The Daily Beast Podcast - I’ve Seen Epstein Pics of Trump With Topless Girls

Episode Date: October 10, 2025

Trump chronicler Michael Wolff joins the Beast’s Joanna Coles to unpack Trump’s latest delusions of grandeur. This time, namely, his fantasy of winning a Nobel Peace Prize for “ending seven wars” that never existed. Wolff recounts a disturbing encounter involving Jeffrey Epstein, the head of the Nobel Committee, and alleged Polaroids of Trump, while Pam Bondi, now heading the DOJ, pointedly refuses to discuss them. From showy Middle East tours to Chicago photo ops with the National Guard, Joanna and Michael explore how Trump’s obsession with power, spectacle, and apparent paranoia, tinged with fear, continues to reshape his presidency. Is Trump intending to occupy cities like Chicago indefinitely or just seeking attention?  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Convierte your passion in a business with Shopify and bathe records of with the form of with a form of pay with a better conversion of the world. Has heard of

the best. The best version of the world. The incredible system of Pago of Shopify facilita the company on your

website, in the social and in any place. That is music for your own ears. No, you'll be

more weltas. Your business will your new new to be a period of per year

for a I once met the head of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee at Jeffrey Epstein's house. Why was he there? Was he there to raise money for the Nobel Prize Committee? I literally don't know. And that was often the case at Jeffrey Epstein's house. You would meet these people and you think, what are they doing there? What is going on? Michael Wolf, excellent to see you, even though we are not sadly in the same studio. I don't think that makes a difference anymore. The whole world is remote to each other. We don't acknowledge that.

I suppose that's true. That's Bush League. But I do like, oh, well, I'm sorry to be Bush League, but I do quite like being in the studio with you because I feel like we have fun, but I'm also reassured by the number of books you have behind you. And why do you find that reassuring? A signaling of erudition, I think.

I see. I've no idea if you've read them or not. But it's surprising to me how many people comment on how much they like your bookshelves. They pull out single titles and want to discuss them. And again, I just want to thank everybody for their comments. Thank you very much for your comments, wishing me a speedy recovery from my hip surgery. I appreciate there. There are other people out there who've also had hip surgery recently.

It turns out. So we are convalescing together, as it were. But again, just so many comments appreciating Michael your depth in trying to understand this strange character who stands astride the world at the moment, Donald Trump, which is just a reminder of why twice a week we try to get in there. We try to get inside Donald Trump's head and understand what is triggering him this week because the rest of us feel the fallout. I think it is part of the pervasive feeling in the way. in the country and has been for quite some time. And it is different from the way we feel about all other politicians.

And all other politicians are we basically take them for what they are. But this particular politician, Donald Trump, is so out of anyone's experience that we don't know why he does what he does, why what is happening is happening, or what will happen tomorrow. Right. And also I think it's fair to say the opposition is still trying to figure out how to deal with him because he is, as you say, just so completely out of sync with how we think of as politicians. You said on the podcast on Tuesday that politicians should be boring. They should be policy led. they should be just focused on getting things done.

And so many people responded in the comment saying, thank you for saying that. We're not looking for performers here. We don't need actors. We need people who just can run things. Absolutely. But the problem is when you get someone who does the opposite, basically the opposite of that,

or something that is singularly disaligned with that way of behavior. How do you approach that? How do you counter that? How do you explain that? Which the Democrats have been at a singular disadvantage so far. Well, I notice, I mean, we've talked about this before and obviously everybody has noticed. Governor Gavin Newsom's nicknames and leaning into some of Trump's own tactics. And I noticed this week he called Pam Bondi, the head of the DOJ. And as we like to remind, people, formerly Trump's personal lawyer. He called a pedophile protector Pam, which seemed a bit of a mouthful. If I were him, I might have shrunk it to Pido Protector, Pam. But again, trying to lean into some of the... I go to Pito pro Pam.

Pito pro pam. Yeah. Maybe that's, well, we should talk about the oversight committee looking into Epstein. Before we do that, I just wanted to say, what do you think is going on inside Donald Trump's head as he prepares for his triumphant tour of the Middle East, knowing that tomorrow is the announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize? Well, I think that is central to what he's thinking right now. So the interesting thing will be if he does not get the Nobel Peace Prize. So the fact that he may be bringing peace home from the Middle East, and I emphasize may, may really emphasize, will be, we'll turn to char in his mouth if he does not get the prize.

