The Dispatch Podcast - Men of Note

Episode Date: May 1, 2020

Bret Baier, chief political anchor at Fox News, joins Sarah and Steve to talk 2020 politics: Joe Biden's sexual misconduct allegation, veepstakes, Justin Amash's third-party run, and the president's handling of coronavirus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to our special second dispatch podcast of the week. I'm your host, Sarah Isgir, joined by Steve Hayes and Fox News' Brett Baer. This podcast is brought to you by The Dispatch. Visit the dispatch.com to see our full slate of newsletters and podcasts. And make sure to subscribe to this podcast so you'd never miss an episode. Today we'll talk some 2020 politics, why Joe Biden's accuser isn't getting any TV time, Biden's likely VP picks, and Justin Mosh's entrance into the race. Then we'll ask Brett to grade the president's job on coronavirus to date. And we'll end with some revelations about Stephen Brett's acapella past. Let's dive right in our special guest today, Brett Baer, chief political anchor for five,

news. And before we even get started, just so cool this weekend that you're doing this, Sunday 7 to 9 p.m. called America Together. And you and Martha McCallum are hosting a virtual town hall with President Trump at the Lincoln Memorial. Yes. Yeah, it's going to be great. It's, you know, the Lincoln Memorial in and of itself will give it a different, a different look. We are going to do it, social distanced apart. We will bring in questions from around the country, from businesses big and small, from people who are concerned about the opening of the states and the different spots around the country to the president. So we'll play those sound bites.

And then obviously, Martha and I will follow up on the issues of the day. We did one in Scranton, Pennsylvania, which worked out well. This one is going to have a different flavor to it. But the fact that it's on the national mall is really cool. But that's only the second most interesting thing that we really need to talk about before we launch off, which is you went to college with Steve? I did. I did.

He was a year below me. We were singing eyes together. Oh, my God. I like to say that I hazed hazed, haze, but I didn't really. Tried. He tried. What was his beer of choice? God, I think it was Labats, maybe.

I did like LaBats. The Milwaukee's best. Let's be honest, I was not picky. Yeah. Mickey's Big Mouth. I'm not sure. Mickey's Big Mouth. That is true. Okay, well, that, you know, it undermines your credibility, Brett, quite a bit, but...

You think he's on the panel for a reason? He knows too much. He knows too much information. I have no chance to put him on the back. This is true. I was actually, I was texting with a couple of our buddies from college last night, trying to come up with things that I could use to spring on you. And there was a split. I've got to go. The problem is some of the stuff, I said, I'd like to catch him a little off guard, but I don't want to really, you know, so there was these two separations of stories that we decided we'd just pass and give you sort of a big pass. That's a good idea. I'll save it for another time.

I see Brett taking a deep breath. He's relaxing. He's better now. All right, all right. let's dive into substance. So Ben Smith had a very interesting piece today at the New York Times about why none of the major networks are putting Tara Reid, who is accused former vice president Joe Biden of sexual assault on the air that the only offer she's gotten is from Fox News. And here's how he ends at Brett. I want to get your reaction to how you see this as a journalist

and at Fox News for that matter. Journalists cannot predict how viewers might react to television interviews with Ms. Reed, or where they're reporting on her claims will lead. They don't have to. They should just make sure their audience knows they're reporting hard and doing the work with an open mind. Yeah. Cudos to Ben. I mean, he's done some really good work here. He's interviewed the editor of the New York Times about the disparity between the coverage of Brett Kavanaugh and those allegations and the coverage of Tara Reid and her allegations. That, I think, is really where this story, you know, on a media angle is. It is so stark, like night and day between what we saw with Brett Kavanaugh and what we're seeing now. I think that the decision to not even ask her

to be on, the journalistic ethics usually is let the chips fall where they may. I'm not saying that Tara Reid's story 100% is backed up. There are holes in it. There are questions to be about her past and some of the things she said. But you can't do one thing on sexual allegations and go everything to the wall and then nothing, not even a question to the candidate in this case. But let me push back on that a little,

which is you're comparing it to Kavanaugh and should we hold that as the gold standard of how Kavanaugh was covered in the media and two, compare it maybe to the allegations against President Trump and how those were treated in that. media? Which were covered and asked about. And Trump was asked about him numerous times, numerous different ways. Now, he blew him off. He blew off the questions. He said it was all fake

news. But we covered those cases. We covered the Stormy Daniels. We covered all of the allegations along the way. You at least have to ask the candidate about it. There have been 142 questions to Joe Biden, not one of them, about Tara Reid. I just think that there's a big vacuum there and more needs to be known. I think today you had House Speaker Pelosi asked about that disparity between what she said about Breit Kavanaugh's allegations and what she's saying now. And she said she didn't want to be lectured. So I just don't think that that's the way to do it. Yeah, it's such, I mean, from my perspective, it's such a massive double standard.

