The Daily Beast Podcast - Proof Trump, 79, Has Lost Grip on Reality: Wolff

Episode Date: February 27, 2026

Michael Wolff joins Joanna Coles to dissect the now tangible proof that Trump has lost touch with political reality. Beginning with a marathon State of the Union that was less a governing document than a 1-hour-and-47-minute exercise in self-mythology, aimed at his fan base, where reality was declared perfect even as polls told a different story. That disconnect between performance and public mood becomes sharper in Minneapolis, where a legitimate COVID-era fraud case that led to dozens of convictions was transformed by the ICE killings, tragedies so unpopular that it could cost Trump an easy political win. Now, JD Vance is dispatched to sell the punishment and absorb the blowback. Abroad, the stakes escalate: brinkmanship with Iran risks blowback Trump once vowed to avoid, while the grinding war in Ukraine—which he promised to end in a day—remains unresolved and increasingly perilous. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the State of the Union, I thought was especially addressed to his fan base. That was his hour and 47 minutes presentation. Look at me, look at me, constantly reminding people that this is his reality, insisting on his own fabulousness. The country is, the country is not in good shape. So it's as though there's an acknowledgement that the movie is a stinker, but you're going to go see it anyway because, Donald Trump is the star.

Michael. Joanna. I forgot your name for a second. I literally forgot your name. Literally. That is not a great way to start the podcast. We could do it. I was going to start with a word cloud and we can choose word out of the cloud.

Iran. Epstein, Bill Gates. The Clinton's State of the Union, J.D. Vance, Minneapolis, Medicare. I could go on. I like the idea and I would like to get to the word shame and ashamed, which I know something about where that word has now slipped into Trump's rather frequent usage. So let's go to that word at some point. Okay, well we could start with that word because it's not a word traditionally associated with Trump because people around him and in fact we see it. as his audience or fan base, I say fan base in inverted

commas, know that he is a man that doesn't have any shame. In inverted comments, in inverted, I think it is a genuine fan base. Well, we're not part of the fan base, is all I'm saying. But I've always thought that that is he is speaking to, in the state of the union, I thought was especially addressed to his fan base. And by fan base, there's a subtle distinction between a political base. This is a fan base in which they just want to see Trump.

And I think that's what, that was his 100 in his hour in 47 minutes presentation. Look at me. Look at me. That's why you're here. Constantly reminding people that this is his

reality. The, you know, he was, he was insisting on his, at every sentence, his own fabulousness, which is obviously a kind of a fan ingredient. You don't really care what I do, what I say.

It's just my presence. And so he could go on at an enormous length saying things that were failing to really address anybody's concerns and hoping that just his 147 minutes of, or an hour in 47 minutes of Donald Trump would, would suffice. Yeah, and you could see how much he was enjoying himself. I mean, that's the thing, too. He's got everything he wants. He's at the center of the world. He's got an audience looking at him, no matter that the Republican members of Congress are all on the edge of their seats about whether or not they can pull off a victory in the midterms. And you just saw him, I mean, there was a moment where he turns his head, well, there were several moments where he turns his head to the side. And it may be

that he's trying to look at the teleprompter, but what you see is this bird-like ability to listen to what's going on, to listen to the room, to feel the energy, and then to know where to take it next. And I've never seen it quite so visible. And it was a remarkable performance

for a guy who's 79, who, you know, many people have diagnosed us on the verge of dementia or if not demonstrating symptoms of dementia. He seemed frail that he was clutching the edge of the podium. And I wondered if he was wearing sort of intimate male hosery

like Manx holding that body together because at one point he looked like he might be sinking. But it was a pretty bravura performance. I hope I don't ever have to do an ad read for Manx. Well, I think on that basis, you've grown down the gornwood.

