The Daily Beast Podcast - Epstein's Warning About Trump is Coming True: Wolff

Episode Date: December 3, 2025

Michael Wolff joins Joanna Coles to unpack the widening sense inside Trumpworld that the operation is slipping into pure incompetence. From Pete Hegseth’s troubling battlefield lore to Keystone Kash Patel’s chaos, Wolff charts a mood shift that even Murdoch-world can’t quite hide. Wolff outlines how Jeffrey Epstein once warned that Trump would misuse his pardon power, as evinced by Trump’s pardon of Honduran ex-president and cocaine trafficker Juan Orlando Hernández. Joanna presses the central question of the hour: Is this the moment when Trump’s own allies decide the circus has finally become a liability? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's a funny thing that Jeffrey Epstein had a riff about this. He would talk about if Donald became president and the pardon power. Because Trump talked about this, his kind of wide eye incredulity, I can pardon anyone. No one can do anything about it. Epstein had focused on this and said he loves showing the power that he has. And he said he would do it in a childlike way. Michael. Joanna.

Different color. I mean tobacco. You've got tobacco pants on. I've got a tobacco jacket. Yeah, no. It's green maybe for Christmas, although I hadn't thought it about that. Okay. And I would take it off if I had thought about that. But anyway, it's here. Okay, well, I like it. And I'm wearing a Kurt-File t-shirt that a reader or a viewer sent us. Sent me, actually, not you. They sent it to me. Really? You get T-shirts in the mail?

Well, I'm very pleased. Thank you, Maria, for sending me the curfile. vile t-shirt, which I thought goes rather well with my tobacco jacket. Okay, lots of comments this week saying people don't believe you have never had a McDonald's. You know, I don't know what I can say. I don't exactly know how to prove that, but I have a further point about myself that would support this and is perhaps even more shocking. I can't wait to hear this. Okay, go forth.

What is it? I don't know how to drive a car. I don't have a driver's license. I know. It's really, I find crazy that you live in the house. Hamptons and you don't have a car. Well, I was never meant to live in the Hamptons. So I have lived virtually my entire adult life, certainly in Manhattan, where it never having a car, never even crossed my mind. Then of late, since I live in the Hamptons, it's a, it's a little bit of a

Why don't you just learn to drive? Cows are so easy to drive. Sort of, I got caught up short. Oh, How do you get from here? But I do live in the center of Amygansit. So I can walk to, well, there's only two things I need to walk to. Go on. A cup of coffee and the fish store. Well, and the bus stop to get into the city. No, and the bus stop is four minutes away.

Yes. So I'm, and the beach is a short walk away. Well, actually, I would say that cars have gotten much easier. to drive now. So I would recommend it even at your advanced stage to learn to drive a car. But look at it this way. You have to have what is

in this game that we're in? What game are we in? The game of life? Not the game of life. The game of the writing game. You need a perspective. Everybody has the perspective from the car.

Very few people have a perspective not from the car who don't know how to drive, a passenger's perspective. I've never heard that's nonsense. It's a bit like, can you ski? Of course not. Okay. I think learning to drive is like learning to ski as an adult.

It's hard-ish. It's not going to happen. We don't even have to have this conversation. Not going to happen. Okay, but what you're not saying is you actually have a wife who drives you around. And I bet she's a very good driver. She seems to be a very good driver. But this is only in the most recent time in my life when I do need anyone to drive me around.

Because having occupied, I mean, never, I can count the days I've been out of Manhattan in my life. I think the funniest idea is you sitting in the passenger seat just sort of looking around. It's just so funny. I like driving. I love driving. The other thing is, and it's the most important thing, is, is the most important thing, I hate being in a car. I hate the idea. I hate the traffic. I hate the traffic. I hate the Hamptons is all about traffic for three months of the year. Except not my Hamptons. You live in the

center of town. It's like an old-fashioned town. You live in an old-fashioned village. You walk almost anywhere you need to be. And the only time you have to get on the road is in fact when you have to get on the jitney to come in to see you. Okay. You're literally sound. like a Rockwell portrait come to life. That's, that's me, an old-fashioned American. Okay, before we say anything, God knows we have a lot to get to today, not least, Hegsworth, Cash Patel, you name it. Just want to remind people, we are going to be live. Live.

Live. Joanna and Michael, live. At the 92nd Street, Street, Y, on January the 21st. So get your tickets now. and you go to 92ny.org to come and see us live January the 21st. And the 92nd Street, Y, is great. I've played it a couple of times and it's a really good space, a good audience. All right. I just want to point out one thing that I think is glorious today.

