Virginia DMV and the City of Richmond remind you to drive with care, slow down and stay alert as you drive. Look for people walking, biking and rolling, especially around schools, crosswalks, parks and playgrounds. We all share the road and we're in this together. Taking a few extra seconds can help prevent crashes and save lives. Let's look out for each other because everyone deserves to get to their destination safely. Hi there, Bill Crystal here. Very pleased to be joined on full work on Sunday by my colleague Sarah Matthews, who was Deputy Press Secretary in the Trump White House at the end of the first term, about seven, eight months I think at the end of 2020. We're quit in protest and on principle on January 6th, 2021, testified honestly and courageously I'd say before the January 6th committee in 2022. And we're so pleased that she's joined the Bull Work in the last few months, I guess it's been, focusing on expanding our reach, especially on Instagram where she's done terrific videos, which I recommend everyone. So Sarah, thanks for joining me today. Oh, Sarah can't hear. I'll just talk for a minute. So I was going to say anyway, having introduced Sarah, that I wanted to take a minute to just give people an update on what's happening in Iran, in terms of the negotiations over Iran and also in the election in Hungary today. In Hungary, the polls closed. We're speaking here just afternoon. The polls closed in an hour, like 7pm Budapest time. Huge turnout, apparently. They monitored that very carefully. It seems like in Hungary you get very precise numbers every two hours. People think that's the momentum that's been with the opposition, the Democratic opposition, the candidate, Peter Magyar. And they think people think the big turnout is good for him. I think we'll know something in a few hours. But it's a complicated electoral system. There's votes from overseas that orbit. Is that a lot to try to buy, frankly? And also he could monkey with the electorate in all kinds of ways. So I think it's, we may not know much for sure until tomorrow. We'll certainly discuss it in morning shots tomorrow morning. We have David Baer, who's covered Hungary for us so much and so well, honestly, ahead of the curve in seeing warbots' vulnerability in this election cycle. And so we'll have something by David tomorrow morning and maybe I'll comment on the news too. And then tomorrow morning, Andrew Ager actually will probably write about what's happened in Islamabad. The negotiations ended and ceasefire may be holding. We don't know. Trump has announced that he's closing the straight. So, for Moose, which is slightly odd since we were supposed to be, one of our unconditional demands was that it be opened. But I suppose he's closing it for the sake of opening it. And we'll see. So we'll have an update on that tomorrow morning too. So we'll update on these two news stories. Sarah, I wanted to talk to her about what to make of what's been happening in the White House in general. She worked there. She was pretty senior there. She knows the people. She knew people. You know, you very well, the people who worked there at the end of the first term and knows a lot of the people who were there back for the second term or those people who knows them well, certainly as much more visibility into the Trump White House than most of us do. And so I thought it'd be very interesting to talk to her particularly about Melania's kind of amazing appearance on Thursday, but in word broadly about what one is to make of Trump himself and also what's sort of happening in his youth. And I think that's something that's really interesting in his White House. I can hear you now. And hear me now. Well, you missed a nice introduction, I'm going to say. I gave a little update about Iran and Ukraine. This is perfect timing because I was just saying that we wanted to ask you about what was going on in the White House, which you have much more of a sense of, more visibility into. You know, you know, people who were still there, who've come back, you know, people who know people who are there and so forth. So very curious to hear your thoughts on what's happening in the Trump White House and what should we know about, you know, from your sense of what's happening at least. Maybe beginning with Melania's kind of astounding appearance on Thursday. Were you surprised by that? What do you make of that? Yeah, you know, Melania is obviously not your typical First Lady, and she does everything how she wants to do it, and she doesn't follow any sort of playbook. But I do think that that press conference did throw me a little bit for a loop because I know we've been joking here at the Bull Work that Trump started this war with Iran so we could stop talking about the Epstein files. But then what does Melania do? She re-injects the Epstein files right back into the news cycle. And, you know, maybe that's because they want to distract away from what a disaster this unnecessary war has been. But I really think that Melania just wanted to go out there and try to clear her name. And I don't know if, like, she got that much sign off from the president when wanting to do this. That's just my two cents because that's how she always operated and her team. They just kind of did their own thing. And there wasn't as much coordination between the East and the West Wing. But obviously, logistically, to pull off a press conference like that, there had to be some level of coordination. I'm just not sure that they maybe the West Wing was fully aware what she was going to say in those remarks. Yeah, that's so interesting. I want to come back to what she said, and you're in that interpretation of that in a minute. But I just, for me, having worked somebody years ago in the White House, seeing her standing in the cross-hall, which is maybe what the most formal place would you say in the White House where a president