My Melania Legal Battle Has Only Just Begun: Wolff | Inside Trump's Head

There are two two main points of the decision.So the judge, Mary Kay Vick -Skosel, accepted the contention of Melania's lawyers that she is a citizen of Florida.She basically had two choices, to remand the case to state court or rule on the case.Functionally, she did neither.She may have actually effectively ruled against the Trumps, without saying so, because effectively kicking the case out of federal court by default puts it back into state court, which is what we wanted in the first place.Make no mistake, we are going forward with this.

We will get in front of a non -Trump judge and then get a much different kind of ruling.

Michael.

Joanna.

We have a result in your legal case.

We have what we call or what lawyers call an adverse result.

Hold that thought, because we're going to talk about your case.We're going to talk about the wedding that's taking place as we record and with the father and the father -in -law.We're going to be talking about Tulsi Gabbard.And of course, we're going to be talking about the monumental slush fund and the extent of the grift.But before we do, we're going to ask people to subscribe.If they haven't done, please just hit the subscription button wherever you get your podcasts, because we are independent media and there aren't that many of us around these days.

And this is how you show your support and we appreciate it.OK, Michael Wolff, let's go into...

Although there are a lot of independentYouTube channels around, like billions.Well, there are.That's true.Just to footnote that.And before we, I just want to say that I was at a Hamptons party last night, very posh Hamptons party, and everyone, well certainly many people were aware of your schedule and travels, expecting you back in New York tomorrow and back in the studio on Tuesday.

I am so looking forward to coming back.I'm looking forward to having a working Wi -Fi.Steve Schmidt, who we interviewed on Friday, and we'll be running that that interview tomorrow was extremely patient because the Wi -Fi actually went down in the middle of it and I had to run across the street to the neighbor's house, which was very nice of them, burst in and continue the podcast from there.So I'm very much looking forward to getting back to New York and to seeing you in person.

That's the podcast life in Yorkshire.

It's the podcast life in Yorkshire, which is Sounds very romantic.I think probably more romantic to be in the Hamptons.And I'm glad, I'm glad that we have some viewers and some listeners in the Hamptons.Thank you.I hope you've subscribed.We appreciate your support.

But Michael, what I really, really want to get at immediately is your case.What's happening in your case?A judge has made a ruling.Tell us everything.

No, I was curious because the ruling came on Friday, late Friday, before the Memorial Day weekend.Now, the judge has been sitting on this ruling for three months now, so it came at the exact moment when the fewest number of people would see it.So, and I think that's, I think the judge is in a bind.I mean, we knew from the beginning when we drew a Trump judge in federal court in the Southern District in New York, that that was problematic.Our I think our attitude was, OK, you know, that's the hand we drew.And it is, of course, possible that this judge, Mary K. Vizcoso, would be an impartial judge.

I mean, we had no alternative but to hope that was the case.At the same time, knowing that, you know, we live in a moment when Trump has utterly corrupted judicial system.I mean, if you are a Trump appointed judge, which Mary Kay Viscoso was in the first administration.Your only chances for advancement, which would occur in the next two years, is not to displease Donald Trump.And she was in this incredibly awkward position of having to decide a case directly involving the president's family.So, I mean, that's the reality.

If she crosses Trump, she's finished.So what does she do?And I am, I suppose, sympathetic to that, although it's completely, you know, this is This is the exact way that a judge is not supposed to act, that justice is not supposed to be.Blind justice is very keenly aware of Donald Trump's favor or disfavor.

And also, just to remind people, when you go down to DC and you walk past the Justice Department, there is an enormous banner of Trump's head hanging on the outside of it, to say this is Trump's Justice Department, just as an aside.

Exactly.And so what has happened in this decision is that she has contorted herself to get rid of the case without actually ruling on it.So two things happened.And I guess we should, this is complicated, so we should probably step back and say that This began with a threat from Melania.Melania's Trump's lawyers, because of what I had said, connecting her to Jeffrey Epstein.We then sued her, and she was threatening to sue me for a billion dollars.

We sued her instead in New York state court under what are called anti -SLAPP laws, which is to say that you can't use threats of libel to intimidate people not to say what they have the perfect right to say.Okay.At that point, having filed that suit, Melania's lawyers asked for it to be moved to federal court.That's their right.And then federal court has to decide, or the judge in federal court has to decide whether it is properly in federal court.And that was the point we were at.