Melania, your friend, and we'll get to some more questions for Melania later in the pod. Melania has released her Christmas. what do we call it, Christmas display in the White House, and she has a Be Best Borgle. I think we should all get Be Best Borgles for Christmas this year. I'm going to produce, and I have to go look for it, where Be Best comes from. Yeah, where does it come from?

Because it comes from an advertising campaign that she did in her model years. I use the word loosely model years. Yeah. And I will get it. be something campaign. I have to unearth this, but we'll get to it. Well, I'm surprised they're not actually selling me. I mean, so she didn't make this up.

Okay. All right. She copied it, is what you're saying. It's stuck in her memory. Yes, and copies. Remember when she copied Michelle Obama's speech? I do remember, yes. Yes. I mean, there is so much about these people in this White House that is just, It's just, you can't, you wouldn't make this up. I'm going to, I'm the first lady, so I'm going to plagiarise the last first lady's speech. I bet she didn't know that's what was going on. I bet one of her advisors did that and thought nobody will notice.

How would you think that? How would you? Well, an inexperienced person would think that, right? Someone who'd never done this before would think that. But listen, Melania, if you're thinking of selling those Be Best bobbles, we will buy some and send them out to our Bee Beast tier of subscribers. our membership crew. We've got some newbie beast names to read out as well at the end of this. All right, but the truth is we've got we've got very important things to do. We've got to get through Pete Higgs-eth, what's going to happen to him? We've got to get through Cash Patel.

We've got to get through Alina Harbour, Lindsay Halligan, the pardoning of Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was jailed for 45 years, 500 tons. A lot of cocaine in America. And then we have to get to the fact that I think Trump is not going to build a ballroom in the East Wing. He's going to build a fucking convention center. He's building a convention center. That thing is getting bigger and bigger by the day. And the architects had enough. Anyway, let's start with Pete Hegseth because I'm not feeling confident about his future.

Well, let's go back. And I think that this goes. We can go back to Melania and her stolen speech that nobody knows what they're doing. And we forget this point. You know, I mean, this has been such an aggressively active year for Donald Trump. Right. That we forget the fact that underneath this, that this is all just skin deep. And underneath it is a wealth, a well of incompetence, the likes of which we have never seen.

Okay. So we've got Pete Hegg, Seth, or is a, I like to call him American doll at the Department of War. Okay, so he has. Overseeing warrior culture. Yes, what he has. And he has, it is, I shouldn't be laughing here because this is horrible. But so he is bombing these small boats, which are said to be involved in drug trafficking.

They may or may not be. He has killed so far, I think, 80 people. Correct. These are drone flights and they just blow them out of the water, these small boats. But then the Washington Post had a piece in which Pete Hegsith has purportedly said, we don't want anyone left alive. So they bombed the boat and then the people, the few people left who were hanging onto the wreckage. They go back and they kill them.

Now, that is patently a war crime. Right. But which Republicans are acknowledging too, right, which is interesting. Exactly. Because the other thing about virtually everyone in Washington, Republicans or Democrats, who very clearly understand. I mean, you're not going to find anyone who in their, in the privacy of their, wide circle of immediate friends is not going to say Pete Hegsith is a moron. I mean, Pete Hegseth is a joke.

The former Saturday co-host of a Fox TV show. There is nobody. I mean, this is a man who has no support within Washington, D.C., within the Republican Party. I mean, he has, or his support is the support of one, which is Donald Trump. Which appears to be wavering slightly. I mean, Donald Trump is suddenly distancing himself. Maybe. I mean, I always think, I always find that actually when somebody is one of his people is up against it, that's actually a way to keep your job because he doubles down,

because he never, there is his, his, not only his instinct, but his policy is to do exactly the opposite of what he is being. forced to do. Except that I think this time might be a little bit different because Hexeth is being, well, the Armed Services Committee, the House Armed Services Committee is setting up a report or an investigation into this and Trump ominously said that he would not have done this. No, no, I, I, I, yes. I mean, I, and it was very lethal. And it's all reasonable. So, so, I mean, let's see if he doubles down on this. Because otherwise, Pete Hegseth is finished, is toast, ought to be. All right. I've got the exact quote here. Trump says, I would not have wanted that. The first strike was very lethal. It was fine. To me, that's Trump distancing himself because he knows the potential real

trouble here. I mean, this is also, you know, Republicans. That's a more. reasonable Donald Trump than I am acquainted with. Well, but Trump is, its instinct is always to save his skin. So he doesn't want to be blamed for this, right? But that's a misunderstanding. The way he saves his skin is to double down on anybody who is attacking him at any point. And he is. It's very hard for to interpret an attack on Pete Hegsseth as not being an attack on Donald

