Why Bizarre Melania Moves Have White House Alarmed | Inside Trump's Head

If she is in, in some kind of. of secret or not so secret revolt against him, which I think she might be. in the times that she has come, come out, that has not been good for them. The Epstein thing drawing attention to that her her. just peculiar attitude about everything, her absence, her strategic absences. This is not good for them, and it's not necessarily controllable. for them.

Michael Gioia. Oh my goodness. Do you think either Melania or Donald Trump know. that Melania has written an ode to motherhood. in the Washington Post? Well, having read the ode to motherhood in the Washington Post. by Melania Trump, I would say certainly that she didn't write it. So it makes sense that she didn't read it.

And and he doesn't read anything. So, yeah, I think I think this probably has. a completely independent life of from both of them. But having said that, I mean, I think it's, it's it's part of what we're, we're, we're now seeing this is the new Melania and the new Melania is brand Melania. It's all about how she sees her. future business, which is the Melania business.

So now she's she's. speaking up for. motherhood in such a peculiar way also. Yeah. Yeah, it makes no sense that she's she's speaking up, it would seem, for for single mothers everywhere. I'm totally perplexed by this. Okay, so for those who of you who don't know what we're talking about, this is an op ed that Melania Trump has written ahead. of Mother's Day on Sunday in the Washington Post.

On the op ed page, which you will remember last year, was it the year before. Jeff Bezos said that really, the op ed page in the Washington. Post should only be used for free market ideas. That's what he wanted to extoll, and the then op ed. editor of the Washington Post left, and lots of other journalists left to. And you will remember that Jeff Bezos. decided against carrying the endorsement for Kamala Harris.

Anyway, Melanie, and you will just just note Jeff Bezos and. and and his wife's appearance at the Met. Ball this past week. That's right. They were chief sponsors of the Met Ball, for which I think they paid $10 million. Yes. A monument to vulgarity. and to into our our time. And the monument, a monument to the nature of our time.

But but what is fascinating about Melania's. essay is that it really doesn't make sense. It clearly hasn't. No editor at the Washington Post has clearly dared to. Editors, as far as I can see, and it's full of vague, generic language, which doesn't quite make sense. And on the one hand, she's extolling the values of family and the importance of family. and the institution of family, and saying how important it is to support family.

And yet, at the same time, women must make a lot of time for self-care. Feminism is to blame for the. the sort of wobbly ness of the nuclear family. She doesn't once mention her husband. She doesn't once mention her own mother, who moved to D.C. to support her. And she doesn't mention Michelle Obama's. mother, who moved into the white House to support Michelle. She also talks about I want to make it.

I want to make a clarification there. Michelle Obama's mother moved into the white House to. to support the Obama family in the white House. Melania Trump's mother moved to Maryland. so that her daughter and grandson could escape the white House. I realized that's what you're going to say as you embark down that sentence. Yes. So, so poor Melania's mother doesn't get a shout out, despite the fact.

that her funeral gets or her memoriam gets an enormous amount of tension. Attention in Melania the Movie. The piece itself is quite remarkable, actually. And it's just it's just nonsense. I mean, let's call it for what it is. It's just nonsense. It's anodyne. It's meaningless. It's full of. It's full of cliches and.

and and dopey sentiment. It's impersonal. But also what's fascinating about it, she doesn't once mention her husband. She sympathizes with single mothers. And then the final paragraph is together. Let's champion new American model that restores honor of motherhood. by encouraging all women to lead boldly at work, while. also making family the cornerstone of our national future.

I invite you to join me in prioritizing family. as we shape a stronger America for the generations to come. Now, she is not someone that. that we've we've barely seen her by her husband's side. What family? What family is she talking about? Michael. And is this her? Is this her clinging to Barron as he fights. for his separation from his parents at this place? I don't think that there's any personal considerations in this at all.

This is this is at best about business. Melania. The brand. Let's let's do a motherhood thing. Somebody have this idea and then they've sent it to the Washington. Post and but but you know, but I'm also wondering about the political. implications of, of this because we have seen. more and more Melania, who has been invisible for for most of this term.

and most of the first term, too, and certainly invisible during the campaign. More and more we see a melania presence, a peculiar presence, presence. You know, it's like like once a week we get a melania hit. Now, well, also also, I mean, another thing she didn't reference, but it's a mother's job to not know Jeffrey Epstein. Remember her crazy statement that she came out with three weeks ago?