I think that the thing that the Ben Smith column really highlights is that this stuff existed long before Donald Trump came on the scene. The conservative skepticism of mainstream media existed for decades, and I think existed for a reason, and this Ben Smith column gets to some of that. But what's the, I mean, I guess if you're starting sort of from scratch, if you're thinking about this as a journalist from the beginning, it's not appropriate to ask. candidates about every allegation that's leveled, right? I mean, doesn't there, shouldn't there be some sort of baseline level of corroboration before it reaches the point? I mean, you can't ask about every single allegation made against the candidate, which was, I think, unfortunately, the standard in the Brett Kavanaugh coverage, but it's not the right standard, is it? No, that's true. I mean, and that shouldn't be the gold standard. It's just the one that we're comparing to because it's the last

time you had a major allegation against somebody who was public. Now, the New York Times said the reason that it was a different focus because he was in this hearing at the time and he was a public figure, well, hello, you have a presumptive Democratic nominee running for president. Now, I'm saying the Kavanaugh thing shouldn't be the gold standard. But arguably, Tara Reid has more dots on the chronological timeline that point back to people knowing at least within the few years of the allegation. And at least she has this vague call about supposedly her mother calling into Larry King live. She has exponentially more than Christine Blasey Ford had when she said what she said about the allegations of Kavanaugh. I know we keep on going back to Kavanaugh, but that's our

most recent example of this happening. So how do you, as a journalist, approach this? If you were interviewing Joe Biden and you have his statements on believe all women from previously and you have his denial now, you know, you get the next interview. What are you asking? Well, just that. You know, I want to know the facts. First of all, his straight denial that had happened.

Second of all, is there a difference between what Tara Reid is alleging and how she's treated to what you're saying in the past about all of these women? I mean, here's a perfect example. Kirsten Gilliprand, who comes out in support of Joe Biden, Senator from New York. She is 100% behind Biden. She kind of discounts the Tara Reid allegations or doesn't comment on them. But yet, this is the same person who led a charge in the Senate really to kick out Alf Franken, her Democratic colleague, for something that Democrats even said, we really don't think

he should be kicked out of office for. So I think the story is more the disparity. You want to get to the ground truth if you can, but at least you have to get a strong denial from Joe Biden and not just his campaign behind closed doors. Yeah, let's broaden this out a little bit. Going from Joe Biden, the accused, to Joe Biden, the candidate. If you look at the 2020 general election for president from 30,000 feet, say, you look at just the situation on the ground. You have a president who's running for reelection in an environment with negative five GDP growth and unemployment of about 20 percent. And that's just right now. That's if those numbers don't get worse, which I think they probably will, his approval rating over his first three years even before

the coronavirus and all the problems it's caused all the challenges it's presented was hovering in the high 30s or low 40s. If that's all we knew about this moment, we'd say that that incumbent was doomed, but would not only lose, but would lose in a blowout. So is this race over before it begins? No, but it's changed dramatically. And, you know, what we haven't seen yet is really what Donald Trump is the best at, which is casting some particular person in a negative light. And, you know, he hasn't really unleashed the cannons as of yet. He has a huge war chest of money. There are going to be a ton of ads. And eventually, one would think, if this COVID thing, goes down and he gets out and about to campaign, he's going to be, you know, in his traditional Trumpian sense, going after Joe Biden in every way, shape, and form. Does that affect the numbers? Maybe. Joe Biden's not the best campaigner on the stump. He may luck out that we have

such a COVID situation that he doesn't have to, and he can ride the numbers and the statute just talked about to election. But it's not over yet, and I think it's going to be close from that war. There's been a bunch of reporting in recent days, just picking up on something you just said there, a bunch of reporting in recent days that the president has told his campaign and Brad Parscale not to unleash a series of attacks on Joe Biden and China, suggesting that Joe Biden is too close to China, some ads that they had apparently prepared pushing that line. And Trump told his campaign, it's too early to do that. What's behind that? I mean, I would say of the many things that Donald Trump is known for restraint is not chief among them. What's behind that? Do you have any reporting or speculation about that? Well, I mean, I've talked to people about the concern about the China story. You know, we talked about the origins of the story and the investigation. The DNI just came out with confirmation that they've launched this full-scale investigation. And when I was doing that reporting, one of the concerns was that China holds the keys to a lot of PPE.