could give remarks. It's where President Trump spoke about Iran just a week ago standing behind. She's standing behind the lectern with the seal, President of the United States, just usually in my day, reserved for the president. I mean, with all due respect to the First Lady. And then she reads this almost six-minute statement that's not about matters of state, but it's about her own unhappiness at Miss, which he claims to be bad reporting about her relationship with Epstein. I don't know. It's just pretty astounding. As you said, it has to be cooperation, at least on the operational level. The White House website carried her remarks. I think even announced them a little bit ahead of time. You could go to the White House and see that, you know, that black screen. And, you know, she comes on and so forth. So it wasn't as if it was a rogue operation, you know, which could have done it that way. Right. She could have called people into her own office. She could have gone elsewhere to a reporter. She could have done it on the phone. There are a million ways you could make a statement that are not official formal, would not be in an official formal White House setting. But I don't know if you ever see, I've never seen anyone make a statement from the cross-hall who wasn't the president speaking about serious things. No, not that I can recall. And so just, yeah, the setting of it was interesting. And I just have to imagine that if the president had a heads up on her wanting to talk about Epstein and put it back into the new cycle, that he wouldn't be too happy about it. And even if he knew that she had a heads up, you would think then she would have more forcefully defended her own husband in that press conference when it really kind of just felt largely like Melania trying to clear her own name. It wasn't like she was really coming out there and defending not just her, but her husband as well. And so it makes me think that he really wasn't fully aware of what this press conference was going to be or if he had any awareness of it. But maybe on the staff level, there was coordination happening there to make it happen. But maybe they weren't even fully aware of like what she was going to be talking about besides maybe her most inner circle. Maybe those folks obviously, if someone wrote her speech, so someone knew what she was going to go out there and say, but I just have to imagine that the West Wing wasn't consulted on it because I don't think that they would want to be talking about the Epstein files again. You would think so. And I think, you know, you've almost been too modest or too cautious in saying how little she defended her husband. She didn't defend him at all. I mean, literally that is to say she mentioned some a few times in the context of Donald and I went to some parties that Epstein and Maxwell were at, but that was just we were in the same social circles. But that's a bare minimum. Yeah. Right. She explains how she met, claims how she met her husband. But there's literally not a sentence in there about he's innocent of the charges. I stand with him. I don't believe he did what people are saying or I don't believe he could have known about what Epstein was doing. Literally the whole every almost every paragraph begins with I or my or me and I never was on the plane. She said some things that kind of almost invited speculation. I thought about his role. I was never on the plane. Well, who was on the plane? Donald Trump. I think we know that right. And similar, you know, similar statements about and then her expression of sympathy with the survivors and and the criticism of these male executives who got away with so much. I don't know, wouldn't her husband fit in that category. So how much do you think she's sort of calculating that how much is just in her own world. I mean, what is one what do you know or if anything of the relationship of the two without getting too speculative. Yeah, I mean, I think that this was such a display of self preservation. If like you outlined if she wanted to go out there and defend her husband, she very well could have and she didn't. And so I think that Melania is a lot smarter than people give her credit for. She is very strategic. And I think that was a strategic choice to not go out there and forcefully defend her husband. She was focused solely on trying to clear her own name and whether that's because she's trying to preempt some story that's about to drop that we're unaware of. Or I do think there's a chance to that she's just been singularly focused on this issue because she doesn't like that her name has been swirling around with it. So she just wanted to go out there and just say her piece. But it makes me think that there might be some other news that's coming that she was trying to preempt. Yeah, we'll have to look for that over the next few days. So we need another big story in the new cycles. So we need what about the why? No, yeah, our shortage of news. It's a crazy, isn't it? I mean, you, so the White House you were in was crazy enough. It looked to some of us on the outside and I'd love to hear your account of what it was like in there to high level those eight or nine months you were there in 2020, both before the election and then obviously after November 3rd or whatever it was, election day. But also, well, what your sense of how how it's working today. I mean, just how is it sort of functioning? Who's powerful? Who makes decisions? Are there is there any mechanism even for sort of discussion and debate about what to say? Or is it entirely the president calling the press secretary and saying, say this or Steve Miller calling someone else and saying, say that. I mean, what's your what's your what's your read on that? Yeah, I think when I look back at my time at the White House, I always tell people that working for any White House is crazy. Working for that specific president