Trump. Donald Trump is the person who put this absolute complete incompetent moron without any experience whatsoever into this job. You're not going to be able to hang that on anybody else. Well, except that Donald Trump's only instinct is self-protection. And if this gets to the point where we've now got Republicans emboldened, I think, by the Thomas Massey and the women that came out in support of releasing the Epstein files. You've now got Republicans coming out and saying, we need to look into this. This could be a war crime. It's not a question. If Donald Trump has to decide between himself and anyone else, he obviously decides. But I'm saying this whole structure of protection of the way he defends himself of his, of his, of this illusion of indominability is not giving in ever.

Never say you're wrong. Never apologize. That is the entire Donald Trump strategy. So, yes, he could be, he, it is possible, as with these Epstein files, he could be forced into a corner. And that would be yet more evidence. of the weakening in his Republican Party base. And that's the interesting trend.

And I guess we'll see if that happens. Well, and I think there's more signaling coming out today. In the New York Post, the columnist Miranda Devine has a piece on Cash Patel. Cash Patel, we know, has come under withering criticisms. Donald Trump has stuck with him. But this seems to be very much a piece aimed at Trump. It's in the print edition of the New York Post, which we know he loves to read. And it's really saying that Cash Patel is also utterly incompetent.

Well, but look at the – yes, totally. And I want to get to that. But I just want to keep in mind the broader narrative here, which is that never before in the history of the American presidency have there been so many inexperienced people. This is nice. They're not just inexperienced. They're complete fools put into the highest ranking jobs in government. And obviously Pete Higseth is one of these people.

It's like, oh, my God, in what world could that have happened? And then followed by Cash Patel, even greater, in what world could that have happened? So we are seeing potentially this unraveling here and potentially a reinvention of this narrative. So the narrative was before he can appoint anybody he wants because he's Donald Trump, because we can no longer apply the reasons of the rules of government or the reason underlying government. to Donald Trump because he has his own. He sees something that nobody else sees. I mean, this has been basically the Republican point of view.

This might look like cockamamie stuff, but nevertheless, it's Donald Trump and somehow he pulls it off. Okay, I think maybe we're seeing the opposite of that now. We're saying, oh, my God, from Republicans, These people truly are not only out of their depth, but fools at a level that nobody can justify. And there was a very good interview that in the economist with John Bolton where he said, when asked, you know, or when it was pointed out to him that everybody in Washington is frightened, he said, yes, they are. and you know, what you have to remember is Donald Trump is not Julius Caesar, and the only way to deal with the intimidation is to stand up to it, which is what he's done. Of course, he's now been indicted. And so he's going through that whole process. But this is not. I mean, the flaw, I mean, it's perfectly true. The flaw with that is that that is really about one person standing up. And it's Washington, D.C. One person doesn't stand up or if they do, they get indicted.

what you need is is the party itself to stand up. So somewhere in in the engine room of a, of a, of a party's self-interest and consciousness has to arise a, you know, a consensus that says, this can't go on anymore. And I don't, I don't yet see that. But it may be it's there. It feels like there are the green shoots of that. You've got Marjorie Taylor Green resigning, you've got the unanimous vote, bar one, to release the Epstein files. And now you've got several Republicans coming out and questioning Pete Hagerth and saying, we need an inquiry into this on both the Senate Armed Committee, Armed Services Committee and the House. Absolutely. I mean, it's there. Let's see if it lasts for more than a week, although there's a

couple of others, too. But you know what's going to hasten it, I think, is the fact that today, we're recording this on a Monday, is the day that the health care, that people enroll for Obamacare again, and they see what their health care premiums have gone on. Well, listen, I mean, it may be, we are at that, and we've discussed this before, that we're at that inflection point, and things are because of lame duck status, because of this well of incompetence that is now bubbling up, that the next three years are going to be catastrophic for Donald Trump. I mean, we'll see. And the off-cycle election results at the beginning of November.