Melania was asking the judge to have federal court take over the case and to either dismiss it or to remove it to a federal court in Florida, whichwould be more favorable to them.We, on the other hand, were asking the judge to acknowledge that Melania Trump actually does not live in Florida.She lives in New York, which would mean that the case is not properly in federal court and should be in state court, and to remand the case to federal, to state court.So, I mean, with the key issue being we want the case to be in state court.So therefore...

Does it actually, Michael, does it actually make any difference?What is it?I mean, in practical terms, what's the difference between having a case in federal or state court?

Well, there is some difference, you know, and specifically related to the fact that we're suing under New York state law.New York state law has a very good law, which is to say, again, that anti -SLAPP laws.You cannot use libel laws for the purpose of intimidating someone.someone out of expressing their perfect right to say something.So this is, and has always been from our side, a free speech case.It's not about money.

We don't get any money out of this.I think maybe we get attorney's fees if we ultimately win.But it is not a case for damages.It is a case just on the principle of the matter.You can't do this.administration, of course, has done this again and again and again and again.

And always important to give a basic background here that there has been noWhite House in modern history that has sued the media.And the Trump White House has done this again and again and again and again.They don't like what you say, you get sued.So the decision which came down yesterday, there are two two main points of the decision.So the judge, Mary Kay Vick -Skosel, accepted the contention of Melania's lawyers that she is a citizen of Florida.

Now, this is interesting because she did this basically on the basis of her lawyers saying she was, and basically refusing to consider this a rather substantial amount of evidence that we presented that she is a citizen of the state of New York and refused to consider our request for further discovery.In other words, we said, well, if you have doubts about this, let us ask Melania to produce documents that would show that she is either a citizen of the state of Florida or a citizen of the state of New York.But the judge The judge said no.She's a citizen of the state of Florida.Therefore, that made this a federal case.One of the ways you get to be a federal case is if the parties are from two different states.

We can show that she lives in New York, that she spends the overwhelming amount of her time here, the overwhelming amount of the people that she deals with on a daily basis and in her business life are here, and that she has really never effectivelymoved out of Trump Tower.But this is an important point, because if the judge found that she doesn't live in Florida, then it would not have been a federal case.So that would have been effectively ruling against the Trump family, because then it would be immediately remanded back to state court.So she didn't do that.She said, yes, OK, this is a case that can properly proceed in federal court.

But at that point, then the judge said she, while it could proceed in federal court, she was not going to rule on the merits of the case.So she, in what she said, she literally said she's going to abstain from ruling on this case, which is completely strange.So she basically had two choices, to remand the case to state court or rule on the case.Functionally, she did neither, so effectively kicking the case out of federal court.So now, weirdly, the case no longer exists in federal court.Where does it exist?

So what she may have done, and this is going to be complicated to kind of untie this knot that she's created, but she may have actually done effectively ruled against the Trumps without saying so, because effectively kicking the case out of federal court by default puts it back into state court, which is what we wanted in the first place.I mean, we never had any illusions that this was going to proceed in a straight line, this case.And we now have to figure out exactly in which way are we going to proceed, go back to state court, appeal in federal court.But make no mistake, we are going forward with this.You know, I guess in some sense, you know, and we are back to where we are in this political moment, we will get in front of a non -Trump judge and then get a much different kind of ruling.

OK, so it was a 45 page article.ruling, and I was going to read a little bit of it.She says, there are many features of this case that make it complicated, the prominence of the personalities involved, the scandalizing content of the underlying statements, and frankly, an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.So I'm assuming that that's actually about both of you.So you're both she's acknowledging you both have prominent personalities.Yes, definitely.

And also that both of you are displaying what she refers to as an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.So that's not just about you.It's about the First Lady too.And then she says, but the outcome is simple.The court will not be conscripted to oversee an abusively presented spat and so declines to reach the merits here.

Exactly.So then the question is, what does that mean?And that will be the next chapter in this.Are we back in state court?Are we appealing in federal court?I mean, I assume we'll probably do both things, but I think fundamentally, It's the question now of can we get before a judge who is not a Trump judge, not under the, you know, I mean, you almost cannot.

I mean, to be in a situation in which you are asking a judge to rule against Donald Trump is a situation which is just the kind of conflict which which the judicial system in the United States of America was meant never to have.And, you know, on a larger basis here, we've just seen Donald Trump settle a case with the IRS and the Justice Department.the $1 .8 billion slush fund, in which he is the plaintiff and effectively the judge also.Likewise, in this, you know, in this slush fund, he got, you know, he sued the IRS for $10 billion because it released, someone in the IRS apparently released some A contractor released a part of his tax return.