a lot of things we still need in this coronavirus health crisis that we're in, to the point where this time going really strong against China, the administration is not sure. Now, you look at what Mike Pompeo is saying and doing, that seems to go against that. I think that he thinks, the president may think, that China is a powerful card. And when you throw in Hunter Biden and you throw in Joe Biden saying, come on, this, China's not going to be a problem in sound bites, that that's a powerful negative connotation, especially China's looked at pretty negatively Democrats and Republicans. So the closer you get to the election, it's a more powerful negative act. Staying on the 2020 theme, I've got some

VP buckets for you to consider. We have the former candidates who've been tested on the national stage, Harris, Warren, Klobuchar. We have the swing state options, Whitmer, Tammy Baldwin from Wisconsin, Florida's Val Demings. You have Tammy Duckworth, who has like a list of first accomplishments that is, you know, actually very impressive. You have the progressive base bucket, Stacey Abrams, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Ayanna Presley. When you're talking to folks, are you hearing A, that they think Biden's vice presidential pick matters? And who are the names that you're hearing most often as his smart pick? So this is early in the process.

I think Klobuchar had a rise there at the beginning. She's very... The clobentum. Clopementum at the beginning because of her campaigning style, the Midwest appeal, somebody in line with Joe Biden's thinking on a number of things. I think Whitmer is not going to sell in the current... controversy over Michigan and how it's dealing with the coronavirus, whether you're a pro-Whitmer or not, the heat usually takes the choice away if I had to bet. I wouldn't be surprised if there's like a

dark horse out there, like the New Mexico governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, who is a Democrat under the radar, but very accomplished. Former Attorney General, she was a former a congressional congressperson from New Mexico, obviously has the Hispanic bucket. Democrats, as we know, like to check a lot of lists sometimes. The president's or, I mean, the former vice president has already checked the box that he wants it to be a woman, dependably. I think it's up in the air, but Klobuchar, if I had to bet. Does that suggest that you, sorry, sir, does that suggest that you think it's

a safe, that he's likely to go with a safe pick, given this environment? I do. I don't think, I think, first of all, people would want to see someone who could be president right away. You know, all the rumors about Hillary Clinton, you know, is she angling for VP? That would be something. It would be unbelievable. But I do think that being president, being able to be president, tested. So somebody on the trail who's been around the block, probably is the safer day. He said yesterday that he'd consider putting Republicans in his cabinet and that he might, in fact,

announce some cabinet members ahead of November. Do you think it's likely for him to pick a Republican for the cabinet? Yeah. I mean, Biden, if anybody, can reach across the aisle and pick Republicans. And there will probably be some who will say yes. And that'll be appealing for some independence. I think his biggest issue is how he presents himself and how he talks about things and he's not been the smoothest. He's had some bumpy rides in his recent interviews.

Well, perhaps this is a good segue then into the third option, if you will. Justin Amash from Michigan announced that he was opening an exploratory bid this week with the Libertarian Party. These are always the questions I ask. Does it matter? It does matter. In a really close race, it matters. I mean, you know, Justin Amash is not a nobody, and he can present very well. He gets one, two percent. It matters in a very close race. Think of the Ross Perrault. Think of green parties of old. Think of Jill Stein. You know, a few points in some of these states really makes a difference, especially Michigan. Can he get the kind of attention that he probably will need, particularly given the likelihood that we're not going to see traditional campaigning, you know, at least for the short-term future. Does he, is he, is he interesting to you? I mean, would you want to interview him on special report? Would you do a town hall with him? Or does he have something to prove before he sort of

reaches that point? I think he has something to prove before we do roll out of town hall, but I definitely do an interview with him. He's interesting. His criticism of the president, goes back away, is obviously left the party because of it. And so in that sense, it's not like this reveal of somebody who suddenly doesn't believe in the president that has to go his own way. I mean, he's kind of set and been that way as an independent. But I interview him. I think he's going to have a tough time to break through, though. You're right. So we don't have a ton of data on this. He just announced 48 hours ago that he was opening this exploratory committee, but the last NBC poll said that of voters who have a negative

opinion of both Trump and Biden, Biden wins those voters about six to one. Is that meaning that a third party candidate like Amos hurts Biden more than Trump if that poll were accurate, for instance? What are you hearing from inside the Trump campaign on how they see an Amash entrance into the race? Is it positive for them, negative for them? I don't. I'm not. I'm not. talked about this with them, but I think that it would be negative. I mean, if it's taking away from anybody, it's taking away from Trump voter potentially, you know, a libertarian leaning maybe doesn't go towards a Democrat. But, you know, listen, the way we are spending and what we're doing in COVID-19 changes, mixes up the whole ideological spectrum, you know. And so there's a lot of

variables that we just don't know because it's so different than we thought it was going to be. Yeah, I mean, I think if you look at what was interesting in the 24 hours after Amash announced his exploratory committee, I was emailing and texting and phoning with a number of Republican strategists from around the country. And my view is that this is the one thing, One of a few things that could give Donald Trump a big boost is an Amash entry into the race. Because Trump, as we were talking about earlier, his approval rating has, you know, hovered between 38 and 44, 45. He's had a difficult time getting above 50. And the people who don't like Donald Trump really, really don't like Donald Trump.

