The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Hopes Dashed For A Ceasefire - The War Continues in Gaza

Episode Date: May 13, 2024

Forget about those marathon ceasefire talks, they aren't going anywhere.  Full scale fighting is back and it's across Gaza not just in the south.  What now?  Dr. Janice Stein is with us for her regular Monday chat about Gaza, and also about Ukraine.  Plus, we unveil this week's question of the week - what's on your mind

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. Hopes for a ceasefire in the Middle East are dashed. Look out for more war. Janice Stein, welcome to Monday. I wish I had better news for you, but it does appear that, you know, last week, a week ago at this time, we said the next seven days are critical, critical in terms of whether or not there will be a ceasefire as a result of the situation in Gaza, Israel, and with Hamas. Well, we didn't say it would happen. We said those seven days were critical.

Well, they were critical. Nothing happened. And now the fighting is back on, big time. We're going to talk to Janice Stein about that. Janice, of course, from the University of Toronto, the Munk School foreign affairs analyst, Middle East expert, conflict management expert and has been a great help to us over the last year or so in trying to cover not only this story

but the situation in Ukraine as well so we will deal with that coming up in a few moments. I wanted to mention a couple of things. Do you know who Mike Duhem is? Well, if you don't, he's the commissioner of the RCMP. He had interesting comments over the weekend, and they all fall out of this question about the safety of our politicians, kind of spurred on recently by the Liberal MP Pam Damoff, who's won three elections in a row,

has decided not to run this time, whenever the election is called, later this year or next year. She's not going to run again because she doesn't feel safe outside of her own home because she's a politician, because of the kind of contact she's had with the public, some of whom are not very pleasant about the way they deal with politicians. Anyway, Duhamel was asked, what are you going to do about this? And he actually had an interesting comment.

He says he wants the government to look at drafting a new law that would make it easier for police to pursue charges against people who threaten elected officials. It appears that whatever laws exist now that relate to anything like that aren't strong enough. So he wants new laws. Because he says often, you know, the behavior does not meet the criminal code threshold for laying a charge of

uttering threats. So that's something of a challenge. He says, and he says, but there are other tools that we can use. But are there other tools we can use? Is there anything else that we could add to the criminal code that can address the situation? Well, those are the questions he's asking, and he's looking for answers on that. So it's interesting to see that the head of the National Police Force is looking at better ways to protect those

who choose to serve the public by entering politics, no matter what party they run for. So we'll be watching that in the time ahead. The other thing I want to mention is the question of the week. Ever since January, we've had these questions of the week and a number of people have said, you know, it doesn't give me sometimes a chance to vent on particular things that are happening that I'd like to have my say about. So occasionally, once a month, once every six weeks, we open it up to this question.

What's on your mind? Okay, so what's on your mind this week? But the same rules apply. All right? Name and where you're writing from. Keep your comments short. I'm not looking for essays. They won't make it on the program. All right. So make your thoughts concise, but to the point on the issue you want to address. And we'll see which ones actually end up on the program on Thursday. So those are the things. Name, where you're writing from, keep your comments concise. All right?

And this time, I'm not going to make exceptions. If you write the long essay and say, well, please, please, read it all, it's not going to happen. Sorry, am I sounding too tough here? I don't mean to be. I just want to get as many comments on as possible under the guise of what's on your mind this week. You write to themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com.

themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. And everything has to be in before 6 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday. All right? Comes in after that, it's not going to make it. So there you go. There's your question of the week. All right. so there you go there's your question of the week all right uh let's get to uh

the main point of the monday episode of the bridge and that is our conversation with dr janice stein so uh let's get to that right now all rightice, I want to start with reading a couple of sentences out of The Guardian this morning. Because for those of us who have given up any hope of a ceasefire, at least any time in the next while, this sounded like the clincher to me and probably explains why, if true,

why the Israelis are now attacking in northern Gaza now. Here are the couple of sentences in The Guardian. And I've got to say, this is repeated in a lot of other news organizations, not just The Guardian this morning. Hamas, which seized power in Gaza in 2007, has been able to reimpose its authority in many areas of the territory in recent months we're talking about gaza here in the northern end of gaza controlling markets running islamic courts and intimidating opponents militants have used remaining tunnels to ambush israeli forces and have continued to fire rockets into israel It goes on, there's more examples, but I guess the surprise to me, at least, is that we kind of assumed that the northern part of

Gaza had all been dealt with in terms of the Israelis flushing out Hamas. This makes it sound like they're back, and while the focus is on Rafah in the south, the Israelis are now having to worry about the north as well. None of this looks like anything that is going to lead towards a ceasefire. You're right, Peter. The prospect of a ceasefire has receded. But the fact that Hamas is back and operating in northern Gaza is exactly what many of us thought, because there was no political line of sight. Israel really inflicted a defeat on Hamas.