They were found out.They're currently in jail.They got a four -year sentence for doing that.

So, he said, you know, okay, I'm suing the IRS, I want my $10 billion, and I am the person, basically, who decides what happens to this lawsuit.I am both plaintiff and judge.And what he decided is that he wouldsettle, let's do some air quotes here, the settlement would be that there would be a fund established, a fund of 1 .8 billion dollars, and this would be established to compensate people, essentially the people who had been involved in criminal activities related to Donald Trump.who the court had found and the Justice Department had found had been involved with criminal activities relating to crimes that were alleged against Donald Trump, these people had been damaged and they now can be compensated.In addition, This settlement also provided that Donald Trump and his family had immunity from any consequences related to their tax filings to date.

Again, this is just, this is Donald Trump wanting something and having the power to decide something.

It couldn't be a better wedding gift to to Don Jr., who marries his socialite fiancée Bettina Anderson from Palm Beach today in the Bahamas, despite the fact that his father says he can't go because he's the president.And of course, he's got a little thing called Iran going on, which strikes me as...

Is the marriage in the Bahamas or is it in Palm Beach?

I think the marriage is in the Bahamas.It's actually in the Bahamas and it's a hundred miles from Mar -a -Lago.I am reliably informed by my Palm Beach correspondence.

So let's ask the fundamental question, which is, why is Donald Trump not at his son's wedding?I mean, there's actually another question you could also ask about this.Why didn't they get married in the White House?Or at Mar -a -Lago.Well, even more so, it's more, I mean, I understand why you wouldn't get married at Mar -a -Lago.It's kind of a really tacky place.

But you would want to get married at the White House.I mean, the Trumps are not people whose modesty might prevent that, let us say.They want that identification, especially Don Jr., who would like his own independent political career.So, why would he not have wanted that?For similar reasons, he didn't show up for the wedding in the Bahamas.And what would be the reason?

The reason would would kind of, I think, unavoidably be, he really doesn't care about his son.He really doesn't want the attention focused on his son.Remember, Donald Trump is the person who said about his son, Don Jr., I wish I could take my name back.

Unfathomable.It's just fascinating.This house ain't big enough for the both of them.It ain't big enough for two Dons.And he doesn't want the attention to go anywhere.And it's not about him.

Right.He only wants things if it's about him.Although I would have thought if he'd flown in on Air Force One or Marine Force One, it would still have been about him.But he's obviously going to deny Don Jr. unless he's planning to make a surprise appearance.the pleasure of his coming.And he did actually have golf down for the weekend.

He was, I think, according to the White House diary, due to be playing golf at Bedminster, but that has now changed.And he claimed, at least as of yesterday, that he would be staying in DC because he had a little thing called Iran going on, which must be the first time he's voluntarily mentioned Iran.

Yeah, and also it is not as though he is always outside of the White House in Mar -a -Lago on frequent, if not most weekends.So the fact that just at this moment when the son is getting married, I mean, you can only read this, I don't want to go to his wedding.

Great.I don't want to go to his wedding.And I wonder how Kimberly Guilfoyle, his former fiancée, now our ambassador in Greece, is doing.What is she doing today?Is she sullenly stamping people's passports with a stamp as they come through Greek customs?Who knows?

Who knows what the Greek ambassador does?I'm sure she's hustling up business for American tourists.

I think, I bet she's completely relieved.I mean, she's come out of this, you know, hole.I mean, she's an ambassador.Let's understand, she was a Fox newscaster, one of the only women, maybe the only women, to have been metooed.

Well, and let's not forget that before that she was married to Gavin Newsom.When Gavin Newsom was mayor of San Francisco, they were married.I mean, that to me is the incredible leap that you go from Gavin Newsom to Don Jr.That is a leap.That is the leap.Anyway, now she's in Greece.

Now she's in Greece having fun, I hope, with lots of young Hercules and lots of young Demetries and Zeuses.

And that may well be, just to add, the disqualifying, the central disqualifying factor for Gavin Newsom to become the next president of the United States.How can we put that I think she was very different then.

I had a friend who was at college with her, at Stanford with her, or certainly practiced law alongside her and said that they didn't recognize what she'd become.Do you remember when she spoke at I think it was the convention and she was wearing a red dress and she had a kind of crazy black hair extensions and she shouted, the best is yet to come.It was a, it was an crazy moment.