Right. And we have a year now, and that will play out. I mean, this is all playing toward the midterms. But we have a couple other characters. Let's not forget in this march of the utter incompetence. We have the Court of Appeals found that Alina Habo, Remember our old friend Alina Haba has been dinged. They said, you know, she was basically appointed to her job as the U.S. attorney in New Jersey.

I'm from New Jersey. The U.S. attorney in New Jersey illegally. And so she's been pushed. The appeals court says she's not the U.S. attorney, which means that anything she's done as the U.S. attorney is essentially illegitial. legitimate. So now this will go to the Supreme Court, and that's another story. But we have a whole set of these people, these incompetence who Trump has put into U.S. attorney slots around the country. Lindsay Halligan. Our other old friend, Lindsay Halligan, who also had the same thing. The court last week, was it? Yes. Who knows? Yeah, last week. Yes. Found that she is not, she does not

legitimately hold this job. And again, both in Alina Haba and Lindsay Halligan, and remember, these are the two women who somehow actually went to law school, but with scant legal careers, who then Trump recruited onto his legal staff. He met Alina Haba at his country club. a fixture, yes, New Jersey Country Club. She was a fixture around his, around the pool there. So he hired her as one of his personal attorneys. Lindsay Halligan, I think he met her at the golf golf club in Palm Beach, hired her. And then he would go around proudly saying to people during the campaign, I may not have the best legal team, but I have the hottest. and then show the pictures of Lindsey Halligan and Alina Haba heads together on his iPhone. So these are two women who have absolutely no qualifications and could not survive the normal process of being approved for these jobs.

Well, and just to go back to Miranda Devine's piece in The New York Post, she also singed. out Dan Bongino the number two to Cash Patel at the FBI and says he's utterly incompetent too. And then there's an interesting anecdote where Dan Bongino has in fact had to call another member of the FBI who's been yelled out by Cash Patel in an expletive laden tirade to apologize for Cash Patel. I don't think this looks good for either. Miranda Devine, who's a columnist for the New York Post, which is all, it's a thing apart from all other columnists and journalists. I mean, she's a New York Post Murdoch apparachek. But she is, that would be, if she's writing this, this is coming from somewhere in the Trump administration,

but also with the approval of the Murdoch organization. So this is a... Is this a sign to Trump? Yes, this is. And this is something, you can read into this that something is happening here, that there is internal Trump opposition that is expressing itself. We're trying to express itself. Okay, that is interesting.

All right. In a string of unfathomable pardons of Juan Orlando Hernandez, who is, I'm testing you here. Which country was he the president of? He's the former president of Honduras and a noted drug smuggler. A noted drug smuggler. I think responsible for... Actually, one of the great drug smugglers of our time. Of our time.

And our time has had a lot of great drug smugglers. And a specific drug, a specific drug, largely cocaine. It was a gobsmacking amount. It was a lot of cocaine. It was a lot of cocaine. Okay, Michael, Michael, be quiet. going to take a break for our advertisers. And we are back.

There are two issues here. The rolling issue of Trump and his propensity to pardon any wealthy criminal. And then why this particular wealthy criminal? Because it's worth pointing out he got 45 years sentenced by Merrick Gar. brought to justice by Merrick Garland, big case, 45 years and an eight million dollar fine. Let's go back though, because I want to trace this through and see if we can intersect with this really exceptional. Among all the exceptional, exceptional pardons, this one seems to possibly stand out. I don't think it stands out, but it's symbolic of the rest of them.

Maybe it's not. I don't know. I think it really does stand out. I mean, most of the other ones are, you know, you have a lot of white-collar criminals. They stole money. They made money. And they, you know, and they kind of vaguely move in somewhere in the Trump orbit. This is not a white-collar crime. This is a criminal who is not only an egregious drug smuggler in a, but it's an administration that has, that has,

that's full of pride about its ability to stop drug smuggling. Right. Okay. But anyway, the whole, the pardon thing. And just to explain how that works again, which I think is important, is that pardons come to Donald Trump through a process, which is, do you have, can you, the person who wants a pardon, carve a path to Donald Trump's influence. So, and that really involves knowing people who know Trump or knowing, knowing people who know

Trump with an amount of money, there are no free pardons here. Right. With an amount of money that has been passed along the line, you've hired someone to represent you to Donald Trump or to represent you to people who can represent you to Donald Trump. And that filters up in a relatively random way. In other administrations, pardons are a very organized process because no one wants to be accused of pardoning people showing favoritism or. Well, no one wants to be accused of putting criminals back out on the street. All of that. Although he is not actually in other administrations, they actual pardon, you know, they pardon people who have may have been gone to jail and there would be some extening reason.