They went underground. They withdrew their forces in January. As soon as they withdrew their forces, and that was in response to a lot of American pressure, but beyond that, it was not sustainable. They withdrew their forces. There was no police. There was no civil agency to run anything.

They made no provision for that. And that lay squarely at the feet of Netanyahu. Hamas comes back, starts to run the police force, starts to run the civilian administration. And so those reports are all accurate. And I think they underestimate the problem, if anything. Not like the Guardian, but they do. Because there will be an insurgency in addition to the fact that you have Hamas, the only organized force in Gaza.

There will be an insurgency against any forces that come back. Which is, again, wholly consistent with the predictions that without a strategy, Israel would not be able to defeat Hamas. I still don't understand how this in seven to 14 days, the last seven or 14 days, has gone from what looked like the very real possibility of a ceasefire now to we're just looking at a situation where we're back to square one the fighting is all in all on and um netanyahu certainly isn't backing off in spite of you know pressure from the states

pressure from egypt and we'll get to that in a minute um but uh you know seemingly for two reasons one he's trying to keep his right wing um compatriots happy within the israeli parliament and two he's trying to keep himself out of jail both of those things are true and both of, this was a conflicted prime minister. You and I have been talking about this for weeks, frankly, that he has no political incentive to end this war. In fact, it works the other way. As we both said, nothing's changed there. Let's go back just five to seven days ago when you and I last talked, and we said

this was make it or break it time. Either those ceasefire talks were going to go, or there was going to be an escalation. And you can't sustain that kind of impasse forever. And it looks like Seymour also said no to those talks today. And the reason for the no on his part is he wants this avalanche of criticism that has descended on Israel, both at home internationally and on the ground. He wants the war to continue because from his perspective

there is one way and one way only to destroy israel is to keep this war going for as long as he can because he believes israel is losing and it is well let me ask that point. First of all, Sinwar, the Palestinian military leader who's inside Gaza, big profile on him in the New York Times over the last 24 hours. So they're catching up with you, Janice, as you've been talking about him for some time. But on this win or lose situation, I know a lot of people have different views on this and i sure do and i and i respect them all um but looking at this

on the straight up side of what's happened in the last seven months you've got to be thinking that hamas is winning this war. They're certainly winning it on the PR front. There's no question. Peter, look, you have to look at this tactically on the ground, and then you look at the bigger picture, the strategic picture. Tactically, we've just talked about the fact that the Israelis have had to go back into northern Gaza now three times, three times. And it's the same story over and over. They subdue the militants. They leave. As soon as they leave, the local insurgency starts. Bigger picture. Relationships between the United States and Israel are at their lowest ebb ever. have been controversies before. There was an icy controversy when Secretary Baker was Secretary of State. But this, I think, is the toughest sled. And something you just mentioned, the relationship with Egypt, which is key, it is the cornerstone of no all-out war in that part of the world, is now fracturing over RAFA. If you think of strategic loss and tactical loss and domestic turbulence,

you have to say that SINWAR's, frankly, pathological strategy is working. Well, if you're sitting in the Israeli prime minister's office, what is the endgame here? If this prime minister or any prime minister. This prime minister. As long as he's, how many times can you count this guy out? He's still there. Yeah.

I think he has to keep his coalition together, number one. He doesn't trust the opposition to the center to make a deal, because there is a deal there to be had if there were better relationships. But he's betrayed them so often. They don't trust him. He doesn't trust them. You keep this coalition off. You delude yourself that there is a victory over Hamas and Rafah, which I don't believe and never have believed.

The only mild ray of optimism in this whole story, Peter, because everything reaches a point where it either gets worse or it gets better, he's going to run out of time. The Israeli army will do what it can in Rafah. And Sinwar is apparently not there. There is an astonishing story, these last 48 hours, about the United States offering to share intelligence with Israel about where Sinwar is hiding. Well, if they've had that intelligence, it's inconceivable that they didn't give it to the Israelis beforehand. But then they leaked it, and they're saying he's not under the tunnels in Rafah.