Well, how could he not get the prize, Michael? I mean, come on. He's ended seven wars, some with countries that weren't even at, war with each other. Yes, yes, yes. So anyway, he will not get the Nobel Peace Prize. Now, I could be proved, I suppose, terribly wrong tomorrow. And as we have seen through so many institutions, in so many walks of life, they do bow to Donald Trump. Why, you know, that's that's the long conversation. But will the Nobel Peace Prize Committee bow to Donald Trump? I would say no, but we'll see. But is his covetous desire? Let me just a small digression here that I once met the head of the

Nobel Peace Prize Committee at Jeffrey Epstein's house. Okay. Breath taken. Just a small aggression. I just I just had a moment there where my breath left my body. Let me hear that one more time. You met the head of the Nobel Prize Committee at Jeffrey Epstein's house. I did indeed. And what were they talking about? And that was like, oh, well, you know, what do you do? Oh, I'm the head of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.

Well, and was Jeffrey putting up one of his friends for it? Why was he there? Was he there to raise money for the Nobel Prize? Committee? Yeah, I can't answer this. I mean, I can't answer this not because I won't answers, but because I literally don't know. And that was often the case at Jeffrey Epstein's house. You would meet these people and you think, what are they doing there? What is going on? So I don't know. Is Trump desperate to get one because Obama got it? Is this just sort of presidential competition?

Well, I think Trump wants what he wants. If there's something to be had, which he thinks is to his advantage, then he wants it. Why wouldn't he wants it, want it? And in his mind, why shouldn't he get it? He is the president of the United States. He is Donald Trump. Other people have gotten this. Why can't he get this award?

Well, maybe because he's employed the National Guard on his own people in cities back in the U.S. We can all say why he should not get this award, absolutely. But to him, in his mind, it's why shouldn't he get it? And if he doesn't get it, then the leap that he immediately makes is they haven't given it to him. is that he's been cheated out of it, of course. It's just, and also, why would the Swedes and the Norwegians want to cheat him out of it? I guess it depends. If it doesn't go to him, and, I mean, as you say, who knows, I wonder who else it goes to?

Has anybody else stopped seven wars? It's not going to go to him. It will not. Okay, so I wonder who it does go to, because they're not going to have stopped seven wars. I mean, remember, he stopped the war between Ukraine and Russia on his first day, on his first day within 24 hours. And it wouldn't have started. I mean, the other thing is none of these wars would have started had he been president. But yes, this is, I mean, Donald Trump is a, is a preposterous figure and says preposterous things.

But were he to bring an end to the slaughter in Gaza? And so the question is, would that make him, despite all other Trumpian ridiculousness, would that make him a reasonable candidate in the pantheon of people who have brought us, who have significantly bettered the world, saved lives? managed to to restore some order, sanity, etc., etc. And is it possible that Steve Whitkoff, his envoy, that, as you have pointed out, well, at least we assumed real skill was in real estate development, largely in downtown Manhattan, what if it turns out that Steve Whitkoff was actually a diplomat in hiding all along?

And he just missed his way. is one of the great dummies of all time. Can he transform that into diplomatic genius? I can't even go down that road. I mean, let's, I don't want to go too far down this road. Because I really, so many people, in so many instances, so many American presidents have, gotten, have been, ended up as dupes for peace in the Middle East. That I think, I think we ought to,

we ought to give this at least a few hours to see what actually is happening there. Well, he appears to be getting on a plane to go out to the Middle East this weekend. Meanwhile, the oversight committee was meeting this week to discuss all things Epstein. Can you bring us up to date? They in particular talked about photos, which I know you've seen. I think I was the hidden hand in at least one of, in a notable confrontation between one of the senators, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. I always think that's a curious name for a senator. And Pam Bondi, the attorney general. So Senator Whitehouse asked her about.