I think it was and I think performance is that is the note to hit here because it was as though, you know, The country is not in good shape. So it's as though there's an acknowledgement that the movie is a stinker, but you're going to go see it anyway because Donald Trump is the star. Right. But you made the point last week when we were talking about the banners being unfurled

and the government buildings in D.C. And it really is a sight to behold, especially outside the DOJ, these enormous German-type banners in. what to call them. I know. They are, I mean, they are, I mean, they don't exist in America. They don't exist in America. Well, the only place we've really seen them is sort of, is Germany, you know, is Germany. But, but I thought your point that actually this is more what you're likely to see outside a consul hall when Taylor Swift is playing was a better observation. And I was thinking about the time he, the enormous amount of time he spent in Hollywood where those posters are

And if you haven't been to Hollywood, it's hard to appreciate the size and the impact of those posters of people's faces, especially slapped on the side of studios. That's what it feels like. On Sunset Boulevard, and that's a kind of funny part of the economics of movie making because these are totally irrelevant to the success of a movie. But they are done by the studios to please the stars, which is similar to what's going on now. Trump's banners are put on these buildings, not really for any other reason except to please Donald Trump. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, they have no impact whatsoever. And, well, we assume they have no impact.

But that's what it feels like and this sense of him as a performer. And as you also pointed out last week, he's always better when his back is against the wall. So the polls are dreadful. There is nothing going on right now that a normal president would feel bullish about. And yet that's when Donald Trump manages to reach down into whatever that wrinkled little walnut of a heart he has and pull out some energy. Yeah, no, no. I mean, he is obviously always in the best position when he has clear enemies. And he is.

But the interesting thing, though, about this particular moment of Trump being down is that I don't think he has yet identified that. I mean, it was the Supreme Court. Then clearly during the speech, it was the Democrats. And actually, I can come back to this word ashamed. Because last week when the court decided against his assumption of great power with regard to the tariffs, Trump said, said in particularly the conservative justice should be ashamed of them. They should be ashamed in front of their families. And then during the speech, he said to the Democrats who were not standing up during to praise his policies, they should be ashamed of themselves.

Well, I think we have a clip of that. Why don't we play it? Isn't that a shame? You should be ashamed of yourself, not standing up. You should be ashamed of yourself. So this word, ashamed, came in within days of eugene. two uses within days of each other. Now, Trump's word choice is, is always pertinent because there are so few of them. I mean, he doesn't have, I mean, he has, he has an incredibly limited vocabulary. And, and this is

helpful to him because it's often hard to know what he means because he uses, he uses the same word constantly. And it's, you know, something is beautiful. All of these things are beautiful or something is tremendous. Something's tremendous. And the interesting thing. So I know how his speechwriters work. And I use speechwriters kind of loosely the term because Trump actually actually writes most of his own speeches, well, rights, I use that word loosely too. There is an extemporaneous delivery here of these speeches. But one of his chief speechwriters is this really put upon guy by the name of Ross Worthington and has been with Trump for since the first administration. And he has to work, you know, he's an intelligent guy, but has to work within this incredibly limited range.

of Trump's words. So just imagine this. You're a speechwriter and you have to write speeches with with with you have to write speeches in which you can only use this limited collection of words. And you get in trouble if you expand beyond that. First thing, because Trump doesn't know how to use the words. He doesn't know what the words exactly mean. Then he starts to use them in an entirely wrong context and everybody goes crazy. What is he? I mean, he's AIDS. What is he saying?

What? And then Ross Worthington gets blamed. You gave him this word. How could you have done that? But sometimes they try to expand the word usage. And so this word ashamed crept in. And this was a, it was a consciously new word put in front of, of Trump. Well, do we think, you know, do we think he knows what a shame, of course.

You know, why would that, why would possibly the, what is even the context of which Supreme Court justices would be ashamed of a decision that they have made, that they have agonized over for quite a number of months here? You know, shame is to be caught. You're ashamed when you get caught in the headlights, when you get caught out on something that you thought was going to be secret. And obviously, this is a public act. It was obviously a public act for the Democrats not to stand up, but they should be ashamed. And it's one of those kind of things.

Everybody goes, huh? What does he mean? I should feel ashamed? Do I feel ashamed? What is he trying to say? And it's one of those things that he doesn't quite know how to use the word, but it has slipped in. And now we will hear it again and again and again. And it will always be used somewhat improperly.