They're not likely to be persuaded between now. November. So you think what enables Donald Trump to win with potentially, you know, 44 or 46% of the vote, it would be a credible third party candidate that just gives people who are not happy with either parties, which, again, a lot of people in this country, some place to go. You seem not to buy that. You seem to be on the other side of that. You think it potentially... Yeah. I just don't know if he can get the traction in a democratic circle. You have to have to be pretty anti-Joe Biden to leave the comfortable confines of what they're trying to portray as the Democratic umbrella from the progressive side of Bernie Sanders and AOC to the conservative

Democrat. You know, they're trying to make it broad and the umbrella is put together by anti-Trump. So how does Justin Amos change that dynamic? Wasn't it possible that people like you and me and Sarah spend way to? I mean, this is certainly true of me. Let me just speak for myself. I mean, if I look back to 2016 and even before, I think I over-emphasized the importance of political philosophy and ideology in determining what voters do. I mean, 2016 felt to me, looking back on it, much more like an attitude election than a,

you know, let's break this down by specific policy issues. And I'm voting for Donald Trump because of, you know, these traditional Republican policy issues. I mean, even in the Republican primary, Trump blew up what had been kind of conventional wisdom among Republicans on those ideological lines. So couldn't you make an argument that a mosh if he comes in. And Joe Biden has these, I mean, he really does struggle getting his answers out in a debate setting in interviews. He's only going to be off the stage for a short amount of time or, you know, certainly not into the first. fall, he'll have to be out there talking, giving answers, giving interviews, being grilled, maybe on a debate stage. And, you know, you look at the people who aren't, aren't happy with

Donald Trump. Couldn't you make a case that Amash, if he just appears to be a sort of semi-sane, normal person who doesn't push people away, that might be his greatest path, whatever his sort of ideological predispositions are? Yeah, I mean, maybe. I agree with you. It wasn't ideological in 2016, but I think Hillary Clinton was uniquely positioned to be the worst candidate possible that the Democrats could have run and that she alone could lose to Donald Trump and that he alone could beat her because of the unique position of Hillary Clinton and the animus to be able to keep the African-American vote home in some position, you know, like maybe two, three points. I don't think Joe Biden has those problems. He doesn't have that baggage. Now, if he goes

out and really just does horrible and has some moment on a stage or something. And then it disintegrates. Then you have a different ballgame and you could have a different mix. But I think he doesn't lose as much if he muddles through as Hillary Clinton would lose just by who they are. This has been a real treat talking about politics and not talking about coronavirus with you, Brett. But it would be odd. I think if we just skipped that entirely? Yeah. So last week, there were a few surprises at the White House's daily briefing. One of them was you.

There you were. Brett Baer, not behind the desk in the White House briefing room. What I don't know you're thinking on why you went, what you gained from, and all of that, whether you think the briefings have been helpful, hurtful, the president's handling of the coronavirus pandemic overall. Yeah. So, you know, that used to be my seat as a one of every, Chief White House will find it. That was my literally my seat right there. Were we ever so young? But that was back in 2007, eight, and the beginning of nine. But the reason I went is because I was preempted so many times on the show. And I joked with my staff and said, you know, I should just go and just do the show. from there and at least get questions answered and everybody joked and laughed around and then we talked about it more and said maybe I should go and so I did and it worked out fine asked a bunch of

questions and surprisingly he ended early and so I looked at my watch and I had it was you know 655 so I had five minutes to go so I just stood up and turned around and finished the show from the briefing room which which worked out fine But to your other question about the success of those briefings, I think at the beginning, they were tremendously successful for President Trump. And he was seen, you know, feuding with reporters and it kind of worked for him. But then over time, the weeks went on, there were diminishing returns. And I think his aides saw that and realized that.