reports of these pictures of of Trump and Epstein and look let's get into that in the second and and she she responded effectively saying saying why are you asking me about pictures you're the you're the the piece of garbage scumb bag or or something to essentially that that well and these were these were notes of attack that she'd actually written down, which a photographer rather brilliantly managed to take a snapshot off, and they were all her attacks on the Democratic senators, including Adam Schiff, once they started asking her questions. And I think for Senator White's House, she had an attack on the fact that you're a friend of Reid Hoffman, you've taken dark money. I mean, she went on full attack

instead of answering the question. Does she know if there are photos? Yes. I mean, very particularly did not answer this question, did not address this question, did not answer this question. And this is what used to be called, I mean, in this day and age, it's just business as usual, but what used to be called stonewalling, I can't answer the question because the question will incriminate me, or in this case, incriminate the president of the United States. So, and so she did not, and she did not, she successfully did not answer the question. But let's just go back and let me just say, because what they're talking about, these, the pictures. The pictures are pictures, I am one of the people who has seen these pictures. And these are pictures that Jeffrey Epstein would take out of his

safe and kind of display on his dining room table, almost as you would, playing cards. This amused him to have these pictures. Okay, so Michael, I want you to set the scene for us. So what time of day is it? Where is the safe? Does he bring them out in a manila folder? Are they in an envelope? Are they in an album?

Does it look like his birthday album? I mean, give us more. This is so hard to get your head around that here is this man who's on the one hand entertaining the head of the Nobel Prize Committee and the former head of Harvard, Larry Summers. And then in his safe, he has these folks. of the president and surrounded by topless girls. Yes.

I want to full picture. I mean, so anyway, this happens. All of Jeffrey Epstein's, or a good part of Jeffrey Epstein's day, was conducted around his dining room table. This is a dining room table that would have, I guess, comfortably could seat, you know, two dozen people, maybe. maybe more baronial, I would describe it as. And in a dining room that was also befitting of this kind of table. I mean, it was a weird kind of, you know, and I kind of got used to this. So I forget the initial shock that I had when I walked into this house

and this room. And I remember saying something to Epstein about it because how could you not? It's just this is not the way other people lived. And I kind of, you know, summoned a compliment or like, wow, this place is incredible. And I remember he then took his knuckle and wrapped on the wall. And he said, fake, it's all fake. And I'm reminding people that you were there at his in between. because he wanted you to write a book about him.

Yes. So you ended up spending some time with him because he'd said, just come and hang out at my house. I just want to set the table, as it were, metaphorically, so people understand why you were there. Yeah, no, exactly, and thank you. But then our conversation rolled on into, when, starting in 2015 and then into 2016,

when Trump became what many people obviously were talking about because he was running for president, but Epstein was particularly focused because he and Trump had been the closest of friends for more than a decade. And Epstein fancied himself a real Trump whisper that he understood Donald Trump. And in my experience, he was one of the people, one of the more insightful people about Trump. And I have spoken to a lot of people about Donald Trump. But at any rate, in the course of one of these discussions about Trump, he left the room and then came back holding in his hands about a dozen. Polaroid snapshots. Oh, they're Polaroids.

Well, in my mind, they're, they're Polaroid. I'm not 100% sure that they, that they were. But they had those crannulated edges like a Polaroid. I, you know, that's, in my, as I say, in my mind, it's, these are, these are polarites. But they certainly are snapshots. And then he kind of, kind of like a deck of cards, kind of displayed them on, on the table. And there are, there were specifically three that, that I remember. And this is now almost 10 years ago. So, but the three that I remember are two in, in which topless young women,

and I don't know the ages of these women, but they are young, are sitting in Trump's lap. And this is, and this is outside Jeffrey Epstein's house in Palm Beach around the swimming pool. Okay. And is Trump dressed? Is he at what? Trump, Trump is dressed. And in, and I'm, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, it's kind of golfy, right, golf leisure wear.

But, um, and then in the third picture, there is, and so, so he's wearing light pants. There is a, or tanish pants, and there's a stain on the front of his trousers. And the girls, three, four, four or five, as I remember, are pointing at the stain and laughing. And that is what I remember. And then Epstein would have returned these pictures to the safe, because I actually asked them, where do you keep these pictures? And he said in the safe. And later, when Trump was elected president,

and I tried to encourage Epstein to do something with these pictures. and and he said, I can't now, I may be such and such, but I'm not crazy, implying that he had some reason to fear the wrath of Donald Trump. And by Stain and everybody laughing, are we assuming that Donald Trump was eating a sandwich and somehow mayonnaise slipped out and stained his pants. I don't know. I can't. I'm not making any assumptions here. And I don't want to say more than I know.