And if you were a psychologist, you would say he's projecting that he's feeling shame over his very low poles and the fact that his policies are not working so far. Actually, I would say that differently. It is for him a contrast because he feels no shame. He is shameless. That is his advantage. And in some way, he may even appreciate that all people feel some level of shame except for Donald Trump. That is his singular, singular among all other attributes, that may be his leading. advantage. He feels no shame. I'm thinking of poor Ross Worthington. It's a bit like saying to Picasso,

or perhaps we shouldn't elevate it that much, but the idea of saying, well, you can paint a picture, here's your palette, but there's no yellow, there's no red, there's no green, and there's no blue. And so he's sort of poking around with brown. Actually, there was a strangely eccentric English poet called William Barnes, who refused to use Latin words. And he would only use English words on the grounds that English words were the most expressive. And for some reason, I can just remember this from school that instead of using the term manual labor, he would use the word handwork instead, which he argued was equally expressive. Anyway, a piece of irrelevant flotsam, except that Donald Trump is not the only person to use

a limited number of words, but he's not a poet. Okay, silence from Michael Wolf. Okay, an oblique British, an oblique British poet. All right. So we've got, as we're talking, we've got Hillary Clinton in Chappaqua, or how did I hear the BBC pronounce it today, Chappaqua, which reminds me of how difficult some of those words are to pronounce, giving evidence to the oversight committee about her relationship with Epstein, which. appears to have been somewhat like Melinda Gates is very minimal. Oh, I'd like to ask actually a factual question, which I'm not up to date on that. She had asked for this testimony to be public.

Do we know what happened that that was the committee turned her down on her desire to testify in public session? Is that what happened? Do we know? Well, what's happened is they're filming it in the, I think, the, I think, the, public arts center in Chappaqua, and I think then it's going to be released. It's slightly unclear, actually. I was checking with our news desk. It's not live and it's not televised. In front of Congress. Yeah, it's sorry, it's not live and televised. It's being filmed and they are going to release the testimony. My understanding is this afternoon, Thursday afternoon, we're recording this Thursday

morning. And the people who are going to be there, I think, are James Comer, Rocahanna, Robert Garcia, who's the leading Democrat on the Oversight Committee. Obviously, James Comer is the chair of the committee. Thomas Massey, who was enormously important with Roe Conner and getting the release of the Epstein files, and Nancy Mace. Nancy Mace. You know, the, and here is a slight digression. That, there is now a resistance of on the part of almost everybody either side to testify in front of Congress, which used to be a regarded as a reasonable investigative body. And now all testimony is filtered through a political lens. It is always, it always, it is always there to serve someone's

agenda. It will always be leaked and leaked in ways that are that are that are that are advantageous to whosoever agenda it is. So the the hearing, this is on the part of I mean, I've spoken to many lawyers about this who who regularly deal with this this kind of this kind of thing is that nobody wants to testify. It comes off. Nobody gets a fair break. It is to nobody's advantage who no no witnesses advantage. And that's where obviously the Clintons went into this knowing that they were being used for a particular agenda. And in this case, the agenda on both, I mean, the Republicans agenda, but also the left

agenda too. Well, and I think these hearings are also being used to pump the social media. accounts of Congress people, right? So, I mean, you think of AOC, you think of Jasmine Crockett, that this is all about the politician grandstanding and it's stuff they can put out immediately on social media to make it look like they're tough or smart or aggressive with the people who are coming in front of them. And also, even the older members of the committee have young staffers who are anxious to prove their worth by growing a social media following. So it's had an enormous impact. And as you say, it used to be a really useful tool for investigation. And now it's

become showmanship. It's become grandstanding. It's become social media fodder. Nobody wants to testify in front of Congress. So anyway, but nevertheless, sometimes people are hauled before Congress. And the Clintons, Hillary and Bill are examples of that. They are there unwillingly. Well, and also they, I mean, you said it's political, it's obviously political. They had written an eight-page letter to the committee outlining they say everything they knew, that they'd answered the questions that the committee wanted to know. Lots of people the committee have approached have said, here's what I know, and that's been

fine for the committee. But obviously, these are two high-profile witnesses. their trophies for the Oversight Committee to bag, and that's what's going on. That said, I'm completely riveted to know what Bill Clinton in particular is going to say, because we've seen the pictures of him. So how is he going to explain those? Well, I assume he's going to say that he was on Jeffrey Epstein's airplane four times, I believe, and Jeffrey Epstein transported him to the following places,