I don't know, Jeffrey Epstein. That is a full time mothers job. That is a full time mothers job to keep your girls away from Jeffrey Epstein. No mention here. She also says, I constantly challenge myself. as first lady to think beyond traditional responsibilities of the East Wing. Well, first of all, there is no East wing, so that's been demolished. That has risen. That's such a peculiar. That's such a peculiar thing to say. Does she not know that?

I mean, so nobody even read this. Why would you call attention to the East Wing? That doesn't exist. That in itself has become a rather. glaring, glaring political issue. Well, she then goes on to say, she's so she's constantly challenged herself. as first lady, which we doubt because she's barely around as first lady. And then she said that has resulted in many new opportunities, including leading for reunification of Ukrainian and Russian.

children with their families, which is, if she has done that, that's great. Thumbs up for that. But there is no mention of her movie and there is no mention of her book, which surely if you had actually written this, those would be things. that you would be proud of, or at least have to pretend to be proud of. and be thrilled at the amount of money she received for both. Well, it could be. just thinking this, thinking this through that this is the white House initiative.

And then they produce this. And then they said. Then they said to Melania's people, we want to run this. And they looked at it and said, well, there's nothing here and who cares? Well, in fact, people do care because the comments. have been fantastically negative. So it's unfortunately had blowback against her. because the comments are like, well, well then that could be. that is the other thing, which I often think that she is leading.

her own separate political. Political initiative. And it not and it does not necessarily conform to her husband's. Well, there's also no mention of blended families. There's no mention of her stepchildren. There's no mention of the fact that she's a step grandmother. So it's as if it's entirely disconnected. from the life that she's led with Donald Trump.

Anyway, I don't know why I find it so amusing. I want to emphasize, because I think this has broader implications, that. that these that these people, politicians. You know, politicians used to farm out this stuff that they wrote to their staff. This is nothing. This means nothing. No one has read it except us, apparently. No, no. And lots of Washington Post readers, the remaining Washington Post readers. And let's not forget, 300,000 subscribers left, but the remaining Washington Post readers have have read.

it and are shocked and have gone online to say, what is this? Well, whoever advised Melania to write this, I would advise you for the First Lady of the United States, let's let's not forget that she's not just she's not just a model. She's not just a catalog model. She's she's the first lady. She represents the United States. And to not have someone I mean, there are so many authors you could call.

There are so many ghostwriters and speechwriters you could call. to write something really moving and rousing. It could be a hymn to her own mother. And yet they've chosen to go the lazy route. I mean, let's question the Washington Post's responsibility here. I mean, obviously they said, okay, great. You know, the first lady is going to write something. about about motherhood, but when they're handed this thing, why wouldn't they say, no, I,

we can't, we can't publish this. Or are they saying, well, let's publish this because it kind of hangs herself? I don't know, but there's some weird lack of responsibility on their part. Well, it's it's a or it could be. Let's remember. Melania, the movie is a. an Amazon Jeff Bezos. production and Melania, the Mother's Day.

article appears in the Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos. So you're suggesting Jeff Bezos rated no. I'm suggesting that this is all part of a greater. a greater Melania marketing influence. peddling piece of grift. You've got weight loss goals, but hitting them is another story. Enter weight loss by Hims.

It's designed to support you in losing the weight and keeping it off. And hymns now offers access to an affordable range of FDA approved. GLP one medications, including the wiggle. pill and the were Gove pen. With Gove at hims, you could lose up to 20%. or more of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise. Our previous producer Devin lost 30 pounds using would go through hims.

Everything happens online. You'll connect with a licensed provider who will determine. if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your medication is delivered right to your door. No insurance necessary, just visit Hims. to get a personalized, affordable plan. That's hims. But I wonder if they had thought. of having Melania attend the Met Ball.

I wonder if she was invited. I wonder if she decided she didn't want to go. She could have taken Barron. It was interesting to me that the entire Trump family stayed away, despite the fact that Jeff Bezos had turned up to support. Donald at the inauguration. Well, I'm sure first thing that that in the reality of this. is that Jeff Bezos and and his wife had very little discretion. over, over the ball that that's that that was going to remain.