I do not know, for instance, that these photographs were in the safe when the FBI raided Jeffrey Epstein's house in July of 2019. Is it reasonable that they might have been? Absolutely. I mean, on several occasions, we discuss where he kept. those photographs in the safe. And that was the question that Senator White House was asking Pam Bondi. Do you know about these pictures? Have you seen these pictures? What is the status of this? Just trying to get information. And the question that she refused to answer. And this question has also been asked by the Oversight Committee of Cash Patel, the head of the FBI. And he, too,

refuse to answer. So do we assume that the FBI does then, by their omission, do we assume? I am, I think it's probably best, as it is always, not to assume anything here. Yeah, I knew you were going to say that. We don't know, we don't know if they were in the safe. We don't know if there was something done with these photographs after, if they were in the safe, if there was something done with these photographs after. that. We don't know anything about, I think, what they call the chain of custody. And I suspect the chain of custody is quite disorganized in this situation, which goes to the problems of the so-called Epstein file. I mean, that's everybody released the Epstein files, but nobody knows what the Epstein files are. Is there your Manila file? Does that exist? Is this all, is this information all gathered in and contained in one place?

Or is the Epstein file a kind of broad metaphor for all of the information the United States government has on Jeffrey Epstein, which could be spread out among many departments, agencies, and it'd be pretty difficult to gather? And now a word from? Our sponsors. We love our sponsors, but Michael and I are back and we're rattling around Donald Trump's head. So what happens in a situation as we have with Jeffrey Epstein, who was arrested, the Southern District was proceeding against him. So they must have a bulk of information.

They arrest him when he flies from France, when in fact he's supposed to be having breakfast with you the next day and he then dies. Where does the evidence go? Well, we don't know. I mean, maybe somebody does. We certainly, we certainly don't know. And it's not illogical to suppose that that Pam Bondi doesn't exactly know. She may have asked the question. And she's probably got a set of, a set of somewhat ambiguous answers. And what is the, you know, in terms of the process of bringing all this information together, what the Southern District has, what the, what was obtained in the Florida investigation, and then there's, you know, there's also, there's also, there's the federal investigation in Florida,

and then there's the local investigation. and he was actually convicted under a state charge and not a federal charge and convicted. He pled guilty to the state charge. So who has this where and in what form? And do these, I mean, if you're the Southern District, is it possible you just throw things away once someone's died and you think, well, that's the end of it? I don't, I don't, I have no idea.

Right. I wonder why the oversight committee doesn't reach out, or perhaps they have done to the Southern District and say, we would like everything you have on Jeffrey Epstein. Theoretically reaching out to the, to the Justice Department, I mean, the Justice Department controls the Southern District theoretically. Although one of the issues, and that was, you know, it's certainly involved with Epstein, the Epstein-sized thinking about this, is that the Southern District was acting not only independently of what's called Maine justice, but they were possibly antagonistic to it. and their ultimate investigation was or was possibly about the president of the United States, Donald Trump. And they might well have thought that by arresting Jeffrey Epstein, they would get a source of information, incriminating information about Donald Trump. We don't know that because not long after his arrest, Jeffrey Epstein was dead. but one of the questions.

Right, one of the questions, as you say. So the FBI has stonewalled. Pam Bondi was stonewalling. In fact, she went on the attack, as we know from her notes. And if you haven't read, if you're listening to this and watching this, and you haven't read the story and seen the photos of her handwritten and printed notes about how she's going to go on the attack against Adam Schiff and Senator Whitehouse, it's really worth looking up at The Daily Beast, I urge you, because we covered it really well,

and it's fascinating to see someone's handwritten notes, a bit like Cash Patel's, you know, affirmation notes when he went in to face them. It's all sort of planned in advance. And of course, here I am with my notes, so I'm not pretending you shouldn't have notes, but it's just interesting when you see the head of the DOJ go in with pre-planned notes, all in order. It's important to realize that there's enormous amount of stagecraft that goes into appearing before Congress. I mean, from the outside, it's just, you know, you're a government official and Congress has called you to answer questions. But that's not what's going on here. I mean, it is from both sides, from whoever, whoever,