And he did not go to Jeffrey Epstein's island, although you certainly would not know that from virtually every report across the breadth of social media, but he did not go to this island. And outside of that had relatively little to do with Jeffrey Epstein. I assume that is what he is going to say because my understanding is that that is the truth. But yes, it'll be interesting. Well, I think perhaps more complicated for him is his relationship with Gillesne Maxwell, various emails suggesting the two of them had gone off on brief vacations together. So I'm assuming he'll be asked about that too. And then, of course, there are the pictures of him in pools, which I think Hillary has dealt with

by saying these were relaxation breaks on long trips when we were staying in hotels, which may all be true. But the other thing, and let's not ignore the overriding point that the one person who this is good for is the president of the United States, the current president of the United States, to have the former president of the United States hoisted like this, that this is that Bill Clinton has always been an incredibly effective foil for Donald Trump. And the reason is that they are in their ways actually quite similar. Well, they seem to be similar in their approach to women and their quest for sex. Yeah, that was my point. Yeah, I know it was your point, but I'm just making it for you anyway. And also, we should point out it's the first time a former president's being called to give evidence.

That's part of, you know, the Donald Trump playbook is always repeat. Things if it works do it again and clearly Bill Clinton was one of the ways that he Manages managed to circumnavigate let us say the grab them grab them by the pussy gate and And and now this will be this will obviously be helpful to To Donald Trump as are all of the other people who are who are have been hoisted in this in the Epstein affair. And it's the first time that a former president has given evidence like this, which may mean that they can summon Donald Trump too. And of course, there's now this very interesting story going around that there's 53 pages missing from the files which relate to a woman who came forward,

I think, in 2019 and who said that she had been abused by Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump when she was 13. And there's some confusion as to why she was interviewed four times by the FBI, but only one of those times is mentioned in the files that been released in the files, and there are three interviews which appear to be missing. May I footnote this to say that the issue here, there are two issues. The first issue is why was this material not included in the release of materials, which was responsive to a law that said all 100% of whatever you have.

We don't know what you have, but we want all of it. So therefore, there's almost little rationale. The only slight rationale is this part of an ongoing investigation, which perhaps the White House or the Justice Department will claim it is. But that's one issue. But the other issue is that the claim here is that this abuse at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump took place in 1983. Now, I am as close to sure as I can possibly be that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein did not know each other in 1983, which would therefore mean that this is a lie. Have we had the conversation of where they met and when they met? I don't, I'm sure we've had since we've had many conversations.

Neither of us can remember any of them, but. I don't precisely know that. I put them together. The first time I know that they were, that they were together occurs in 1988, I believe. And I know this because they approached someone. in a restaurant together. Actually, they approached a man by the name of Herbert Allen, who had founded the investment bank, Allen and company.

And at any rate, they went up to Herbert Allen, and Trump had, I believe, had known Alan through Roy Cohen. So we understand the level of people we're dealing with here. Right. But anyway, he went up to Alan said, said hello and then said, and I'd like you to meet my associate, Jeffie Epstein. Jeffie? That's the first moment I actually put them together, and I actually think that maybe they

had known that it was a new relationship of theirs, six months old, something like that. Okay. All right. Well, that would then undermine the story. of the victim, but the fact that she was interviewed four times by the FBI, presumably about the same thing is pretty interesting. Anyway, there's now a search on for those papers. And of course, the Epstein story has now gone global. I mean, the Norwegian police have opened an investigation into the former Prime Minister of Norway, who was a former head of the Council of Europe, I think.

