Well, and then that other just and we've we've talked about this this before, but I, I find it again one of the, one of the, the rate limits on understanding this moment in time is the New York Times lack of the language to express what's going on. How do you how do you how do you find the context for describing the president of the United that the president of the United States, you know, that that there might be a civil emergency here and now? And I don't I don't think that the New York Times there's there's, the New York Times has to treat the white House, Donald Trump's White House, Donald Trump, the president of the United States, as a, as a reasonable enterprise, because if you stop seeing it as a reasonable enterprise, that is a, a civil emergency. Well, Jamie Raskin, as you know, called last week for Donald Trump to take a cognitive test and for the results to be made public. So clearly, the removes in Congress to move on. Yeah. But even that's a problem. That's a problem there. Because because what that does in the Democrats have have have consistently done this is they don't have the language to express this. So that just comes that just the that just seems like a another anti-Trump partizan, Trump Derangement syndrome kind of thing. It becomes meaningless. It's like impeaching him twice. Meaningless. It's like putting him on trial for times. Meaningless. And the Democrats are going to have to sort this through if they do. If they do win in November, then then they're in the hot seat. How how do they approach Trump without without giving him extending him another platform on which to, dramatize the being Donald Trump, which is what he consistently does to, to inexplicably positive effect? Well, perhaps you've just given people the language we're facing a civil emergency. Well, well, that's not where we were expecting to end a civil emergency. We're facing a civil emergency. Oh, Lordy, Lordy, Michael, we will be back on Thursday or being. Well, the lights may be off. We may have no fuel because of the Strait of Hormuz. Although I know America is energy independent for anybody writes into correct me. But yeah. And we didn't get get into that in which, which we, which we should have because we're now overlooking the central emergency of, of of the moment Donald Trump is in a situation which he can't get out of and which he quite likely seems to be making significantly worse. Well, we can come back on Thursday and discuss that. I'm sure we will, Michael, as I have always, always energizing to talk to you. If you haven't done, please hit your subscription button. We've we actually put on, I think, 50,000 subscribers over the weekend as people were desperate to know, what is Melania doing? Is she signaling that she wants a divorce or what is what is she signaling? Anyway, please hit the subscription button. That's how we get to have these conversations, because we're independent media and we really need. And we appreciate your support. And don't forget, you can become a beast tier member, where you get extra content. Michael, do you want to thank our production team? Thanks to our incredible team. Such an incredible team. They are an incredible team. Devin, Rachel, Ryan, Heather and Neil. See you on Thursday.