I mean, that's their position was wholly, wholly honorary there. And and obviously the Met Ball is run by. by Anna Wintour and Conde Nast. have known. Right. But I know intro put Melania Trump. and Donald Trump on the cover of Vogue when when they got married. I mean, I know that she since said Melania Trump will never appear on the company,

but they have. But yes, but they have not seen that. that was another age, another another couple basically. And so they would have known in the Condé Nast people would, would. have, would have known that that would have been. to involved the Trumps would have been. a statement that they certainly didn't want to make. Yeah. Yeah. Well it's it's I mean, I'm not I'm not encouraging people. to go and read it because it just it doesn't mean anything.

It's just generic weird gobbledygook, but interesting that they put it out there. Yeah. And I think the, you know, the, the, the larger point here is what is Melania doing that this, that this does become a political. Something. we have to see within the, within this political context. We don't know what it means. And it could be it could be dangerous for Donald Trump. She is if she is in,

in some kind of, of secret or not. so secret revolt against him, which I think she might be. And if she is building this, this independent brand persona. business from from him, that also becomes a potential liability. And as we've we've discussed before within the white House, they now look at her as a, as a liability.

I mean, in the times that she has come, come out, that has not been good for them. The Epstein thing drawing attention to that her her. just peculiar attitude about everything, her absence, her strategic absences. This is not good for them and it's not necessarily controllable for them. So, Michael, one of the things we get lots of emails, lots of texts. and comments asking what's happening with the case against the first lady.

or what's happening with your case. with the first lady, my case against against the first lady. And just just to recap, the first lady threatened to sue me. for $1 billion over me. mentioning her connection to Jeffrey Epstein. in in the state of New York. You you mean you you can't do that. There are things called anti-SLAPP laws. And what that means is that you cannot use.

the threats, legal threats, to stifle perfectly legitimate free speech. She threatened to sue me. And for the direct purpose of me backing down, not saying what I could have every legal right to say in a New York. You sue, you can sue for that, which we did. So instead of her suing me, we turned around and sued her. That is now in court. It is now in federal court, and we've raised a lot of money.

through a, a through a GoFundMe page, almost almost $1 million to support this, this suit. So a lot of people say, well, what's happening, what's happening, what's happening? And in fact, I also am saying what's happening to my lawyers. on a regular basis. And the truth is that, you know, it's it's the law moves very slowly. So this is we have been pending.

a decision in federal court for almost two months now. They have asked to a, of course, dismiss this suit or in lieu of that, move it to Florida, which would be a preferential jurisdiction for them. We have responded by saying no, this should be remanded. back to New York State Court where it belongs, because Melania lives in New York and I live in New York. And and if there's any doubt about that, we've asked for discovery.

on that point, although we've produced a lot of evidence to show she, in fact, lives in New York, even though she says she lives in Florida. So, again, this is this is in federal court. is before a federal judge who is a a Trump appointed judge. So we don't know. We don't know what that will mean for, for the case. But I suspect one of the things that it means is that a Trump appointed judge.

certainly doesn't want to rush into a decision. against the First lady, but a decision will have to be forthcoming. And it could come, as my lawyers tell me on a regular basis, any any minute or not. And it could take weeks longer. But but that's the that is what we are waiting for, that decision. Is there any deadline by which the decision has to be made?

There is no, no, this is the legal system in the United States of America. There is no deadline. It is wholly in the at the discretion of the judge. So in theory, the judge could. just keep kicking this down the road until 2028. And she's no longer first lady. You know, I don't that's a very good question. And and I will almost immediately ask my lawyers that how far can this go?

And they don't expect it. I mean, they expect that this is I mean, right now this is not out of the ordinary. in, in in many cases that go before. federal judges and procedural cases, they take their time in deciding, I mean, these are somewhat complicated issues, but imagine being the judge. Imagine being the judge having this on your desk and. and making the decision to allow the case to go ahead.