is conducting the panel, Democrats and both and Republicans, a stagecraft, this is a stagecraft event. And for the witnesses, it is a stagecraft event. And the stakes are very high. Well, and as you are always saying, audience of one, Donald Trump is watching this as if it were a television show. And I couldn't help thinking when he was doing his roundtable on Antifa, that there was stagecraft involved in him sitting there, Pam Bondi sort of, you know, trying to sort of fend off various questions from people. And then Marco Rubio suddenly arriving behind her and presenting Donald Trump with a note as if he was about to announce the winner of the next episode of The Apprentice and it was slightly shaking it up. And in fact, we saw again the note which said,

you know, we need you to approve the truth social post so you can go out and announce we've secured peace in the Middle East. That all felt very staged as if Mark Burnett were the producer or were indeed in the ear. Yeah, you know, and the other thing is, I mean, the Pam Bondi appearance and her response, I mean, it was kind of extraordinary because usually there is a, at least the pretense of decorum, of back and forth, of at least seeming to, to, to, to be responsive, I think is the term, the term of art. And this was exactly the opposite. This was literally, you're a dirty scumbag or along those lines. And I, you know, during the,

during Trump's long legal journey during the, during the campaign, I kind of, I was, I was privy on several occasions to to these interactions with his with his lawyers. And the lawyers would do what lawyers do, which is to try to not antagonize the judge to be adversarial by but not being not not making the situation worse. And then Trump would ream them out. Just just just take them apart because of their any appearance that they might have. been relatively civil. And it was always his demands. Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack. You have to call them out. You have to tell them that they're scumbags. And, you know, scumbags is kind of a term of art with Trump. All enemies are, or all antagonists are scumbags. You have to say,

call him, call the judge a scumbag. So this was Pam Bondi doing. exactly in Trump character. This is what he, she understood, stands obviously, this is what he wants. This is what you have to deliver. And it seems to stand back, or at least the first time I remember it, is really the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court after he'd been accused of sexually assaulting a teenager when he was a teenager, Christine Blazy Ford. and then the feedback from Donald Trump after he'd gotten very, very angry in the seat

was that he was doing a great job. You know, this is so long ago I can't quite remember that. But I remember writing about this. And I'm not sure you actually have this right because I think that he found Kavanaugh, as I recall, to be a pussy. I think on the first day he was, it was a two day hearing, right? Or it was a multi-day hearing.

The first day, Kavanaugh didn't know what had hit him. And then the second day he came roaring back after I think being encouraged to be much more aggressive. Yeah, I think that that may be right. I remember the pussy part because when Trump dresses down people, it is painful and devastating. Oh, goodness me. Okay, so let's move on to, in Chicago and Illinois, we have Governor J.B. Pritzker saying that Trump has dementia, trying to figure out how to deal with the fact the National Guard have rolled into the streets in Chicago, that there was a particularly aggressive move on one particular building where actually Black Hawk helicopters were involved. clearly again for television cameras.

And J.B. Pritzker has come out swinging, saying, enough already. We Democrats have to unite against this. What's your impression of what's going on there? Well, I mean, obviously, the idea of sending troops into American cities is provocative. It is stagecraft also. it is Trump making a point. We're not exactly sure what that point necessarily is because it's not as if he is sending troops in

to solve a particular and immediate problem. Well, he would argue that he's sending them in to clear up the crime in Portland, although they haven't managed to get into Portland because of legal maneuverings. But the crime, especially in South Chicago, is terrible. He has this broad thing. There's a crisis, but it's not a crisis.

It's a crisis of, you know, I can't even describe what it is because it's not a crisis. It's a condition that is, in this case, an urban condition. So, you know, and in the extremely rare instances where the federal government sends in troops, I mean, extremely rare, there is a clear and a clear and present danger is going on. That obviously is not happening. So we don't really know. And we would be hard pressed to say, what's the measure of success here? What is the goal? To get rid of crime? Okay, well, good luck with that.