Right. Or low level drug offenses, right, where people are not thought to be violent. There's some anomaly in the process or in their conviction. In the case of Trump's part, that's seldom the case. These people have done the deed. And Trump has decided for a variety of reasons. It was a political prosecution, some fig leaf rationale. And the real reason is that these people become part of his structural support base. And that means as part of the part of.

of that, they're paying other people who are part of his structural support base. And I feel, I mean, we've had Liz Oyer, who was the Biden administration's pardon attorney on the podcast, on the Daily Beast podcast, two or three times at this point. And she says that so much of this is going under the radar because there are so many other bigger stories. But it's more than a billion dollars that Trump has sort of excused white-collar criminals of. There's no need to pay back restitution to the victims. So people, and a lot of these people are in Republican territories too. I mean, I don't understand it. I mean, it's egregious. So they are in the Trump business. So he's unlocked a source of cash, which doesn't have to come from him or for the

government for to support the people around. So these are essentially pardoned lobbyists. They may or may not be lawyers. Yeah, they're just, yeah, I mean, they're pardoned, yes. They just have to whisper to him as he's getting ready to play golf, a bedman store in Palm Beach that, you know, he's a very nice guy. Or they have to whisper to other people who can whisper to him. This is a big, this is a big network of people. And actually, sort of probably an untold story is the people who pay an enormous amount of money

and don't get the pardon because they have paid the wrong. person. So you don't know. We could set up as pardon lobby. You don't know who exactly the right person to pay is. But you do have to pay someone. There's something almost childlike

in his sort of or monarch like to sort of pardon people, right? Didn't? Well, it's a funny thing that Jeffrey Epstein had a kind of riff about this because even before Trump became president, he would talk about if Donald became president and the pardon power.

Because the pardon power, and Trump has often gone on talked about this, his kind of wide eye, incredulity, I can pardon anyone. No one can do anything about it if I pardon them. I have absolute power, absolute pardon power. And Epstein had focused on this and said he's going to do that. He loves having these kinds of, this kind of thing. He loves showing the power that he has. And he said it was he would do it in a childlike way. You see, I can do this. I can do this.

I can pardon anyone. Well, he can't yet pardon Gulen Maxwell. That might be the trigger. If he were to, I mean, you're saying, you know, are the Republicans going to rise up against him? I wonder if that would be a moment where people would just say, no, we are not supporting someone who got 20 years for sex trafficking. Well, we'll see. I mean, I'm sure that that is the deal that they made. Can he break that deal? What's the peril of that? I don't know. We'll see. But right now, so he's just pardoned someone this. drug trafficker. What is the likelihood that the money that that cost to get this guy a pardon was drug cartel money? Well, Hernandez himself was basically financed by drug cartel money, and then he would serve up other cartel leaders to the Americans. He's not a good guy. He's definitely not a good guide, do we know the results of the election?

We know that the two conservatives are in the lead. The Trump supported conservative and then another, you know, I think like a broadcast. The election is not finished, but the two conservatives are in the lead with the leftist lagging far behind. The Trump supported conservative and then another conservative, but their neck-in-neck. And Hernandez is a support. supporter of the conservatives. Hernandez is the

his party, the Trump supported Canada is of his party, yes. Anyway, it's a crazy, it's an absolutely crazy pardon. But the other, that he's a bad guy. Almost all of the people, Trump has pardoned, are actual bad guys. There's not, you can't, you're not

going to survey all, survey this and say, oh, you know, there's a deserving guy. No one would appear to be deserving. Well, and interestingly, the opportunity cost of that is the people who are in jail wrongly, who do deserve to be pardoned and who can't get anywhere near even seeing someone for a pardon. Yeah, no. I mean, it's a... I mean, the whole, my point is the whole system is corrupted by this. No, it's, I mean, the people that Trump has consistently pardoned are wealthy people.

Okay. Well, he only likes rich people. Talking about rich people, do we want to discuss the New York Times piece on David Sacks, his AI advisor? I do. Who somewhat brilliantly, and this is his act of genius, managed to get the job as AI advisor to the White House and maintain his status as co-founder of craft. So let's just go over our thing. We've done the morons. We've done the pardons.