You would only, I'm sure, and I hope the judge is not thinking of this, but I'm sure the judge will be thinking the retribution could be enormous. Which is not to say, and I don't, and I don't want to even in any way apply. that this federal judge and she was appointed in the in. the first term is doing anything other than what she should be doing. is is of the issues in this case.

and on her own schedule. And I'm sure she has, you know, substantial other issues on her, on her docket. And then a decision will, will will come and. and then we'll deal with that, whatever it is. Well, but it can't go. The case is now effectively slowed down. as, as most most as. as it as happens in most cases, in most litigations, you get to.

you get to moments in which things happen very quickly, in which other times and things happen very slowly. Well, the results of the British election happened, felt like they happened incredibly quickly this week. And we've seen a hundred years of labor. rule in Wales just tossed out. of the window and extraordinarily reform the Reform Party.

by led by Nigel Farage, the right wing sort of Trump light candidate. For those of you not following British politics and why would you, has won. 1400 seats and labor has, I think, lost. Let's. let's point out that you at this moment. sit in the middle of, if not British politics, in the middle of the United. Kingdom, in Yorkshire, at your family's home.

Yes, I'm here, but looking after my mum, who is ill, as many of you know and have written me incredibly nice comments and emails. Thank you very much for that. We were distracted this week from the horrors of pancreatic cancer. by the really remarkable shift in British politics, which, like the States, has really been a two party system, certainly for the last hundred years. And that seems to have been blown apart. The character that I was discussing, the leader of the Green Party,

Zach Polanski, who is a former hypnotist who, as we mentioned, hypnotized one woman to believe her breasts would grow. larger, has won lots of local government seats. These are local elections, but it means that reform. has taken over several councils and will be running cities. In a way that's this has just never happened before, and it now looks increasingly likely that the next election, Nigel Farage.

could be could be a prime ministerial, a proper prime ministerial candidate. So pancreatic cancer on the one hand, Nigel Farage on the other hand. Yeah, it's it's between a rock and a hard place. But you know, it's it's indicative. I mean what's interesting to, to, to me is, is obviously on a, on a, on a larger. stage here that, that, that what we see. again is people's incredible unhappiness.

with the system that the system fails to perform for people. And that is that is something that is very hard for a politician, for any politic politician to deal. with the system, the system. It is hard to move the system. It is hard to get the system to perform better. So when there is a perception that the system is not performing, any politician is going to fail to rectify that and then is going to suffer.

the consequences. And that's. that seems to happen at this. point to to all or most incumbents. and the only people who are able to the only politicians. who seem to be able to overcome. the the difficulties in moving the system. are politicians who are are, you know, the great bullshitter.

And Nigel Farage is one of those great bullshitter. A kind of, you know, like Donald Trump, you know, with this amazing. shamelessness, you know, as though, you know, he represents himself as a, as a, you know, as a really effective. and efficient businessman, which he is not. And a whole other range of things, but what he isn't, and that is fundamentally his appeal.

is that he isn't really a politician, or at least. he represents himself, comes off as not a politician. In fact, he is a politician, but he doesn't seem that way. I mean, Keir Starmer seems like a politician and that's that. other that other thing about authenticity, you know, Nigel Farage, say what you want. About him, he seems like he's always seems like. he's having a good time, probably because he's had quite a bit to drink.

And he seems he seems comfortable. He seems comfortable in his own skin, whereas Keir Starmer is one of those other politicians. And this is true about almost every Democratic politician in America, seems distinctly uncomfortable in their own skin. And versus, of course, Donald Trump, who is absolutely comfortable with being Donald Trump,

and his very orange tanned, leathery skin with his nasty rash. And that's shamelessness is is is a key part, part of this, you know, other, you know, a lot of politicians, a lot of Democratic politicians, you know, you feel that they have they fundamentally understand. and appreciate and have some shame about their own phoniness. Donald Trump does not have any shame about his own phoniness.

Well, he has no shame about anything. But you're right. It's the rise of the anti-pollution politicians that Polanski, who's leading the Green Party, is the same. And what you've seen over the last two days is the collapse of two party. rule in Britain. I mean, it's possible that Labor and Conservatives will get even more. And the conservatives were also trounced in this most recent election, that they will both take a back seat the next general election. I mean, who knows. It's a lot of time between still three years to go case.

Starmer is refusing to resign over shockingly bad results. I mean, they lost council after council after council. I mean really devastating results, as he himself acknowledged. But he's refusing to go. And obviously there's all sorts of internal machinations. So there's the equivalent of the JD Vance and the Marco Rubio. But you're right, it's playing out in the States and exactly the same way. And Nigel Farage is the Trumpian character.

Now, now, the other thing is, is that the person out of power. always benefits, and the person in power is the person who is penalized. And so we are looking at that now that the penalized. that the person to be penalized is Donald Trump, because even he in doing all of those those things and being the bullshitter. and being the non politician can't. basically make the system work better.