And she was, she was giving a speech that she gave the screech, what's called this, even the Trump people call it the screech speech.The screech speech.But even so, it doesn't make, this doesn't, I mean, Gavin Newsom married Kimberly Guilfoyle, who then went on to become the giver of the Screech speech and the boyfriend and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr. and a fox.This gotta, at some point, this gotta says, this has to return to Gavin Newsom.How could you?You saw nothing here?

You recognize nothing?

I also wonder if, as we know, Vanessa Trump, Donald Jr.'s ex -wife, is now dating Tiger Woods.And we know that Donald Trump loves famous people.He appreciates famous people.He may be on the side of Vanessa here saying, oh, good for you.You went big.You snagged Tiger Woods.

Well, maybe they can get married in the White House.

Maybe they can get married in the White House.She is experiencing or suffering breast cancer at the moment.Who knows?Who knows what happened?

Tiger Woods has his particular problems on an ongoing basis.

But I do like the idea of a wedding in the White House for them.I do think that that would be a good solve for all of this.

You know, I would like, but as long as we've brought up Gavin Newsom, I would like to just briefly segue to the California governor's race, because there is someone in the race who we both know.And I everything that is happening now in British politics, which is kind of extraordinary on every level.But let me submit that I think the most extraordinary thing that could possibly happen in British politics would be for Steve Hilton, who comes, who is a well -known spinmeister in British politics for the Tory party, to become the governor of California.Now, you and I both know Steve.I mean, I think, I mean, I've always, I've always liked Steve.Steve, Steve moved to California because his wife became a very highly placed PR person in the technology business.

And then Steve met Rupert Murdoch at somefunction and Murdoch gave him a job as a Sunday anchor on Fox News.

On a show called The Revolution with Steve Hilton.It's a funny, funny title.

That show had an audience only of Rupert Murdoch, but that's all you need.

And I think Donald Trump, I think to be fair, I think Donald Trump watched it too, or at least his people would tweet out positive things about the show.

Um, and, um, but Steve now is in a position because, because, uh, California is obviously a heavily democratic state, but it has a ranking system in the, um, in, uh, in election, a ranking system in its elections so that it is very possible that the, um, um, that the Democrats will split their vote and, um, And a Republican will be elected.And Steve Hilton is one of two Republicans running.

And I think it's fair to say that Steve Hilton was largely responsible for getting David Cameron elected.He's of that generation.They were all at Oxford together.And he worked at Saatchi's and really was responsible for the campaign that got David Cameron elected, was then a very close adviser to David Cameron for, I think, six years before he moved to California with Rachel Whetstone, his wife, who, as you say, is a communications director.I think she would rather have it and policy adviser than PR person, but PR person, whatever.

I know she would.Yes.

They're a very fun, lively couple.And I mean, Steve is quirky, isn't he?of his politics.I don't think he's a particularly Trumpian politician, actually.

No, no, no.And I have always, I mean, I've known Steve for some time.He's been very helpful to me at various points.That is to say, he has been a good source.But the other thing about Steve is that he is a vocal Brexiteer.

Well, he was instrumental in Brexit.And in fact, he has a great story that he and Rachel was so convinced that they wouldn't win the Brexit vote, that they planned to go on holiday the day of the vote.He had come out to stump for Brexit, which I think was perhaps because he'd spent so much time looking at European bureaucracy up close, or I remember him complaining that Europe was incredibly bureaucratic, and it stopped you from getting things done.And that actually, once you got into power, the thing that was surprising was just how the civil service could thwart whatever plans you were trying to get underway and whatever changes you were making.And But they went off in an RV and Steve, for the longest time, refused to have a smartphone.He had a sort of Razr, which was one of those flip phones, which was incredibly annoying to anyone trying to get hold of him.

And they went to some trailer park in Arizona, where one of them sort of held up their phone in the corner of the field.And the thing nearly exploded with texts and messages from people saying, Oh, my God, we've won.And Boris saying, I cannot write this speech without you.I need you.I need you.And so Steve, somewhat like I'm

been frustrated by the Wi -Fi in Yorkshire, had to try and help Boris write his sort of Brexit acceptance speech, as it were, from the corner of a foreign field with no Wi -Fi or very, very limited Wi -Fi.Needless to say, he's now got a smartphone.