And now we're doing the grift. Now we're doing the rich people. Now we're doing the really rich people. My inbox filled up yesterday over this piece. And I would say it was split. Half people thought David Sachs was outrageous. The other half thought it was outrageous. The New York Times had gone after him and said,

this is why business people do not go into politics because they don't want this kind of treatment. Well, there's a simple answer that is business people should not go into politics. So clearly, David Sachs wanted it both ways. I want to go into government and have an influence on the area of business that I am in. But I want to continue in business. So this is also an anomaly. This is in no other administration.

would this have been this kind of glaring conflict. This is called a conflict of interest. It is, though, I don't agree with you that business people shouldn't go into politics because you need people who've got experience of creating jobs and creating well. All of that's important. Joanna, but that's in. And there's a long history of business people going into politics. You leave your business.

Right. Or you put stuff in a blind trust. You leave it behind. You have the, the, the, um. Didn't Donald Trump do that when he went to? No, he never. So the appearance of a conflict of interest is as damaging as a conflict of interest itself. So on that basis, how you could possibly, in what world, justify David Sacks as an example of good government is ridiculous.

I mean, let's just put the name on it, put the name on all of these people in the Trump administration who have profited. at extraordinary levels, David Sacks being won. And in fact, you know, on the campaign, you know, there was a whole thing, his, a whole process in which he ingratiated himself into the campaign, holding fundraisers, introducing other people. And remember, David Sacks is in this, you know, in the, you know, the Peter Thiel, Elon Musk. The PayPal Mafia. Yes.

You know, a part of the thing, how do we get J.D. Vance, select, put in as vice president and ultimately president. So this is a whole concerted effort to create a situation favorable for David Sacks and friends. Well, what I think they want, right, his group is they want deregulation. They don't want to be struggling to get. They don't want deregulation. They want money. The way to get money is deregulation. Well, I know.

It might not be. If you regulate their competition, they're fine with that. They want deregulation for them. They want a circumstance that benefits them. Not broadly this, that, the other thing. Them. That's what they want. Money for me.

Okay, I've never seen you so worked up about something. All right. I mean, one of the points that a couple of people made to me was that, you know, what they actually want is American tech to dominate, especially in this new round of AI. And that that's what will be beneficial to Americans. It will create American jobs. These people are largely creating companies that create American jobs.

I think that's, that's. Not true. I think it's naive. And I think you should take it back. I'm not going to take it back. I'm not going to say it back. I mean, they're just, these are people. These are people. These are they weren't business friendly enough. Yeah. Hello. Of course that was a frustration when you're a business person who, who's incredible, whose gross profits are being, are being, you. made a little less gross. But, you know, this is, this is, I mean, the Biden, the Biden people took a, took a, I mean, I mean, they seem to me to be also egregious in their tolerance for this. But, but at least there was some effort to say, hey, these, these, these behemoth tech companies ought to be,

regulated in some way or rationalized. Well, I agree we should regulate, but nobody knows how to do it. All right. Well, that is not true. I think that is true. American industry has been regulated. There's all kinds of people who actually know how to do this. I mean, there is resistance to doing it.

So there's a major difference between not knowing how to do this and resistance to doing it. Okay, fair enough, but then they could have put people in who understood how to do that, which is not what they do. No, no, no, no, you're missing the point. There is that there is, this is, this is a fight, a fundamental fight between people who don't want, who have billions and billions, trillions of dollars and who are fighting regulation and a government bureaucracy, which is the nature of a government bureaucracy, who is trying to implement, regulation. And that's, you know, that's now, that's now, appears to be an unequal battle. And Michael, quick toss to our sponsors.

And we are back inside Trump's head. All right. Well, we're moving on. We're moving on to what is happening at the White House itself with the East Wing. Well, the White House itself is kind of going away, diminishing. It's diminishing. It gets ever smaller as this other thing becomes ever bigger, if only in Donald Trump's imagination. Well, I don't think it's going to be a ballroom anymore. I think he's building a convention center. I think he's going to hold conventions there, except he's got to get it built quickly.

I mean, they haven't broken ground on it yet because there's a lot of small. squabbling about what the plans are. Yeah, no, I think it, I mean, it'd be interesting. It's kind of an interesting measurement if that East Wing with all the stuff hanging out of it because it's been. Right, all the wires and the concrete posts and everything. Yeah, yeah, it's like that kind of, yeah, the Gaza look. Did you just say the Gaza look?