was crazier. But I think I had the craziest stretch of Donald Trump's first term. I was there for during everything from COVID to the George Floyd protests to the president getting COVID, Ruth Bader Ginsburg's passing and and then obviously the election and then him pushing the lies about the election which ultimately led to January 6 which was you know the breaking point for me. And it so it really was a crazy stretch there that I was able to witness at the end. And I think to that when I'm looking at comparing Trump 1.0 versus Trump 2.0, I think that obviously in 1.0 we say this all the time you know you had the people there who were there because they wanted to serve their country. They wanted to try to keep Donald Trump in check and they kind of served as a guard rails and obviously in 2.0 you don't have that you have sycophants and loyalists who are willing to say and do whatever he wants and and that is how he operates he he does when especially when it comes to the press team. There would be times Kayleigh McEnany was the press secretary when I was serving in the White House in the first administration and he would call her in and say I want you to go do a briefing on this topic and I want you to talk about this and defend this and it got really dicey there toward the end when it came to the election because you know there was potential hatchback violations of her talking about campaign related things from the White House podium. But then she also didn't want to be involved in part of those conversations because I think she knew in her mind that he had lost and so she was very careful with what she would talk about from from the White House and I think that that is how he is so and so I have to imagine it's the same thing with Caroline Leavitt now where he's instructing her and I remember toward the end of the first administration there would be times where Kayleigh would go out of her way to try to avoid the president because she would be afraid that he would find her and tell her. I need you to go do a briefing on this since she didn't want to risk upsetting him when she would say no. But I do think one of the biggest differences too between 1.0 and 2.0 is that in 1.0 it felt like there was a lot more backstabbing and infighting than what we're seeing play out with 2.0. And so I'll give credit where credit's due. That's a good thing that it seems like they're functioning a little bit better in that regard. But I do think that there's more chaos in the second administration because you don't have those people in place who are willing to push back and say no to the president and serve as those guardrails. And so it's a little bit of a give and take. Yes, you don't have the leaking happening and the backstabbing and it kind of felt like every man for themselves at times during the first administration and you didn't really know who you could trust. And in the second administration it does seem like they're operating as a more functional team. But I just don't know if I like the goals of that team and what they're trying to accomplish. Yeah, that's really a good point. I mean the people deplore leaks and I was in a White House that actually had a fair number of leaks and some of them were deplorable. Some of them were reasonable I would say or understandable that way and a lot of them were accurate. But that is one way in which it is kind of a guardrail honestly, right? I mean you shouldn't, you know, without endorsing people leaking especially if it's in a malicious way or certainly in a false way. But it is getting something out there that the president is planning to do if you think it's pretty unwise and you think it hasn't been properly debated or ventilated isn't necessarily a bad thing for the country, you know, if that happens. And it is striking. I've been struck by this too. I think, you know, people like me and a lot of our friends who are anti-Trump wanted to say, well, it's chaos, it's crazy, it's so dysfunctional. And there's a lot of truth to that obviously. But I would say in terms of actual mechanics, it's not. I agree with you. I think you're making a very important point. It's fairly, in a weird way, it's a fairly tight ship. It's a pretty crazy ship. But, you know, they're pretty good at pulling surprises, right? They're pretty good at not things haven't leaked. It's not like on the Iran announcement on February 28th of the war, there wasn't that much leaking ahead of time about what he was going to say or when he was going to say it. It was a bit of a surprise to a lot of people. He did it at midnight, got into what he did at midnight 2am or something with a taped video. But if you think about it for a minute, he taped that video, right? So the people knew about it, right? There was someone who ran that, who arranged that, who there were others who were ready to distribute it. And in that respect, the loyalty, the fealty, as John Bolton called it, to Trump, I suppose, has helped him in the sense that it enables him to pull off surprises and whether it's helped him in terms of just insulating him more in a bubble, I guess, is the question. Yeah. No, exactly. So it does seem like he has that loyal team around him and they're willing, they're able to, you know, keep a secret and plan things like that and pull it off. But I, and I think that there's credit to be given to Susie Wiles in that regard that it does seem like she is a professional and, you know, she picks and chooses her battles with Trump, but she is running a well oiled machine over there at the White House. And I do think that she has a lot of power within that world and it's someone that Trump trusts because she was kind of, you know, stood by him when it felt like he had lost, like, everyone. She was there and stayed. And so I think that she has a lot of power. I think that obviously Stephen Miller has more power in the first administration. I