So on the one hand, on the one hand, we have that, the statement that Trump is making, and I think largely the statement is, I can do this. These are my troops. And I think it's also kind of a threat But again, a threat to what? We don't know. But in the Trump world of dominance and submission, he is expressing his dominant authority. Now, and then it's the question of how Pritzker responds to this or the governor of any of these particular states. And Pritzker, for his own reasons, here is a man who is a very prominent Democrat.

who is a very wealthy Democrat, too, and one of the wealthiest families in the country, and who is probably running for president. So the dementia charge is an interesting one, because remember, you kind of, what works in politics, you just keep replaying it. And it worked against Joe Biden. And so why not try it against Donald Trump? And this does not mean to say it is either true or not true, but it certainly could be true. You know, of the many things that might explain the inexplicable about Donald Trump,

the fact that he might have cognitive impairments is certainly one. And I was going to say we had Dr. John Gartner on the show, on the podcast about three weeks ago, and he went through why he thought Trump was definitely displaying symptoms of dementia because we've seen him in the public eye for the last 40 years. So there are a lot of ways you can map what Dr. Gardner was arguing was his mental decline. So a lot of speech patterns and speech is often where dementia shows up, first of all. And so you can see the decline in his speech patterns, in his vocabulary and how he speaks to people in his level of aggression. And if you haven't listened to that, I urge people to go and listen to it. It's the Daily Beast podcast with Dr. John Gartner because it's really a very interesting diagnosis of someone that we see in plain sight.

Hold that thought, Joanna. And now a word from our sponsors. And we are back because I've been holding that thought, but I want to get back into it. I think it's a kind of simplistic view. It's how do we explain Donald Trump, which is a very difficult thing to do? Well, yes, an easy explanation would be that he is off his rocker. And I think that that is partly true. I don't know if it's true because of because of, because of dementia or because he has always been progressively and peculiarly off his rocker.

But these are the kinds of things. And we will probably see this more and more. And as we head toward 26, what is the case against Donald Trump? And Pritzker is stepping forward aggressively. to make this case. And he is also saying, calling out other Democrats. You're not, you're not stepping forward. You're, you know, you're wilting in front of, in front of this guy. You're trying to rationalize your approach to politics. And that would be, that would be, you know, we've seen Chuck Schumer especially do this. Although, just to remind everyone, the government closed down, continues to go on. So the background of everything that we said here is a government that is not open for business.

But at the same time, the government not open for business is invading Illinois. Right. And where we hear that for the most part, the National Guard is actually sort of picking up litter and they don't know what they're supposed to be doing there either. Yeah, no. I mean, that is, and that goes from the top down, what is the mission here to get rid of crime? Well, that's not a mission. That's a...

And also there's a police force to do that, right? There is actually something in play already set up in all cities to deal with this. So it's not like you need to send in the National Guard. Yes, exactly. So what is going on here? What does Trump want other than a show of... of force and a show of his own power. And I think I've just answered my question

because that is clearly for Donald Trump quite enough. Well, and I think you've also often made the point that at the center of some of Donald Trump's actions, so it is a kernel of truth. And what he's trying to get at here is the sense that some of these cities do have crime problems and they are out of control. And now we know that for the most part...

But even that is not... true. There is urban crime. That is, is true. But in almost every situation, crime is less than it was, you know, however we want to define the arc. Right. The data in all the big cities, i.e. Democratic cities for the most part, is that crime is down. But I think he's drawing on images of sort of rioting in 2020 around the whole George Floyd moment. And I am still staggered when I meet people and they hear I live in New York and they go, oh my goodness, is it safe there? Are you allowed to walk out at night? How do you manage that? Well, you know, a law and order as an issue, especially for Republicans, has been a traditional winner. And in a way, you know, I mean, it's an interesting thing because,

I mean, Trump sets this up and it's kind of smart. Martin sets this up. You know, this is about law and order and then leaving, leaving the various blue state governors to talk about constitutional process. What's the winner there? Law and order or constitutional process. But having said that, you know, then it's this other kind of fascinating thing of demanding that laws be obeyed that basically are not being broken. You know, in Washington, where he sent the troops in, there was, you know, again and again, the troops were told to make arrests. And they would make arrests because that's what they were told to do. And then judges in the Washington judges would then throw out these arrests. So nothing

has been accomplished there. So you mentioned the shutdown. Do you think the Democrats are winning that particular PR battle in terms of how the medical insurance premiums are going to go up? I mean, Marjorie Taylor Green has come out and said the Republicans have got this all wrong because her son or her children, I think, in their 20s, are going to see their premiums doubled. Imagine being Marjorie Taylor Green's child. But Marjorie Taylor Green's had two moments though, you know, she's joined Roe Carners. She's an interesting character. She's an interesting character, Marjorie Taylor Green.