And he, as we mentioned before, was introduced to Jeffrey Epstein by Terrod Larsson, who is the diplomat that, you know, they wrote the play Oslo about. The head of the World Economic Forum, Davos, always at the center of things, has had to step back because of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Larry Summers has resigned from our. Harvard over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Larry Summers always seems to be resigning. He's resigning. He's stepping back. Who knows what he's doing? He's doing a lot of fancy footwork there. Yeah. And remember long ago, he was the president of Harvard and had to resign from being the president of Harvard out of an issue unrelated to Epstein. Well, sort of tangentially related to

Epstein because he suggested that women weren't as good at science as men were. And then we've had a Nobel Prize winning professor. That's only related. to Epstein in terms of the fact that that was about women and Epstein is about women. Other than that, there is no connection. No, I'm just thinking about their opinion about women and that women were somehow used to be decorative objects and for sex, but didn't agree to have any kind of of... I'm just pushing back slightly on the idea that everything connects to Jeffrey Epstein. But now, at this point, we certainly believe everything is connected to Jefferson. Yeah, well, what started as a conspiracy and everybody thought was ridiculous turns out to be taking

all sorts of people down with it, including a Nobel Prize winning scientist at Columbia this week who resigned from Colombia. So it's been another week of ripple effects. And we're still at the beginning of plowing through these three million files. And we've got another three million to come. So I thought it was very notable at the state of the union, actually, that Cash Patel didn't get a shout out. Just talking about the FBI and Pam Bondi. Pam Bondi got a shout out. I think she got a shout out. But RFK Jr. didn't get a shout out and Cash Patel very clearly didn't get a shout out. J.D. Vance did. And then the biggest applause in the room was for Marco Rubio. You know, the interesting thing, and I know a little about this, how the shoutouts are positioned in his speeches. And that's specific.

Specifically, he doesn't like them to be on the teleprompter because he feels that that looks, that that looks phony. Phony is a Trump word. And he likes to be, I like to be spontaneous. I like to, I like to call out the person I think who comes to my mind at that time because that's the guy, I don't know what, that's the guy. That's the guy who. That's the guy who the crowd wants to hear. That's the guy I'm feeling. But it's a particular thing and a thing that he is very aware of, the act of calling out someone in the crowd. But it also means that people are always expecting to be called out. And then he doesn't call them out because he decides to punish them. Or, and nobody knows this, he forgets.

So it's a kind of thing. And people within the White House circle try to read this often. What does this mean? Am I being punished? Or did he forget? And then sometimes to confuse things, he says to people, aren't you, you know, weren't you, you know, weren't you happy that I called you out, that I gave you an acknowledgement when he did not?

So he has not only forgotten to call someone out, but he then forgets that he didn't call them out in the speech and thinks that he has. Wow, that must be very confusing to deal with. I mean, it was really remarkable seeing his cabinet sitting there clapping. David Rothkopf in a column just said they're clapping like seals, that sort of. And then standing up, standing up, standing up. I mean, it really was like the state of the union workout. I don't know how many times. In fact, we should count how many times people stood up and clapped. But Pete Hegseth in particular looked so sort of adoring of Trump and didn't, as far as I can remember, get a personal shout out. The one that was clearly the most vivid was Marco Rubio, because Trump spent some time on him.

And Marco looked both thrilled and embarrassed. He pulled, he did that thing he does where he looks off in the middle distance. and you can see the remainder of what's left of his soul leaving his body. And then right after that he was on camera looking at his cell phone. Which tells you a lot, that he was bored and probably on Instagram. Yeah, no, and somebody had texted him. Who texted him? This is another name, I'm forgetting.

Someone had texted him about being called out. Oh, and that's what he was looking at. Well, those poor people having to sit there. I mean, at least I could get up and walk around my living room, have several cups of tea. I mean, it was so long. And even if it did summon up all his vaudevillian energy, it just went on and on and on. The longest state of the union, longer than Bill Clinton's. No, no, the last longest one was also his.

And he just went beyond the world. It's just, it's incredible. Anyway, look. He broke his own record. Look, you know, peace in the world hangs on a thread here. We've got Steve Wickev and Jared Kushner as we speak having a quick break from the talks about Iran, from the Iran talks, where the U.S. is trying to figure out what to do with the last three main nuclear sites in Iran, and they want them dismantled and they want the U.S. to get the contents.