mean, in the second administration that he did in the first when I was working with him, you know, in the first administration, he was the speechwriter and largely focused on immigration when it came to policy. But now in the second administration, I mean, he's touching everything from the conversations I've had with people who are inside the White House and he's not just focused on that issue set, even though that's obviously his baby and what he cares about most, but he is touching policy across the administration. So I think that the negative headlines that have come out though around ICE, I think has kind of made him not as powerful as a blade, but I'm sure he'll find a way to we still is way back in. And, and I think to obviously Marco Rubio is just a one when we look at the cabinet who is who has this enormous influence obviously he's, you know, got how many titles now and doing however many jobs. But like I thought it was even interesting last night that he was the one who was at Trump side at this UFC event. And it wasn't the vice president. But you know that's funny because you would think, well, the president entrusted the vice president to go to Islamabad for these negotiations and, you know, sent him with his son in law and Steve Wittkopf and, but almost makes me think that maybe Trump, maybe I'm giving Trump too much credit here, but that he knew it was a fruitless effort and that it might not go anywhere. And I just thought it was interesting though that why wouldn't you send your secretary of state to be part of those negotiations and but Marco Rubio was at his side at the USC event and so it just shows me that they have a very close friendly relationship and it seems like he's in the room for a lot of those important decisions that are being made. Well, he should be his secretary of state and national security advisor whether he's really running a like a traditional national security council process that, you know, does a good job of coordinating agencies and stuff I'm a little doubtful that he has the bandwidth to do that or the experience really to do that or the support needs to do that in the White House but I was struck by the thing last night was so give me your so how does that work I mean do you believe Rubio saw Vance's in Islamabad I have a chance to be with Trump suck up Trump be seen with Trump or to be fair, tell Trump a few things as news breaks, you know, quietly in the middle of this rock of Scraout is supposed to, you know, having to place a call to or something like that I suppose that that would be the nice the nice way of interpreting it but do you think Rubio initiates that does Trump initiated it how much how much is Trump open to people saying hey I'd like to join you with this thing and how much is he, you know, picking the people who wants around him. I kind of think that Trump is the one picking the people that he's inviting and you know he, it's like oh well he wants you to be there so you have to be there and make it work, but there probably is a level or like layer to it to have having Rubio there to be able to update him on what's going on and give him those kinds of updates and having him by his side. Do you think is any pushback I mean they are. It's not like Jim Mattis obviously or or or General Kelly or John Bolton or or she's even Kayleigh McEnany I mean even an adoragatory but people who are less had less stature on their own you could say, but still we're uncomfortable saying certain things I mean do you have any sense that I mean how much is he in his own information bubble I've been debating this with people and I don't know the answer I mean is it how much is he he wants to do certain things he says things that are clearly not true or that are highly misleading or one sided interpretations of events does he believe them because that's just all he hears or is he know what he's he knows what what he's saying because he wants to push things in a certain direction. I feel it's a little bit of both because the way I look at it having worked for Trump I think that oftentimes you know Trump has a way of bending reality to what he wants and so if there's a narrative that he wants to push he's going to find a way to push that and he's going to spin it if even if it's a defeat somehow he makes it into a victory and he's going to do that regardless. And I do think to that from what I've gathered of just reading about what's going on in the second administration. It does seem like he's living in this little information bubble and not getting as much you know the negative reports of like what's going on with the war for example. There was a story recently about how Susie Wiles is encouraging people to tell him the truth and tell him how the negative polling and how people are unhappy with the war and you know the the negative attacks that are happening against us troops and I thought that that was interesting because it makes me think that Susie Wiles is the source of that story and it's trying to present herself as she's the adult in the room and that she's willing to you know tell him the things that he doesn't necessarily want to hear. And I do think that he's being fed a lot of what he wants to hear and and I mean there was a story recently too about how he's not hearing as much about the negative impacts of the war on US troops and how there was an example where there was an attack I believe of like the Iranians had shot at some of our aircraft might get this wrong I think it was an Axios piece if I'm remembering correctly but they were saying that Trump found out about it from the news. And that he wasn't briefed on it from his own team and that they like to keep that they brief him with these little video montages of things blowing up. And it's because one he has a short attention span but two they don't want to tell him about the negative things they want to make it look like we're