Now, just as an indication of how worried the Democrats are about Steve Hilton, is that just yesterday I got a call from someone representing one of the Democrats running for office.And it was a question to me about whether I knew anything about Steve Hilton's connections to dot, dot, dot.Who do you think?Donald Trump?Jeffrey Epstein.Jeffrey Epstein.

So I would say that's an indication of the Democrats' desperation.We need we need we need a smear.What's the best smear we could come up with?I think I said to this person, knowing both people, both Steve Hilton and Jeffrey Epstein, there is an extremely high likelihood that I would know if they knew each other, and I do not know that.I certainly can't help you there.

Well, and we should also point out that the reason the Democrats are in such a desperate situation is because Eric Swalwell, who was supposed to be the leading candidate, was forced to resign after multiple accusations of sexual assault against him.

So well, the reason the Democrats are in such a desperate situation is that they have terrible candidates, including Eric Solwell and all of the other candidates who arewho are running in California.So I mean, this is, and this goes to a sort of larger issue.I mean, the Democrats are being presented with the kind of political gif that does not come along very often, which is to say a Republican president with some of the lowest favorability ratings in modern political history.The world is there for the taking.But they have their own problems, and not least of all, their own lack of convincing candidates anywhere.

Well, and Steve's book, Caliphalia, is worth a read.And I know he's been dogged about showing up in every single district, going sort of slowly and quietly, sort of under the radar, actually, up until now, because the assumption was, obviously, that a Democrat would win.

Yeah, no, no.I mean, it's a, it's that, that's kind of funny thing that is now happening ever so often in politics, which is to say that these people who you would not in any way, in any imagination think were plausible, somehow become plausible and then actually sometimes certain.I remember Steve, I remember Steve and I sat in, in Michael's restaurant in Midtown Manhattan and this was, this was five or six years ago, and he told me and he outlined to me his plan for becoming governor of California.And I thought, really, Steve, you flipped your lid.

Well, for fans of Armando Iannucci, who created Veep, he also did an unbelievably funny show that LampoonBritish politics in which Steve Hilton is lampooned.It's called The Thick of It and Steve plays a barefoot pan -piped a panpipe playing advisor.And it's a wonderful, wonderful portrayal of a very eccentric character, which is what Steve is.And there would be a strange logic in him ending up as the governor of California.So we should watch this space carefully.

Anyway, Jeff Bezos, Jeff Bezos talking of characters, said to Andrew Ross Sorkin on Wednesday that he thought Trump had made some great decisions that he'd matured in his second presidency.What thinkest you of this?

Well, it's just, this is another dimension of the Trump grift, obviously.And I mean, Jeff Bezos has participated in the grift quite directly.She got paid $40 million to do this documentary.Brett Ratner, the director, now the best friend of the president of the United States.You know, I mean, I think Jeff Bezos is in every way has shown himself.I mean, he may have shown himself to be a great businessman, but he has shown himself to also be the most tone -deaf man in America.

And he was just the chairman, co -chairman with his appalling wife of the Met Ball, in which causing all kinds of people to boycott the Met Ball and kind of stripping the Met Ball in a moment of its own tone deafness of any pretense whatsoever.was anything else but one of the most craven spectacles in American life.And again and again he is in that situation and I think now he has stepped into it once again absolutely tone deaf, that he is the symbol, Jeff Bezos is the symbol of an economy run amok, an economy that does everything against the interests of most of the people in the country, an economy who has remade itself in the over the last many years, but specifically during the time of Donald Trump, to be, to favor the riches of the rich.And now he has stepped forward to be the, to be a Trump avatar.I mean, the Trump people should, if they knew, if they weren't so tone deaf, would say to Bezos, oh my God, go, Go back under your rock.This is not helpful.

This is not helpful to us at all.And I think it is.And I think it's one more of those glaring examples that people are now seeing through Donald Trump.What does Donald Trump stand for?Donald Trump stands for more money for me.

Right.More money for Donald Trump.

And for Jeff Bezos.

And also hard to argue that Trump has been more disciplined in his second administration.I mean, as you're always pointing out, and as we have discussed at length on this particular podcast, it's a government of one.I mean, hard to argue that he's been disciplined.other than focused on getting more money for him and his friends.The war in Iran, completely opposite to what he promised in his campaign.

Yeah.Also, it just says that Jeff Bezos said that Trump is more mature and more disciplined.When to everyone?Patently clear, Donald Trump has only been more childish and more out of control.