Oh my God, you're so feisty today. I think it's the green sweater. I think it's because of the holiday. are coming. You're feeling a frisson of hatred for the holidays. You hate the holidays? Oh, of course. Of course. Okay, back to the

convention center that is going to dwarf the West Wing. But I think it will be interesting if that stays, if we just see that truncated East Wing, if nothing really replaces it, because I think he's going to run into problems. And I think it's a measure.

The weaker he gets, the more difficult it's going to be. although he goes around announcing, I can do anything. It's like the pardon thing and Jeffrey Epstein. I can do anything. I can build anything here. I have all the land. I have all the power.

I'm going to do it. And now I'm going to build a ballroom. No, I'm not going to build a ballroom anymore. I'm going to build Versailles. Right. It's going to be bigger than a ballroom. Well, and what's so interesting is the architect McCrary is clearly stepping back a little bit. They're all feeling a little nervous.

you can tell. And then there was an interesting interview with Jamie Diamond, CEO of J.P. Morgan with Erin Burnett on CNN. And she asked him why J.P. Morgan Chase hadn't contributed to the building of the new ballroom because we know that lots of American companies have. And he didn't, he stopped short of saying, we are not going to bribe them. He said, well, we've got all sorts of regulations. We can't do things like this. But then what he said was, and there will be other administrations, i.e. he can see the future. It's coming at us and he doesn't want to throw everything in the Trump basket. And it's hard not to believe that people, I mean, I felt the architect was thinking the same thing. I don't want to be the architect who's built a convention

center on the White House. That will crash my business. Yeah, no, I'm, you know, again, and this is, I mean, I mean, you can extend this out until everything about this administration. How much do you want to be associated with this. And certainly up until now, the Republicans have been all in. Right. And are we now seeing a kind of, you know, people pulling back from this? I mean, that would be the logical, a logical effect of a lame duck president. Well, and also they were so giddy with power when they got elected with all three branches of government and now especially post the off cycle election, it feels like there's a very quick sobering up of people. By the way, all in the name of David Saxes podcast. Is ours bigger than

David Saxis? Well, funny you should ask that because when I looked at their numbers on YouTube, they were very similar to ours. They've been going much longer than us and they have more subscribers. They've got double the number of subscribers on YouTube, but we started much, much more recently and we seem to have similar numbers in terms of actually people looking at each episode. You know, on the campaign trail, there was a lot of the Trump people took particular note of David Sachs' unctuousness around the president. He was a real fauner. Okay. And then they've also... Real ASLIC.

You're just feisty. It's the green cardigan. I think Brown has a sobering. Brown has a sobering effect. All right. I do want to talk about Melania because having said in her first term, I fucking hate Christmas, I hate Christmas.

She's now embracing Christmas with her be-best baubles on the blue and white Christmas tree that they unveiled at the White House today. Thoughts. I have no thoughts on this. No thoughts. I mean, it's just,

Yes, this is what I, you know, how much was... Would you have a thought if I threw out what the theme is, home is where heart is. Home is where the heart is. But not her heart. Yeah, I were just going to say, yes. No thoughts. No.

Have you got your Christmas tree up yet? You know. You have, haven't you? You've got your Christmas tree up already. It's not my wife and children went to cut the Christmas tree yesterday. I did not go with them. I bet you have real candles like the Victorian saddle. Yes, and it was actually the tree arrived that was rained yesterday.

So the tree is very wet. So it's standing outside. It will dry off today and then it will be there. Is it a tall tree? I haven't looked at it. All right. So we've got some questions for Melania. And again, just reminding you, Michael has an ongoing legal scenario with Melania Trump

where he's planning to subpoena her and ask her lots of questions. So if you have questions for the First Lady, don't hesitate to put them in our comments on YouTube. And remember that I am, I will be in a position to ask her these questions under oath. You'll be under oath or she'll be under oath? She'll be under oath. Okay, so many people react to.

Well, I guess they'll put me under oath at some point too. Everybody's under oath. Everybody's under oath. So a lot of people responded to your observation, or perhaps observation isn't the right word, but your comment that Donald Trump, during his first administration at least, was gobbling burgers in his bedroom, which a lot of people think that perhaps, well, they're curious to know, does Melania do that? So ask Melania what she eats. And remember, remember, they don't, you know, they don't share a bedroom.