winning this war and that we're successful. And that's leaving out the bad and that is a really scary and dangerous thing to think that he's not operating with all of the information because they're terrified of him throwing a tantrum if he does hear about what is going wrong. How much did people exaggerate from the outside that you know he's watching Fox News all the time and a startling percentage of what he does is driven by something he hears on Fox or sees on Fox and or maybe a few other sites that he likes. I mean is that exaggerated or is that was that your experience. Yeah. No that was 1000% my experience. I think he sat in the Oval Office dining room and would watch TV and consume it and you have to be really careful with what you present in front of him to so like how we were saying you know if he hears something on Fox he'll repeat it. It was the same thing with us with the press team we had to be really careful about what we would put in front of him and what facts and filter that because if he sees something he'll latch on to it and he'll repeat it so you have to be very careful with what you're you're briefing him with and showing him and and so that's why it was so important in the first Trump administration. This is before my time but like John Kelly one of his largest things that he had to do is act as the gatekeeper for the Oval because people were just walking in and out of there which is not typical but that's how it was operating before he came on board and then he kind of had to help streamline things of no not everyone can have access to the president and present you know whatever it is that they want to show him because Trump will just repeat it and so it is it is quite interesting in that way but he does consume a lot of media a lot of Fox news and I think that's obvious as you know we see him fire off these things when he gets upset about something he sees and will you know post on his true social you know attacking I think like recently he attacked Jessica tarlock from Fox news and even though I think she's amazing and I don't know how she does that job and they whatever they're paying her they're not paying her enough but it he he does that is that was my example. And I think that's the first thing that he's experienced though was that that's how he likes to consume his media. As you say if you're not getting regular intelligence briefings presented by actual you know intelligence community experts and to try to give you at least recently true account of what's happening it's some clear where you get it from especially if you buy and are people just intimidated from telling him the facts I mean is it. To get to get the backlash from him in like the anger I mean there were I remember there were times where I had to tell him about a negative press story and he freaked out on me and what you know would yell at me. But it was you know whatever that story was had risen to the level that we needed to go to him because he was the only source that could push back on whatever it was that you know that outlet was reporting. You know it's not a fun position to be in to have to tell him something that he doesn't want to hear know that whatever you're about to say is probably going to upset him and that you're going to be the one on the receiving end of that but. That that's what you do you just have to do it and. And so I do think that it's people. They're they're looking out for themselves because they want to stay in his good graces they want to stay you know the proximity and the power and all the things and they don't want to risk. Obscuring him and risking their jobs so which is you know that that says a lot that they aren't thinking through what's best for the country and like what's best for the president and his decision making know I'm going to get paint him a rosy picture because I'm more concerned with my own self interest and protecting myself. You're right it does say a lot we used to fries by the firing first of Kristi Noem and then of Pam Bondi and it seemed like he was trying pretty hard not to fire people here in the second term and I think one reason that I think maybe is a little under. You know reported in this respect is there's so much corruption and somebody dubious things going on. You sort of need to keep everyone in the tent right I mean there's a sort of real and it's actually interesting that he gave Kristi Noem this fake job or whatever it was the shield of the Americas or whatever that was and Pam Bondi talked about some of cryptically about how she'll be doing great in the private sector I'm sure that they're arranging. Lots of ways in which you'll do fine you know I mean I think the degree to which you know it is if you're running kind of a mob operation you can't really afford to let people go out to unhappy I mean you need to keep them on the string somehow I. So I kind of was a little bit of a doubter when people said oh he may fire no me a fire body but he has done both of them and that could be more what's your take on what happened and do you think more. Fireings are in our roots is he like firing people I sort of the first time I vaguely remember he's both Mr firing because of this TV show obviously your fire but also he didn't really like doing it personally what had the sense I mean he didn't quite have the nerve to look someone in the eye and just say you're gone maybe I'm wrong about that though I don't know. I think that it to me it was interesting that I think obviously there were plenty of reasons why no man bond you both deserve to be fired but from what my senses on the situations he only chose to fire them when when it came to with no. He didn't like that she had said oh well he signed off on these you know multi million dollar ads and he she implicated him and that is what pushed him over the edge and led to her firing not everything else that happened I mean. Sure yeah he