Right.And of course, you know, there's his ownership of the Washington Post, which started off promisingly in 2014.And since him pulling the endorsement for Kamala Harris before the last election, which led to 300 ,000 people withdrawing their subscriptions, cancelling their subscriptions.

Another tone deaf piece.Extraordinary.Does this guy know anything about anything except selling shit?

He has created...It's hard to give up Amazon though.I will say it's incredibly good.And it even reaches the corners of Yorkshire where I am, where no Wi -Fi can reach.The Amazon truck will arrive.So I will say Amazon has been my connection to a lot of things out here.

much as I dislike the way he presents.No, I think you can say, and I think what's going on here is that, you know, a shopkeeper should stay in the shop.Keep your fucking trap shut about everything else, you blithering moron.

OK, so, Michael, what else do we have to discuss?Do we need to go back to the slush fund?Do we need to go back to the slush fund?

I think we've done the slush fund, but I think it's hard not toonce again acknowledge, yeah, I mean, it's there.I mean, it's there and it's not going away.It is intractable.It is, Trump is stuck.It is, matter of fact, the whole world is stuck in the Strait of Hormuz.

because of Donald Trump.

You know who's not stuck in the Strait of Hormuz anymore?Tulsi Gabbard.Tulsi Gabbard has resigned.Resigned for what appear to be sad reasons.Her husband has got a rare form of bone cancer.

I mean, we know her announcement, you know, family matters.I mean, that's everybody's Everybody who's fired their go -to leave -taking announcement is for family reasons.But let's make no mistake.

Well, except for Christine Ohm, actually.Christine Ohm didn't try and pull that one.Even Christine Ohm knew no one would be buying that.Anyway, I digress.

Yes.

Christina was leaving for Corey.

She should actually that would have been more plausible.She was leaving because she had dire a dire fight.I mean, she had a family embarrassment that she had to go deal anyway.But but yes, Tulsi out one more out.So all of the fourth woman, the fourth woman, she's the cabinet.

The only people to leave the cabinet so far are women for women.I think there's only Linda McMahon left now, isn't there?And the agriculture, Brooke Rowlands.

I mean, I called Tulsi Gabbard months ago.but I certainly thought, I certainly thought Kash Patel would go first.You know, Kash Patel is extremely helpful.I mean, he's abjectly loyal.He runs the FBI.Trump needs someone.

The last person Trump wants in there is someone running the FBI who is not abjectly loyal.So therefore, Kash Patel, no matter that he is a fool and an embarrassment, gets to keep his job.

At least for now.But does it make any difference that Tulsi's gone?She was in theory in charge of intelligence, but seemed to have been excluded from important decisions.

Well, no.I mean, nobody knew what she did anyway.But for that matter, it doesn't mean nobody essentially matters here.Trump is the guy in charge.I mean, the only thing that they are helpful in doing is not impeding him.

Right.So I think our friend Heges got caught up in some trouble this week, because he cancelled a deployment of American Trump troops to Poland.I think thinking that Trump would be pleased with that, because Trump had said that he wanted fewer American troops in Europe.But actually, what he meant was in Germany.And so Trump apparently reamed Heges out for cancelling troops going to Poland because, in fact, Trump likes Poland and Poland has been supportive of his position in Iran.

I think Trump put it that, that, that Haggers had got the country wrong, which is, you know, I think a frequent malady in this White House.Which country are we talking about?Where?is that country?

Yeah, it's just...

Can you find it on a map?

Oh, well, I hope to find America on a map.Well, at least I hope to find it in an airplane tomorrow.I'm excited to come back.And we will be in the studio on Tuesday, Michael.

Fantastic.I can't wait.

Fingers crossed.Fingers crossed.And happy Memorial Day.I know you'll be flying your flag, your stars and stripes on your porch.

I can, I see it now.Out my window.

Good.

Good, good, good.It's a little wrinkled.It's been in storage for the winter.

We have a limerick from Garfried.When the Don felt the walls closing in, he brought Ratner back home from his sin.With a slush fund to spend and no court to pretend, he made loyalty look like a win.

That's Brett Ratner, who we have, I think, officially and perhaps single -handedly elevated to a new character in this drama.

So the good news is we have so many Be Beast tier members now.There are too many names to read out and we really appreciate your support.Thanks to our production team, Ryan Murray, Rachel Passer, Heather Passaro, Neil Rosenhaus.