And that that that is basically you can reduce that, that formulation to can't make the economy do better than it is doing. And Donald Trump is now facing the midterm elections. And where that is going, where, where by every reasonable expectation. he is going to be hoisted, except for the fact that he has the,

the the incredible ability. to manipulate the system in his own favor. And we have arrived at that, a kind of a crisis point this week in, in, in in the recognition. that that despite the. the despite the political wins. winds that are blowing against him, he has the ability to to.

to weigh in on the system with such heavy feet. that that again, we're at this moment of saying, who knows. what's going to happen now in specifically what we're talking about is the ruling, you know, the the ruling, the Trump. court ruling in Virginia. And this was a vote by the Virginia legislature to reposition its electorate. in such a way that it would be a counterweight to the Trump.

The reapportionment in Trump states. to favor Republicans, the Virginia reapportionment would have would have. favored Democrats and neutralized the efforts of Republicans. So the state court that has thrown that out, the math that would have said that basically, basically the the Trump. reapportionment has been balanced by the Democrats.

Reapportionment has now been thrown up because the Democrats. reapportionment in the key state of Virginia has been thrown out. So the we will go into the midterms. with probably something like the the. the Republicans will have. as much as a ten seat advantage. that they would not have otherwise have had. So and that is coupled with.

what else the other things that Donald Trump can do. on a structural basis to influence this election. He can't change the politics. He can't change those wins, but he can change the system in his favor. And and, you know, I think we've gone back and forth and everyone, you know, there's a lot of. the the sense over the last. number of months has been okay, he can't really do that.

Yes, he can try, but there's always going to be push back on that. And the Democrats can probably neutralize this. And now we're at a moment of saying, well, maybe that isn't true. Matter of fact, maybe quite the opposite. Isn't isn't true that the system itself can be altered. and then and then and then considering the other add. on things, I mean, his, his, his efforts to call for,

for substantially greater. identification to be necessary at the polls, which would disenfranchize. a lot of people the the ability to put in federal. a federal policing presence, ice at polling places. So again, this moment of thinking, okay, the political winds. are against Donald Trump, they're really against Donald Trump. And and we are looking forward.

to certainly to a House of Representatives. that will have a Democratic majority and even quite possibly. and this has gotten quite a bit of press in the last several weeks, a Senate Democratic majority. And now that is, again, we've had a bracing moment. in, in suddenly having to face the fact that that may not be true, that that that Donald Trump, despite the political winds,

holds an incredible amount of power. Well, on Friday, he released potentially a new platform. for him to UFOs, UFOs, strange lights in the sky. He released a government file telling people that people believed this ship. He, you know, I could quite see him running on a platform. where he's now fighting aliens and obviously releasing it on Friday. I don't know if he was competing with Melania's essay.

or if he was doing it to distract from the war. I have a Trump. quote in this in this comes from 2016, actually from the campaign. And so his first campaign in which he said, I could run on UFOs, people really believe this shit. So which is perfectly cynical, Donald Trump cynical, so cynical. Yeah, of course, but it's also an, you know, an appreciation.

UFOs are a UFOs sell. They have always that has always been a kind of a kind of. well, it's conspiracy theory, isn't it? It's conspiracies. And he likes them because he understands. If you throw a conspiracy theory. into anything, it immediately makes things murkier. And of course, we had another thing thrown into the biggest conspiracy of all. Was Jeffrey Epstein murdered, or did he die by suicide.

because supposedly his suicide note was produced? Did you did you have thoughts on this? Well, my, my, I. have limited thoughts, but my my two thoughts are, are that Jeffrey. Epstein's suicide note or purported suicide note. sounds bizarrely like the kind of suicide note. that Donald Trump might write if at the time it comes to that,

well, does that even mean I can't imagine be kind of no fun? It's enormous handwriting. Well, he would that. But it's, you know, you know, it's kind of no fun exclamation point. I mean, it's, I mean, the poor grammar and the. in the kind of in the kind of. You know, you know, well, if this is the way it's going to be, then.

I'm going to do this, then it's I mean, I found it very Trumpian in its tone. Did you believe because it was supposed to come from, in theory and earlier, attempt to to die. just as the week before, maybe ten days before. Epstein Epstein died. There was another another effort, another apparent effort on his part to commit suicide.