No, no, I would say she's finger in the wind. We should pay attention to where she's to something in the wind. But actually. To her weather report. On her Epstein point and on her medical insurance point, she's leaning in. Yeah, no. I think, yes, if I had to say advantage at this point, I would say advantage, minor advantage, the Democrats. But they are falling into what Democrats do, arguing this on fairly narrow policy basis.

And certainly an important policy. And it will be a shock and a burden to many people when they, do find out what this is going to cost them for their health insurance. And for a tax break for the rich. But having said that, the opportunity here, the opportunity, because you have the attention of the public, is to make it stick, make it last. And I think health care is a, health care compared against the enormity of everything that Trump is doing on all fronts is weak. Is it possible he returns from what we are or what I am? Is it possible that he returns from a jubilant weekend in the Middle East and comes back to the government shutdown and just

thinks, you know what, I want this out of the way. We've got to get rid of this now. This isn't feeling good. Yeah, of course it's possible. Everything is possible. I mean, one of the, one of the problems with reading Trump is all things are possible, all things. Any reversal, any advance, any doubling down, any falling back. Well, well, well, well, we will be watching with great curiosity this weekend, I guess, and then see what he's, and then see what he's, he says when he comes home off, off old Air Force one. I don't think the Qatari plane has, have we taken possession of the Qatari plane yet? Well, I think we've taken possession, but we're spending hundreds of millions of dollars to debug.

To debug. To debug. Yeah, to debug, yeah. All right, Michael, well, let's just pay attention. And obviously, you'll be my first call in the morning when we find out who's got the Nobel Peace Prize. And as you say, everything's possible. and you ran into headline alert, the head of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee at Jeffrey Epstein.

So everything is possible. Until next Tuesday. Until next Tuesday. Would you like to read us out and remind people to subscribe to the Daily Beast and indeed to our channel and to leave us comments because we love the comments? We love the comments.

We read them actually. Actually, Joanna obsessively reads them. I do obsessively read them because I think of it as reader, a listener feedback. And I know at the beginning you were like, I'm never going to read the comments. And then you started reading the comments and you were like, these are fantastic comments. They're really intelligent. They're thoughtful. They're articulate.

More precisely, Joanna reads them to me. So you get the call. You've got to hear this. You've got to hear it. So please. So please. It's, it is. I mean, they're completely interesting.

They're really responsive. And I commend everybody. It's a high level of conversation. I know what we haven't discussed, and I want to discuss, and that is the reappearance of Melania Trump. Should we talk about it more on Tuesday? Because you have a theory behind it, but we would be negligent if we didn't mention

the Navy Huya that she gave? Yes, I do have a theory and we could leave that as the cliffhanger for Tuesday. All right, we will leave it as a cliffhanger for Tuesday and if I had been more organized like

Pam Bondier would have had my notes and I would have seen the word Melania and I would have brought it up earlier but let's discuss why she's suddenly back in the public eye next Tuesday. on Inside Trump's head.

If you have been, thank you for joining us. Don't forget to subscribe to the Daily Beast. We're independent media, so we appreciate your support. Please join the Daily Beast community, so you get extra time with me and Michael Wolfe. And if you haven't been this week, don't forget, Be Beast. And a shout out to our top tier Be Beast members, Karen White, Heidi Riley, Connie, Cony, Rutherford, Sharon Shipley,

Andrea Hoddle, and Free DC. and thank you to our production team. Michael, can you remember their names? No. Devin, Anna, Jessie. That's good. That's good. I can't do last names.

Devin, Roderino. But who needs them? Everybody needs them. Devin Roderino, Anna von Erson and Jesse. And I know that actually Michael, though he appears as if he can't remember your name, is extremely grateful for all your support. As am I. Want more great listens?

Check out our comedy podcast. The Last Laugh and our star-studed the Daily Beast podcast at the Daily Beast.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.