He's under the tunnels in Han Yunis. Then what is the point of any further military action in Rafah? There isn't. There's no point because those alleged four battalions of Hamas fighters, which everybody is focused on, they're going to behave exactly like the Hamas fighters did in northern Gaza. They're going to melt away. Once the fighting gets fiercer, they will hide among the population. When the Israeli army and the IDF withdraws, they'll reemerge.

So Netanyahu is going to run out of operations that he can say to the Israeli public, he's going to end this war. This is the last one. After that, we're into a long-run insurgency, or they agree, frankly, to a ceasefire, which ends the war. That's in war's terms. Let's understand. Has Netanyahu said anything about what he sees for Gaza if, in fact, his military operation succeeds?

The Gaza after Hamas. Did we have any idea what he's thinking? That is the right question. And he's offered the thinnest possible story that you can imagine, right? No Palestinian authority, because that's corrupt. And it has, you know, there's no question there are textbooks that the Palestinian Authority has issued. This is not a new story, which, you know, include material that calls

for continuing resistance to Israeli occupation. That is not a new story. So what's the story he's telling? A government of Gazan families, led by Gazan notable families, civilians, unconnected to the Palestine Authority, not on the Palestine Authority payroll, which would then be supported by a peacekeeping force of the UAE, the Emirates, and Saudi Arabia and others that might join. What's wrong with this story, one might ask? Well, the Gazan families, who are longstanding pillars of Gazan society, they've been there for generations,

are not going to risk their lives to take those kinds of roles. And the Saudis and the Emiratis and now the Egyptians have made absolutely clear they're not going to go in as long as they put it on the backs of the IDF occupation. So the two key components for Gaza the day after in Netanyahu's story are fictional. They're not going to happen. I can't put it any more bluntly than that.

And that's pretty blunt. You know, obviously public opinion has some role in all this, but even that on the Israeli side, you side, it's conflicting as to what to believe, because on the one hand, you've got these huge crowds demonstrating for the release of the hostages and demanding that Netanyahu agree to a ceasefire, bring the hostages home, that he should quit, he should get out. I mean, and these are big numbers in terms of the demonstrations.

On the other hand, we're continually told that he has overwhelming support to continue the war. No, that's not, there's no question that's not accurate. Which one's not accurate? The overwhelming support to continue the war, right? They want, the overwhelming demand right now the war okay right they want the overwhelming the demand right now is for a ceasefire everybody wants it's 75 which is you know in terms of a divided israeli public i've never seen numbers like this they want the hostages released so

this is we it all hinges on the only way to get the hostages back is a permanent ceasefire. Those are the talks that blew up just before Israel went into Rafah and they'll come back. I know you've said you've given up hope and I don't blame you, but those terms and conditions will come back and Israelis want the hostages back. That is want the hostages back. That is their number one priority. Do they want them to continue the fight with Hamas? Yes.

Are they totally opposed to leaving Hamas in Gaza? Yes. Because so many of them are so badly traumatized. You know, every second family in Israel has somebody. By now, they either was a hostage, died in this war. So it really infuses the whole society. And I think that's probably the untold story here, Peter, of how fragile Israelis feel as the situation continues and they watch what's happening in the world.

It's reinforcing that sense of vulnerability and fragility among the population. But it's not only the people in the streets. 75% of people want him gone and want the hostages back. The day after, the right question in Israel is, in Gaza, it's the day after the fighting stops. In Israel, what happens the day after

the hostages come back? So I still don't get how, if those numbers, the way you tell the story in terms of public opinion, those are the numbers that exist. How can he maintain his position? I understand the whole thing about the coalition. But, I mean, there are a lot of members there. Nobody can say, you know, I'm breaking down any support for him from his own party or the coalition parties, because they don't need many. Well, he's hanging on by what?

A couple of four votes. You need five members of his own party to cross to Benny Gantz. That's all you need. The other two coalition parties, you know, the groups of the religious and the ultra-nationalists are going to stay. For sure the ultra-nationalists are not going to do this because once this coalition breaks up, there's no road back to them for power. Politics moves to the center.