And this is interesting, too, in the context of what they will do next, because as, as, as, you know, you might recall when we last bombed them, Trump pronounced them obliterated. Exactly. So these sites that have been obliterated now need to be more obliterated. They need to be dismantled and brought to anything left over. But we're at this point and we should. I mean, this is an incredibly critical point. What does Trump do with having amassed all of this.

power, what does he do with it? And it's a kind of existential decision. Do you do as little as possible and hope to, and you do as little as possible, declare victory, get out, and don't pay any price for it? Or do you go forward? Do you use all of this firepower to, to, actually make a difference, to actually do something, to destabilize the regime, decapitate the regime, free the Iranian people, I'm sure Trump would say, and come what may, which is to say, you don't know what's going to happen. You don't know how the Iranian regime is going to respond. and there are indications by Trump's own generals that the response might be fierce and in some ways potentially apocalyptic.

Yeah, John Bolton was on MPR this morning just, I think, with PTSD from his days as Trump's national security advisor during Trump one, just saying that Trump will have no idea. He was just trying to remember what it was like briefing him. And as you've pointed out many times on this podcast, you know, inability to focus on any of the information determined to argue with any analysis that's presented if he can pay attention. And he will have no sense of what regime change could be. It's just he approaches everything as, is there a deal to be made here? And what is the deal if so?

And of course, that's why Steve Wittkoff and Jared Kushner are there. Steve Wittkoff, his golfing buddy, who's a Manhattan real estate guy. No, and there's another, there's a kind of, I suppose, silver lining here in which traditionally, and this is through the first administration and through this administration, because he can't, he doesn't want to concentrate on the details of going a war, the vast details, doesn't want to, is incapable of, is just, is just, just, just, um, just too bored, is that we don't, and we have not gotten into the situation, a George Bush situation in Iraq. All he wants to do. So, and this is the, I mean, if you think about it, I mean, performative war is really shameful. But nevertheless, performative war is, is, is, does not get you, at least so far for Donald Trump, bogged down in endless war situations that you can never hope to come out with in any kind of successful way. Right. And of course, the blueprint he's got, I think, in his head is the Venezuela situation where they went in extracted Maduro.

And in fact, we saw the leading helicopter pilot get an award at the State of the Union address, where Donald Trump sort of stole some of his values. I think. And actually, it was the first time we'd heard that anybody had been injured. He had apparently had one of his legs shredded and he was there on a walker. That was the first time I think we'd heard of any injury whatsoever. We were told it was just a flawless operation, but much harder to do that in Iran. Well, I think I said the other day that in the situation room when they had their kind of come to Jesus meeting, what are we going to do here? In which, you know, and that was the meaning in which General Kane apparently outlined the difficulties in an attack on Iran, and which then Trump reinterpreted as it was all easy, busy and no problem.

And then General Kane had to clarify. That was not what he meant. But also within that meeting, then Trump kept repeating, I want to do it like we did in Venezuela. And everybody was like, well, it's clearly not Venezuela. Right. By the time this podcast goes out, the talks will be over and we'll have some sense of whether or not Iran has said, as Trump keeps referring to it, the secret words, which are that they're going to give up all nuclear ambitions and stop. And which they do. And we should repeat this, we should note this, that they repeatedly say this.

Right. Right. But there's no logic to the way these things proceed. All right. So we've got also an apology from Bill Gates, just going back to Epstein for a, so we've got an apology from Bill Gates, just going back to Epstein for a moment. I realized I didn't include him in the men that have gone down this week for saying that he had, two affairs, one with a Russian bridge player and one with a Russian nuclear physicist. So at least these were intelligent women. What can I say? And then he says that Melinda, his now ex-wife, had warned him about Epstein and he said, you know, I've got to admit Melinda was right.

And he's apologized to his foundation staff. I mean, everything is the same here. Everything is to script. Everybody is on script here. So, I mean, there's certainly no insight that Bill Gates is providing here. Right. Everybody is just saying what they are told to say by their communications people and their lawyers. Yeah, for sure. For sure.