probably didn't like all the negative headlines that were coming out around ice and how she handled the killings of Renee good and Alex pretty but. But what ultimately made him fire her was something that made him look bad and then I think same thing with bondy it was all about him when it came to her where you know I think she totally botched the handling of the Epstein files and all these other things but it seems like he only fired her because she wasn't prosecuting his and. Enemies enough that she wasn't able to you know go after them as effectively or vigorously as he wanted and that that's all he care about he didn't care about anything else that's happening at DOJ it was just how can we enact revenge and why aren't you going after these people more and. So I thought that that was interesting because you see what you know with the incompetency of like. You know Pete Hegceth where he I you know I think in any other normal White House and administration that he would have been fired over signal gate but that didn't happen and. But Pete Hegceth hasn't done anything that has upset Trump or implicated Trump personally so I think that that's kind of interesting that those are where he chose to finally you know break with these two people notably women but. I think that yeah he tried to hold off firing for as long as he could. And I think he didn't feel as much pressure when there were negative headlines like signal gate and things like that because he thought these are my people and they're loyal and I'm going to keep them on board I don't care. But I think that yeah now that we're like a little bit further into the administration I'm sure there will be other firings that will come down. I don't know if I know who that might be I mean you know maybe it will be like a a cash fatale or someone but. Someone else who seems to have kind of like upset him a little bit but I just found it interesting. I guess I guess. Bondi and no had weathered so many storms that I almost thought that they were they were in a clear but I had heard a lot of. Rumblings from people inside the administration about no in particular so I was not surprised about her firing bondi I was a little bit more surprised about actually. But no it kind of felt like it was coming because it was just so much I mean you know just that they alleged a fair with Corey Lewandowski and then the ice and you know Renee Gooden Alex pretty and then the the ad campaign that would just was absolutely ridiculous like there was just so much there so that one didn't surprise me at all actually. Yeah that's interesting he seems to dislike his support it's getting a lot of press you know doing the kinds of things he likes doing you know like getting a lot of public tax payer money to put to his own advantage but doesn't quite like it if someone is doing it. And if it gets bad fast and if you then gets kind of tarred with having signed off on it I guess that was her big sin what a couple other questions it's been so interesting. Do you buy into the Vance versus Rubio competition story to be his air and all or is that overstated and media speculation. No I think there's definitely a competition going on and I mean Trump always during the first administration. You know he's always like polling people asking like oh how do you think this person's doing do you think they're doing a good job or like what do you think of this person. And so I think there's a lot of that going on and I think he he knows that yeah those are kind of the top two contenders to be his air to the Maga throne and so I think that I think he's having a lot of those conversations and kind of testing them and I think that there are people within both camps that are trying to make their principal look the best I mean we saw that recently with a story I believe it was in the New York Times talking about Trump's decision to launch the attack on Iran and how there was the telling of Vance saying that no I don't support that support this and I don't think this is a good idea but I'll back you and I thought that that obviously looked like it was a source story coming from Vance because it made him look good when this is this unpopular war that the American people did not vote for. Trump campaigned on ending endless wars and then gets us into this war with seemingly no way out as of now and so it felt like it was a story that was planted in order to try to make JD look good and so that way he can come out on the other side you know potentially as unscathed as someone who was a vocally against the war and and so yeah that that just kind of shows me that they're trying his team and him are trying to frame him in that light and I think that. Rubio has been out there saying oh well if you know Vance is the nominee then I have no interest and all this stuff like that's bullshit that's BS everyone will all these guys want to be president so. It is complete another bullshit for him to say that he's just saying what he has to say publicly but I imagine behind the scenes that. I think there is a lot of. Things happening and I think Susie Wilds is someone who would probably want to see Rubio over Vance as well you know just with her Florida background and so I imagine she's kind of angling to to. To put Rubio in those situations where he is you know part of these big decisions and and is by Trump side and. So I think there is more to that story there of them kind of secretly battling and you know what that also reminded me of was that. That story that was what was it was it the was it time magazine where they photographed all the staffers. Yeah or some time or maybe vanity fair something like that but it was vanity fair correct I know you're talking about that yeah very staged photo and yeah. And it was reported in the story where Vance made some comment to the photographer will make me look better than Marco and it's like there's something to