He had a cellmate at the time, right? With the first attempt, I think he had a cell. This was the cellmate found the suicide note. The cellmate found the suicide note. There was the cellmate was accused of the person. who might have tried to strangle him in the first instance. And the cellmate has since been convicted on several murder counts. So. I mean, I don't know who you want to want to believe here, but this is.

Well, did you ever did you ever see, I mean, in your various correspondences with him, which I know were largely on email, but did you ever see his handwriting? I mean, the handwriting itself, the first of all, the language of the note was so strange. The handwriting itself was so peculiar. You know, I saw it, I didn't I didn't find the I mean, I don't I don't know if I have a view on his hand.

I don't think the, the handwriting didn't seem so peculiar to me. It seemed like all handwriting at this point seems to me actually quite peculiar. But it's true. But. But I've known you for 20, 25, 26 years. I'm not sure I could identify your handwriting. There are lots of people whose handwriting I could identify. I'm trying to. I'm trying to think if I had. I once swiped. a a Jeffrey Epstein pad.

It said Jeffrey Epstein on the top because I thought. I thought that would be an interesting artifact to have. And, And he had written something. There was a top page in which he had he had written something, and I looked for it just as soon as this note came out. I looked for in hoping to compare it, but of course I couldn't, having swiped it. for the purposes of history, I have now lost it. Well, I don't know what frame of mind.

you can possibly be in if you're thinking of attempting suicide, but the note to me struck it just I don't know it. Not only everything just seemed so in jail. In your frame of mind that you're in jail and you may never get out of jail. So well, and you've been running an industrial size. complex of of girls coming through your apartment. The whole thing is horrible, but I just thought you might.

have seen his handwriting and know what it was like. and whether or not the note was genuine, I can I cannot verify this, this note. But I've always thought. I mean, I've always thought it's very possible. I mean, I don't know what happened to Jeffrey Epstein at that. most fateful moment, whether he was killed himself or whether other forces were involved. But I have always thought it is quite possible.

that he could have that he would have killed himself. You know, and as I've said before, the the. I received one of the last messages from him. and and in that message it was he said, he said. and this was in response to me saying, how are you or some something like that? He said, still hanging around. And this was as much as hours before his death by hanging. So and he was clearly then.

referring that was, that was referring I, I understood it to refer back to. when he the the previous effort to. in which he seemed to have tried to kill himself by hanging. It's still, to me the most incredible story of. of friendship that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, who tooled around. for up to 15 years together, were each other's best buds.

One of them ends up as president, and one of them ends up at the heart of. possibly the most fascinating conspiracy. about what happened to him in a jail cell in New York. I mean, just the juxtaposition. Can I claim credit just for that? Just juxtaposition? Yes you can. You can claim credit for you. You can absolutely claim credit for it.

It's just it's so strange, so somewhat following in your own footsteps. Very interesting development at ABC this week. Who's decided to sue the FCC, claiming the FCC. is trying to restrict ABC's use of the First Amendment. Really interesting case. New CEO at a, b c. Josh. A different. approach to Bob Iger, who is the previous CEO.

who decided to settle the case with George Stephanopoulos. I know you have thoughts on this. Yeah. No. And this is against the background of it's not just ABC that had settled, settled. the case in the face of a Trump threat, but also CBS that had settled. and, and, and other organizations. You get threatened by the president of the United States. And that's a scary thing.

It's a scary thing to large businesses and smaller businesses. And and this had and this is itself is against the backdrop. that this has never been done by a white House, an American president, the the the American executive. branch does not use its power against the media. You know, this is a. this is. fundamental, and it has shocked.

everyone that a president would be so, so audacious and perhaps tone deaf. and and belligerent in his efforts. to get them to bend the media to his will. And that has gone on for certain, the for the breadth of the of the second term. And as we discussed before, I have been involved with, with with this and,

and I have been the steps that I take that. I, that I took against the first lady. have been one of the few instances in which there has been clear pushback. Well, now there is. There is a, B, c. the Disney Corporation and ABC is also now. finally pushing back in a, in a very material way.