Everybody understands this, right? The first couple since JFK and Jackie not to share a bedroom. JFK and Jackie didn't share a bedroom? Oh, no. Was that because he had back pain? Yeah, I mean, and he also had other things going on. Other things going on in his bedroom. All right, so does Melania cook, did she cook growing up,

do First Ladies ever come? cook anything in the White House. Could that somehow be relevant? Yeah, I would be hard-pressed to think that that's relevant, and I would be hard-pressed to imagine Melania in the kitchen. I'm in kitchen now, kitchen making toast. Okay, ask Melania. Michael, this is from Patricia 5-6-86. Michael, I recently saw that Melania is starting a film company called Muse. I saw that too. Would you ask her, who is bankrolling this for her. Was she thinking you would by threatening to sue you for a billion dollars? Good question. Are you in fact potentially leading? You're going to be her leading investor? You think it will be my billion. Do you think David Sachs is investing in Melania's muse? Well, I know that so they have

the Melania documentary which Amazon is supporting. Amazon has paid her $40 million. She gets a big piece of the back end and then she is selling at 10 million a pop corporate sponsorships too. So I don't think that she's having trouble raising money at this point. What form are the corporate sponsorships? Because I'm struggling to understand. Does that just mean you have your name at the beginning? At the end. Oh, at the end. This movie is brought to you by. Well, I don't even know. Probably it may just say with thanks. In other words, how do you give money to the first lady? in a way that is not going to send the First Lady to jail. Well, I'm a sponsor of this movie.

What do I get for that sponsorship? I get my with thanks from... All of them. Apple, Amazon, Meta, the drug... Palantir. The following drug cartel. Yes. And that's what it is. But why are you doing that?

Well, because you're buying the theoretical goodwill of the first lady and of her husband then. So Jill Branton wrote in saying, please boycott Melania movie and Amazon. But actually, I think we want to watch party. Don't we want to expose the movie? Don't we all want to know much more about Melania, not less? I'm very intrigued by me. Yeah, no, no, no, no. I mean, I can't see. Yes. Anyway, yes, obviously.

I mean, she could have sold sponsors for her book because there's nobody thanked in her book. We've made this point before. In fact, you made the point. Ah. Ah. Literally nobody is thanked in the Melania book. Yes. Ah. But the Melania book appeared before her husband was reelected president. I've always thought that that was one of her a hedge. why would she have published the book before the election instead of after when it would have been much more valuable? And I think, well, she thought, man, you know, he might not win.

Well, I think he thought he might not get elected both times. And it would have had significantly less value if he had lost and then she published it. So did they buy, did Brett Ratner and Amazon buy the rights to the book to do this? Or is it just a completely different version of Melania? I don't know. It doesn't, it wouldn't seem to really matter. It's $40 million. I'm sure.

I'm sure she's not selling the rights to somebody else. So, yes. And Brett Ratner, again, Brett Rackner comes into this because he has a relationship with her publisher, which is a publisher called Skyhorse, which specializes in publishing books that no one else will publish. Like books by RFK Jr.?

Yes, and the whole range. I mean, the guy who runs Skyhorse, a guy by the name of Tony Lyons has a very kind of novel business model, which is he has recruited all kinds of canceled people and published their books, but he doesn't give advances like other. publishers and he pays a royalty rate half as large as other publishers. Brilliant. Why didn't we think of this? Why didn't we think of this? Well, we thought of lots of other things.

So I think that's quite a lot for a for a Tuesday. We could go on. We could go on, but I don't think we should because we'll be back on Thursday and we'll be back on Saturday. And that's probably enough for all of you. So if you have been, thank you for joining us. Don't forget to subscribe to the Daily Beast podcast. You can join our Bee Beast tier of the Daily Beast community, which is so much fun. You get lots of access to Michael. And you get actually extra content, which is kind of fun. You're going to read the names of our new Bee Beast level members. Sandra Clark, Meethinks, me thinks is new. Travels with Carl, new. Andrew. Beaver, new.

Caponator, new. Harry Clark, I think, is new. Dawn McCarthy, new. Daniel Doglover, new. M. Griner. Fulvia Orlando. Herbie, these are old favorites. Andrew Melor.

Laws Kande. Bonzo. Val Love Francisco. Andrea Hodel. Bocock, D.C. Sharon Shipley, Connie Rutherford, Karen White, Heidi Riley. What else? Devin, Anna, and Jesse.

As always. Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast, The Last Laugh, and our star-studded The Daily Beast podcast at thedailybeast.com slash podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, consider becoming a Daily Beast subscriber. Subscribing is the best way to feed the beast and support all of your podcasts as we cover What might become the darkest timeline. Head to the DailyBeast.com

slash membership slash podcast and sign up today.