So it's enormously, it is as opaque. as it has ever been. Yeah, that's for sure. And of course, one of the most fascinating elements of the State of the Union is watching the two people behind Donald Trump. So no one can forget that moment where Nancy Pelosi rips up the agenda, I assume it was, and that was a big moment. Very interesting watching Mike Johnson, leader of the House and the vice president, J.D. Vance. And J.D. Vance looks in a state of permanent confusion and incredulity that he's there. He's got this sort of furrowed brow and he's looking at the back of Trump's head. And you're wondering, is he thinking what's inside Trump's head? He looks inscrutable. He looks incredulous. And he's also being vindictive to the people of Minnesota. Well, I actually, I think that this may be an instance of not him being, not primarily him being vindictive to the people of Minnesota, but of Trump being vindictive to J.D. Vance.

So he's just given J.D. Vance the job of telling the people of Minnesota that they are going, that the federal government is going to withhold 250 million. dollars in Medicare funding. In Medicaid funding. Medicaid funding, thank you. And so, and this is, of course, against the backdrop of what's happened in Minneapolis. So they are being punished for that. And J.D. Vance is being the guy sent out to do this. So what happened in Minneapolis is hugely unpopular, incredibly unpopular.

Maybe one of the things that will result in the midterm election route, possibly in both houses, in both the House of Representatives and the Senate against this government. Could not be, I mean, could not be less popular. And here, J.D. Vance has given the job of being now the face of the punishment of the people of Minneapolis and Minnesota. So he can't be happy about that. Well, and of course, they're using the fraud in Minnesota, which actually has been addressed. I mean, there are, I think, 47 people in jail over a fraud that was about a children's

nutrition program that largely took place during COVID when government funds came flooding in and people siphoned it off utterly illegally. the Attorney General in Minneapolis was on it. They rounded up people who were guilty and they put them in jail. But it's become this festering wound that Trump keeps going back to. Well, I would say in a different way. It's more indicative of the dumbassness of the Trump White House because they had a bona fide issue there. That was an issue that they had uncovered this issue.

They had highlighted this issue. It was genuine. It already, it has already meant that the, that the, that the sitting governor is not going to run again. And then they sent in the troops to Minneapolis and, and basically lost their own issue there. That became, I mean, it was the Trump White House's and ISIS misdeeds in Minneapolis in Minneapolis. the story instead of the corruption in Minneapolis in these programs being the story. So could no one think in a political straight line there? Apparently not.

Apparently not. And Christy Noam, who, as we know, is the head of Homeland Security, has been elbowed out of the way. Tom Homan has gone into sort of calm the situation, has pulled a lot of the ice troops, as it were, out. And the situation appears to be calming down, except now it feels re-inflamed. Again, another Trump home goal by J.D. Vance saying we're pulling out a quarter of a billion dollars. But they are trying to get back. And they're really, it's as though pay attention to the fact that we've killed these people in Minneapolis. And let's go back to the corruption. I mean, that was that was a subtext of the state of the union. and another indicative aspect of the state of the union.

Let's see the world the way we want to see it, even though everybody else sees it differently and knows that it is differently. So again, the state of the union was Trump reality, which was largely by the way, the state of the union is utterly perfect. And true reality, which is reflected in, in, well, it's reflected everywhere, but specifically in recent polls, which are devastating to Trump.

I mean, and, and, and, and I think, I mean, I think it's a totally fascinating moment because I, it is potentially that inflection moment. He can't get anything right. And he can't find, he can't even find the rhetoric now to create a kind of, kind of consistent opposition to all of these things that are going wrong on a palpable basis for most Americans. Which is why the Iran moment is so interesting. But even the Iranian moment, that is also an interesting because he doesn't know what to do here. If he goes in, in all likelihood, unless we do this cosmetic. obliteration of what has already been obliterated. He's going to create a situation which is going

to be offered nothing but blowback. Americans are going to get killed. No resolution is going to be achieved. Maga is going to be furious because he will he will have done what he expressly pledged not to do never-ending wars. He would have begun one himself. Well, don't forget get he's ended 42 wars. Well, all right, he says he's ended eight wars, possibly nine, certainly not ended the Ukraine war with Russia, which continues to hang over Europe, the fourth anniversary of the start of the war this week. A devastating report on CNN, I caught with Clarissa Ward, following a train that was bringing back bodies that had been found on the front lines, just a terrifying. terrible, terrible ongoing situation that is yet to be resolved.