So nothing will force them. The only reason they will leave is if he agrees to a ceasefire, then ends the war, then they will leave. But short of that, nothing will. So this comes down to what it has to meaning five or six more moderate members of his own party looking at the damage, right? The damage on the ground and international damage and the rupturing of these relationships, which could take years to restore, frankly, if ever to undo the damage

that has been done by this war. Five of them have to put their country ahead of their politics. All right. Last question. If Benny Gantz was prime minister, what would happen? If Benny Gantz was prime minister, first of all, there would be a better relationship with the United States, because you ask why Netanyahu is prepared to absorb this kind of damage. He's thinking about the next election, Peter. That's his number one priority for him. He's going to run on. I stood up alone and defied the United States. When they wanted to force it into this war, I stood up and defied the United States. Benny Gantz would not do this. Benny Gantz is not a supporter of an independent Palestinian state. But I think there would be a day after plan

because he understands as a military, this is who he is, he's a military man and Netanyahu is not. He understands that the current situation where you fight and you withdraw is a made to measure recipe for an ongoing insurgency, which is what this will become if there's no ceasefire. Okay.

Let's take a break. That's hard to digest. Let's take a break, come back on Russia, Ukraine, which has interesting moments this week too. And also a quick, what are we missing from you? So right back after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Monday episode with Dr. Janice Stein

from the University of Toronto, the Munk School. We've dealt with the Middle East as best we can. You know the Middle East deals with us, Peter. We don't deal with the Middle East, right? That's true. Absolutely. Well, so we'll move on to another one as it twists and turns. And that is, of course, the Ukraine situation, the Russia-Ukraine situation.

Yesterday, Vladimir Putin shuffles his cabinet. And for months, it's been assumed that the defense minister, the guy who's run the Russian side of this war, Shoigu was going to get the hook. And somehow he survived. He survived through the whole mess with Bogosian. And here he is now being shuffled out. It's not like he's been shuffled to, I don't know, Treasury Board. He's been shuffled to being the big spy man.

But he's been shuffled out of defense, which is the headline, which is interesting at a time when Russia seems to have the advantage and is planning some kind of spring offensive. It must be past spring there already i mean it's even spring here and uh well past spring in northern scotland where i am today um anyway what do you make of this the shuffle that happened here it's a big story this is a big story um the what this is about is mobilizing the Russian economy for a long term. This is all about the defense industrial base. And what a blow that is going to be ultimately to the Russian economy too, Peter.

It's about converting it to a long time war footing. There were stories about corruption inside, not only the Russian military, but all the suppliers who are doing extremely well in this economy, the defense contractors who have stood up and are manufacturing those artillery shells that Ukraine wishes that it could get its hands on, and more broadly. So what this is a signal, Russia is in this for the long haul. But Lutsov, the new Minister of Defense, he's an economist.

Just think about that one. He's an economist by profession. That's what he does, right? That tells you everything. This is about restructuring the Russian economy, converting it into an industrial machine that will produce drones, ammunition, artillery, missiles,

the equipment that the Russian army needs to keep this war running and to deal with corruption. The old, old Russian story, to deal with the corruption. That's where Belusov is well known. Shoigu is moved, as you just put it. He is chief spy. And Putin took out one of his most loyal, all-time friends.

I think everybody remembers the day that the war started, and Putin was asking his ministers for advice. It was all staged for the camera, and Patricia misspoke, and Putin humiliated him in front of everybody else. And he just took it, frankly, as anybody who works for Vladimir Putin does. He takes care of his friends, but here, his old, loyal senior spy who knows everything about everybody that's always at risk, Peter, in any society, has moved to an unspecified job. This is about Russia on a permanent wartime economy

along with the week in which he threatened he might use tactical nuclear weapons in response to a story that you've been following, Macron and Cameron's musings that NATO might get involved on the periphery of the conflict. This is a Russia back with its sights on not only on Ukraine, but on the NATO member states and border Russia. Well, you know, Russia is back in a way with Putin having, you know, kind of clear reign over things at the moment. You know, he seems to have the upper hand on Ukraine.

We'll see how long that lasts. But he definitely has the upper hand with the Americans because Biden is so fixated on the Middle East. Yeah. And so is the American, basically, the news agenda when it's not dealing with trials in New York. It's dealing with the Middle East situation, and it's not talking about Russia and Ukraine anymore.

I can't remember the last time I saw a Russia-Ukraine story on the American news. I mean, it's so focused on these other two issues, which gives Putin kind of free reign on that. It does. It does. And it's actually amazing, Peter, because we actually look at it. The Russia-Ukraine story is a bigger story with much longer-term strategic implications for Europe and for the American relationship with the resurgent Russia.