it I think that they know that they have a secret little competition going on. How much do you think Trump will put out into I mean JVL spent of the Trump will run again view others or just if you were much younger I actually agree with that it's maybe a little less likely if he's 81 82 on the other hand I don't rule it out. Does he have full confidence that the the the answer will be able to protect him and his family in the way that he would like you know as the air but also psychologically in this you have a good insight into. Trump put up with in 2728 with bands or Ruby or both or or five other candidates I suppose all kind of just getting the headlines as the you know as they go through the primaries and Trump is just out of it I mean I feel like he doesn't really like other people being in the center of attention you know. Yeah I think that that that's a great point I think it's going to drive him crazy when he becomes you know even more of this lame duck president or he's irrelevant people are focused on this you know what's going to be shape up to be I imagine a crazy primary. And I think that he he's going to hate that not having the attention in the spotlight. I do. I agree with JVL in the sense that that we need to be taking seriously when Trump makes these comments about running for a third term. I mean he's floated it out there so many times and it's I do think it's because he's trying to normalize it. And I think if he could he genuinely would. But I do think that there is something about his age and how I just don't know if that's feasible and possible and how maybe there will be people in the party that are you know pushed back on the idea of that and obviously you know just constitutionally pushed back on the idea of it. But like I think that they he he is going to try to find a path I think to run for a third term or I don't know like I just I think he's been out there floating it I don't think it's possible which is you know great and thank God but like I really think that if he could find a way to do it. He would try, which is a scary thought. No but that's so important and I you would and I guess it's somewhat analogous isn't it to what you must have seen after Election Day in 2020 as Trump starts well he started a little before Election Day but certainly after the whole you know pushing of the big lie and then just the relentless effort to normalize that even though there was no evidence that everyone was saying it's not the case and people in his own administration were saying it's bill bar and others not the case and as you say people in the White House knew it wasn't the case. I guess you've been through this right you've seen I mean you've seen the degree to which he's willing to to lay the groundwork for something and then try to make it happen I you know it didn't work luckily in January 6 but I would maybe it's not a good analogy but I feel like it's no no I think it is because yeah I think that it just shows that he's like I mean God he's the first president to disrupt the peaceful transfer power and so if you know if that's what and if you and if he learned anything from January 6 it was he learned his mistakes I think he's learned a lot from that process and so it does scare me at the thought of what could happen moving forward because I think he's just gotten you know the lessons learned from that and and now I think you know when you see Bannon out there also pushing this and trying to kind of put it in the just out there and normalize it it's it's a very scary thing and so I wouldn't be surprised but I don't think it will actually happen so you know it's one of those things where you're like oh this guy is falling and you know it but I do think we do need to be taking it seriously when he says these things I just don't think it will actually end up coming to fruition. But it's an important point to about taking it seriously and and you know one of the lessons he learned right is that ultimately he won the Republican nomination again as you say people forget you know how unlikely that looked in 2022 with the he's not doing so great in the polls and you know that he's gets prosecuted he survives all that one lesson he learned is that he paid no price really for January 6 2021 and if he's paid no price for that why wouldn't he try the equivalent this time if his health was good enough and if he thought there was a path there's no path there's no path if he just not up to it he's not up to it maybe he's confident enough in one of his successors that he just thinks okay enough enough but I think it is it is interesting right I mean he I think that's very good point you make about the lessons learned and and he did not learn the lesson that you shouldn't try unconstitutional or anti constitutional things. No exactly like you said he faced no accountability so it's like why wouldn't he want to try again to try to stay in power. No so a chilling note to end on but a very interesting thank you Sarah this really fascinating and we should do it again sometime and obviously people need to follow tell I'm not a big Instagram person tell me what's the best way to follow you on Instagram and and what they should um people can follow me on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter because I refuse to call it X. It's good. They can follow me on at Sarah a Matthews one. Okay great that's good to hear and people should do that I follow you on on X but I maybe I need to get on Instagram yeah I refuse to call it X to know I feel like Instagram is more for people your age but maybe I'm just being old fast. I mean I see a lot of stuff as it gets repurposed you know on on blue sky so it's you that was I see your stuff because it's in the you know our own. Our channels slack and so forth so yeah yeah. Sarah thank you for joining me today here on on Bull Work on Sunday and thank you all for joining us. Thank you.