Well, yet to be resolved. No, I mean, I think of all the things in the world, of everything that is going on, you might not, you might reasonably say Ukraine is the center of the world. I mean, this is what happens there determines the future. And not to mention, and I, and I think, I think, I think the scale of what's going on, we, certainly we in the, in the, in the, in the, U.S. don't entirely appreciate that we're that we're talking about casualties which are which are running almost to two million at this point and I mean that's on both on both sides of this I mean to devastating effect and and and also the devastation of not only Ukraine but but also in a ways that we don't appreciate the devastate the devastation of of of of of Russia

itself. Russia is too at a potential tipping point. I mean, we have this situation that is not sustainable for either side. And yet it goes on. And where does what with the existential possibilities of both toward the greater Europe and toward Russia and Putin himself. Right. And remember that. he went in and everybody assumed that this would be a very short war, that it would be a takeover and that the Ukrainians would fold very quickly and four years on. Putin is hanging on, Zelensky's hanging on, and it's unclear what Trump is doing, despite his boast that he would have been able to solve it the first day. He obviously didn't do that, and now he's relying on the fact that

had he been president, the war would never have happened. And I have actually, actually, I was speaking to a white house person who was chortling about this in saying Trump does not like it if you bring up Ukraine. So Michael, we have a limerick from a new writer this week. This is from Sycampian, 4001. I'm going to read it out. It's based on our last podcast where we were talking about Prince Andrew, or the Andrew formerly known as Prince. The royals are mystical beasts like centaurs and Catholic priests. They live in glass homes and should never throw stones as the stones might awaken police. That is almost perfect as a limerick. I think rhythmically, it's perfect.

No, that was great. Cy. Is that his name? Yep, Sycampian. Well, it might be a woman. Might be. Might be. Or like William Barnes, the oblique British poet, they might never use Roman words.

Greek words, Latin words, Latin words. Anyway, we'll be back on Saturday to discuss Hillary and Bill Clinton's evidence to the Oversight Committee. And we may or may not be at war with Iran. Iran may already be under regime change. We don't know. Donald Trump doesn't know. And nobody else knows either. As William Goldman said, first words of his brilliant memoir, nobody knows anything. But I know that I'm launching a substack. You've got one, and so I decided I want one, Michael.

Please sign up for it if you're interested in even more Joanna Coles. Just go to beast. pub forward slash scream. It's called primal scream, and it's beast. dot pub forward slash scream. And Michael's substack is called Howl, based on the poem by Alan Ginsberg. Alan Ginsberg being a poet from New Jersey. I'm telling you that because otherwise Michael will. Do you want to thank people, Michael?

I'm considering, do we want to thank them? Have you had coffee today? Yeah, I have. I have. Not enough. I just want to point out that... Can we just run a thing, the thanks? No, it's important to say it every time.

And I would like to point out that when you come into the studio, you normally drink. We have always have a cappuccino waiting for you, but then you go through another large couple of cups of espresso. So I probably around eight espresso, I would say. No, that's just because you gave instructions to prepare it improperly. Oh, well, then why didn't you tell me that? Everyone else knows this now and has blamed the situation on you. Oh, okay, fair. Well, how many coffees do you have, Ben?

How many coffees do you have? Long. Long go. Okay, and I would like to shout out. I've been trying to respond to as many comments as I have been able over the last couple of the weeks, comment from someone called Sarah McPhee who said that she loved my messy hair, that messy hair was in. It wasn't supposed to be messy. And someone else called Dee who said, cut your bangs, they're bloody annoying. That was a brusque email I felt to read first thing in the

morning. I'm assuming that Dee, because of the use of the word bloody is perhaps in London or in England somewhere. Anyway, I'm on my way to the hairdressers at some point this weekend all being well. So am I. I'd see you on Saturday. So the good news is we have so many Bee Beast tier members now. There are too many names to read out. And we really appreciate your support. Thanks to our production team, Devin Rodgerino, Ryan Murray,

Rachel Passer, Heather Pissarro, Neil Rosenhaus.