You'd think that would get at least equal billing, but you're right. The Middle East is always on the front page of every newspaper. What you do read about Ukraine and hear about Ukraine is also not encouraging. The bottom line story here, you said spring offensive. We're getting to June, but the Russians are clearly gearing up. There is already a push in the northern part of Ukraine, so that the city of Kharkiv is threatened. But even the most optimistic analysis now, which takes on board just what the $64 billion worth of military assistance is going into Ukraine, will do recognize that there's not much chance of a major Ukrainian counteroffensive.

So this is now positioning Ukraine to hold the lines for as long as possible until there can be ceasefire discussions between Russia and Ukraine. That's a very sobering story for Ukraine in comparison to last summer. And this move is designed to ratchet up the pressure. Well, I'll tell you where pressure is being felt. It's being felt here in the UK. Now, I know there's an election coming, and it's coming you know very soon uh and so some of the rhetoric that gets uh gets thrown out there in the on the campaign trail can get pretty uh can get pretty heated is the right word but today

russi sunak the british prime minister um gave a speech uh where he's kind of setting the agenda for the next five years now this is a guy who's down you know so far down in the polls he's got to look up to see how down trudeau is in canada but sunak has given a speech where he's basically saying that britain is facing the most dangerous five years uh in a long time and that every aspect of our lives is going to change over these next five years. So, of course, he's trying to argue that he's the right guy for it, the right guy for continued leadership.

But here's what he says in this. He says, I'm just trying to find the section of the speech. Basically, you know, he worries about Russia. He worries about the immigration story. He worries about artificial intelligence. He combines all of these to say, you know, your lives are going to change considerably over the next five years, and we're the only party that's ready for it.

But the picture he's painting is yet another one of these pictures that's coming out of the European theater about a world that has changed rapidly, and much of that change is a result of the threat from Russia and to a degree China as well. So that picture is being painted kind of uniformly across Western Europe by parties of different ideologies and different stripes. And that's why this is a big story, Peter, because the sense of threat by Europeans is growing, and the sense of fragility and vulnerability is growing.

I think that's exaggerated. I think the Russian threat is exaggerated. It is a mortal threat to Ukraine, Russia, mortal. There's no question Putin, as soon as he can, would swallow up Ukraine. But I don't think even he, as deluded as he is, even he believes that Russia will have the capacity to move far beyond those core borders of what he's called Greater Russia. So that's Belarus, Ukraine, you know, Moldova, you might argue. But that's much more limited than what the British and the French are. But the British and the French are really feeling it. They're seeing a Russia that's

going to change its economy to a wartime economy that is spending. One of the reasons the ruble is doing so well, Peter, and one of the reasons there's employment in Russia, he's doing what FDR did, right? He's

converting the whole economy to industrial manufacturing and military equipment. Now, there's a price to pay down the road for that. There's going to be terrible inflation inside Russia. They are using all their reserves. There is a big price to pay for what Vladimir Putin is doing, but it's down the road two or three years. And in the meantime, Europeans, we are coming up

here, we'll have to remember to mark this one, on the 75th anniversary of NATO this July. 75 years in which Europeans and North Americans came together to guarantee their collective defense against the then Soviet Union. That mood is back. Now, you're right that there's electoral politics in France, there's electoral politics in the UK.

There's always some hype around that. But that fear of two things, of a Russia that's reorganizing itself and the United States over the pond, distracted, turning inward, not willing to play the same role that it did 75 years ago. All right. Let's move to something that may be a little less overwhelming, and that is what are we missing this week? Tell me about it. Well, you know, I try to look for good news stories. I tried really hard, Peter. I could not find one this week. So there is a story that we're missing, which is Kuwait, which people will remember from the 1990s when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. It is also one of the oil-rich countries, but it has an interesting tradition. It's always had an advisory council, which then became what they call a parliament. And who's in the parliament? It doesn't look anything like ours. It is old, established Kuwaiti families. You know, accurately you could describe this as tribal politics because there

are long-standing tribes. It's not the negative sense of that word. And they've always been able to constrain to some degree the emirate. So it's a form of democracy that doesn't look like ours, but it's local. It reflects the way societies work. They have to approve the budget. That's not nothing in politics, as we know. And this group has one other power that it has exercised. You approve the crown prince. These tribal leaders have to come together and approve the crown prince.