And what this basically involves, curiously, is the show, the view. And, you know, I mean the, the the view is a is a is a daily show. of of of with a panel of women. talking about many things, and they have largely been. antagonistic to Donald Trump, although it's an interesting thing. that Donald Trump has been on The View before he became.

became the president in 2017. Many, many times, I think I think a couple of dozen times. Well, as he was on Jimmy Kimmel, he used to say he loved Jimmy Kimmel, right? Which has been another target of his attacks. I mean, ABC says that they've had a chilling effect. The white House attacks have had a chilling effect, and they've had enough of it. I mean, the view we should remind people is started by Barbara Walters, two,

who did several interviews with Donald Trump. where she challenged him on all sorts of his nonsense. Yeah, well, I mean, I wouldn't go that far. I mean, I think that they were that was a that was largely. his interviews were with Barbara Walters were to his benefit. It it helped solidify him as, as moving him from flimflam man to celebrity.

fair. Totally fair, said. Barbara Walters was also culpable in not taking him seriously enough. Perhaps, but but at any rate, they have said, I mean, he's been he's been pushing particularly in regard to the view. on all kinds of licensing matters for the ABC television stations. pushing on, on a, on a, on an, you know, former. ruling about equal time, which has not been.

The equal time ruling has has. and I don't actually even know the formal status of it now. because it has not been enforced in two generations. So but they're bringing that back a whole. really any leverage, possibly governmental leverage. they can use against ABC. and against any of the, the, the networks.

to bend the networks to their will. and to make the networks, the networks. a think twice and three times. before they go negative on Donald Trump. And of course, one of the networks CBS. has now been, has been, has been. taken over by. a company and by a family in the in the technology. business, the Ellison family, which has close ties to Donald Trump.

Right. And they brought in Barry Weiss, who was the founder of the Free Press, a conservative newsletter. to run CBS news, which so far she's found extremely challenging. So among all of the the the other things. which the second Trump administration has, has, has, has shifted in. political life is this overt attack on the media.

And that has gone from in the first administration, basically just name. calling to in the second administration trying to use every point of leverage. it has against against media organizations and people in the media. So do we think this is a hopeful sign that ABC is saying enough already? We're going to do essentially what you've done, which is before. the FCC actually launches its full suit, they launch their own suit.

Yeah. Well, it's it's more hopeful than than not, certainly. I mean, this is what what media organizations should have done. in the past, the capitulation of, of these organizations. to Trump has been has been the really damaging thing. I mean, I mean, that's that's what that's what. what eggs him on number one.

And number two. spreads the chilling effect. Everybody in these organizations knows that they may not be supported. Okay. Well, this is the perfect moment for me to ask people who have been listening. and watching us today to. smash the subscription button, join the Daily Beast community. You can become a beast member where you get extra content. and you get content ahead of time. You get exclusive, exclusive content,

but it helps support independent media, which is what we are. You can thank our production team now. Thank you. Thank you for. We have just staring blankly at me. You were just staring blankly. I wonder what I was thinking at that time. And I will tell you, I was thinking absolutely nothing.

Just everything had just just just gone out. You get to the end of a show and you think we made it. Although, although, you know, I mean, I had a moment, you know, this, this Virginia decision in this whole kind of realization. that that in fact, the midterms are not a fate on that. He has the ability to do all kinds of. of mischief and more was one of the I was thinking again,

I was thinking, oh my God, you know, I just can't I can't face it, I can't, I can't put my boots on again and have to slog through. through another, another swing of Donald Trump's. fortunes, at any rate, for another day. Thank you. And we're not there yet. Yeah, we're definitely not there yet. But my point about conspiracy was simply that once you start sowing conspiracies.

about the voting system itself, like the fact that voting is rigged. and like the fact that, you know, he was urging on the FBI officers. when Tulsi Gabbard went down to Georgia. to take ballots away, that that all you have to do is so doubt. in a system which hitherto Americans have largely trusted. Well, yeah. And well, I mean, I understand. Sure, I understand that, but we're beyond doubts here. I mean, this is this is now now actually actually.

manipulating the structure of the system, really the the potential. of putting actually masked men in the way of your vote. I mean, this is this this isn't just doubts. I mean, this is we are looking at the potential of. of making it, making it very difficult for people to vote and, and of altering the system in a way that it is.

so, so egregiously favors. Donald Trump, that we're that democracy becomes in danger. But for another day. Meanwhile, another day for Tuesday, perhaps. Thank you. Ryan, Rachel, Heather and Neil. So the good news is we have so many beast tier members now. There are too many names to read out and we really appreciate your support.