That's a big one. And in Kuwait, the current emir is 83 years old, and it's still vacant. There is no crown prince named. Well, there's been struggles for the last three or four years to get this done. And so this past weekend, the emir suspended parliament after elections for four years. Elections take place so usually once every four years. Parliament was just suspended for the last four years. And he and his advisors will take over all the functions of Parliament. It will not be long before Crown Prince is named. And I look at that, and I think, oh, my goodness, the last kind of spark of institutional independence, a longstanding tradition. You know, it's interesting that Kuwait is, you know, most people had never heard of it before that invasion.

Yeah. You know, Saddam Hussein trying to claim the 19th province. It wasn't that the term he used? He said, it really belongs to us. Which led to the first Gulf War. Now, keep remembering where this was positioned. This was shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall, about a year or so later.

And our world at that point looked like, whoa, the good times are here. The fall of communism in Eastern Europe, you know, things are relatively quiet in the Middle East. This is going to be a lot easier now moving forward. The good times were here. Well, it led to the first Gulf War, which led to the second Gulf War, which led to as a result of 9-11, you know, and then Afghanistan, then

Iraq, the Middle East, you know, as we've seen in the last six months is up again. So all of those great hopes and dreams in the early 90s just haven't delivered. No, they have not. And you and I have talked about the Arab Spring. When, again, there was hope for, you know, standing up institutions. Peter, one of the ways I think the conversation went off track was when we in North America and Europe talk about democracy, we think democracy everywhere has to look like our institutions.

It doesn't. There are local political traditions in every country. And Kuwait was one of those which, around all the noise, nevertheless managed to have a form of political institutions which held the emir falsely accountable on budget and on succession. So it is not a good story when the last of these, frankly, disappears. I have to try harder next week for a good news story. I know you'll find one somewhere.

All right, Janice. next week for a new story. I know you'll find one somewhere. All right, Janice, another fascinating conversation. It wasn't a conversation I thought we were going to be having this week. No. I was really hopeful that we were heading somewhere.

So who knows? I may be surprised this week. We'll see. Thank you for this. We'll talk to you again in seven days may be surprised this week. We'll see. Thank you for this. We'll talk to you again in seven days. See you next week. Well, there you go. Jana Stein with another one of those conversations that can be so frustrating at times, right?

She's guiding us through this. But boy, oh boy, some weeks it just seems like an impossible situation. Janice will be back next Monday. What have we got time? We got time for a couple of things. One, an end bit that I find this one fascinating. Listen up, university students who are looking for a summer job. Take a hint from this fellow, Alex Eisler.

He's a sophomore at Brown University in Rhode Island. Saw this on NBCNews.com. What do you think he does for the summer? Well, he actually doesn't do it just for the summer. He does it all year round, but delivers him a great summer. You know, some college students, they work in, you know, the school cafeteria or the local coffee shop, what have you. Not Alex. You know what he does? He sells reservations at top New York City restaurants. And he's selling them for hundreds of dollars.

He gets up early in the morning. You know, he goes online to restaurants where there are reservations available and he books them. And then he sells them later in the day um and he makes well let's just say he makes a lot of money he made over a hundred thousand dollars last year well a little more than a year 19 months a hundred thousand dollars selling reservations that he grabbed online. Well, apparently there's more than a few people like him entering platforms

like Appointments Trader. I think it's, well, ingenuity on his part and others who are doing the same thing. You might call it, well, some restaurants don't like it at all. But, hey, they're filling their seats and Alex is making a buck. All right, there's your end bit. More on NBCNews.com if you're looking for it. That's the headline. Reservations at top New York City restaurants are selling for hundreds of dollars.

Tomorrow, Keith Bogue is with us for one of his regular visits. He's been dropping in a few times already this year. I don't know roughly every month six weeks or so uh to talk about the u.s election situation and obviously all the focus these days is on the trial we're going to try and get away from the trial to talk a little bit it might be hard tomorrow because with michael cohen on the today, but we want to try and talk about the stuff that's impacting, really appears to be impacting the U.S. presidential race. And so we'll do our regular check-in with Keith tomorrow,

right here on the bridge. Wednesday is the Encore Edition. Thursday, I've already told you, your turn. What's on your mind? Get your short entry in for that question. Name, location you're writing from. Get it in before 6 o'clock, 6 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com.

That's where to write. That's it for this day. Thanks so much for listening. We'll talk to you again in, well, about 24 hours.