And that's why they scaled it back. I think he has to have the substance to be able to deliver, as opposed to going on riffs, which he often does, and that gets him into a lot of trouble. So let the record show that our college buddies think that you needed to show up at the briefings because you just have such a massive ego. You needed your face on television, and that was really what, no, that's not true. That's not true. That's not what they said. And it's the only nice thing I'll say about you is one of the reasons it's so fun to work with you, aside from the fact that I have all these stories about you from the past, is you don't have that ego, which is pretty unique in the world of television, I can say, having been doing TV now for, I don't know, 15 years myself, sort of refreshing. On the handling of coronavirus in general, obviously the president's polls have taken a hit lately.

You read stories, and I think they're true. I think they're accurate stories about finger-pointing inside the White House, the president shouting at his campaign manager, people, you know, the HHS secretary at odds with the Treasury Secretary and the coronavirus task force not getting along. lots of finger pointing, lots of frustration there. Is this the kind of thing that sticks? Or are we seeing them frustrated internally because what we're seeing externally has been so problematic? I think it sticks depending on what the outcome is. If we as a country bounce back, the virus,

we get a handle on it. There's a treatment by the fall that is at least in the medical community believed to reduce it on the way to a quickened vaccine that Fauci even says could be 100 million by January if we're on fast speed. That would be quite something. And if that happens and in turn, more places open up, that some of the beginning will be forgotten. And some of the pain knows no memory will be forgotten in the early times. But you can argue that the administration had obviously fits and starts about how to deal with this. Any administration likely would, but it was unique to this president because of how he talks about things. Now he, again, goes on riffs and goes on, you know, his gut. So when they roll out a big thing in the Rose Garden about tests in

CVS parking lots, you know, that doesn't transpire. And then the questions about tests get testee with him, you know, back and forth. And it doesn't look good. But if the end result is good, I don't think it's going to make a huge difference come November. Let me dig down on that a little more specifically. Of the last two months, what specific moment would you give the administration an A for and what specific moment would you give them an F for, moments that will matter six months from now in an election year. You know, he talks about it all the time now, but the ability to round up these ventilators

and the ability to get public-private partnerships with companies and to roll that cooperation out, I think was impressive, and it was impressive when they all rolled out and talked about things that they were doing. Obviously, ventilators are not the concern, but they were at the beginning. And you remember Governor Cuomo talking about, you know, if you don't give me 26,000 ventilators,

I want you to tell the families which ones are going to die. You know, that was a real moment where he's saying, you tell the family which one's going to die because they don't have a ventilator. Well, now he's giving ventilators, Cuomo is, to all kinds of states because he has excess ventilators. I think they mobilize the Army Corps of Engineers to these stand-up hospitals really quickly. Both are those things. And now those hospitals are getting taken down because they're not being used. They're like six people in McCormick Place in Chicago or something.

So I think those are A's. I think F's or lower on the chain is, you know, the testing rollout and what was talked about about testing, not acknowledging at first that the CDC had real, real problems off the beginning and not explaining that and why it mattered. And two, relying on models that arguably were wrong and policy decisions that were made based on those models that we don't know, there's so much more that we don't know about this virus even today, that I think, you know, there was just a lot that was up in the air at the beginning. Last question to you, Steve, and then I have a wrap question. Yeah, just a little bit about the politics of this and the president's. base. What's been so interesting to me, I mean, I think it's fair to say the president's been sort of

all over on this. He favors, strongly favors lockdowns, but then kind of backs off and says, we need to open up and then changes his mind. You know, the next day he's for Brian Camp opening up Georgia one day and then he sort of disavows that the next day. So he's sort of been all over the place. But what's been consistent is that I would say key components of the president's base among Republicans have remained very skeptical of the lockdowns and very critical of what they've done to the economy. You had Dennis Prager, who's been a pretty strong Trump supporter, tweet the other day that the lockdown is the worst decision in human history. You've had some of our colleagues in prime time, Laura Ingram. Certainly, Sean Hannity has been

pretty supportive of the president, no matter what he does, which he has been in the past, but Laura's been pretty critical of the lockdown situation. And the question I have for you is, does that matter to the president? I mean, you'd think if somebody like Dennis Prager says, this is the worst mistake in human history, it would be hard for him to support the person who encouraged it or made it for president. Do you see any fraying on the president's base there, or is that pretty solid? They're not voting for Joe Biden. So, in that, that sense, it's unifying, no matter, it's not shooting somebody on Fifth Avenue, but it is a policy decision. He's defending it. I mean, for the people who point to Sweden, he's tweeting

out, look at Sweden's numbers compared to Norway. The fact that he's defending it suggests to me that he's listening to his medical experts. And in that sense, for all of the criticisms about Donald Trump, for the most part, Tony Fauci and Deborah Birx have determined what this looks like. I mean, all of the steps along the way have had their full endorsement, including the rollout of these guidelines from the states. So it's important to remember that this is being led by the medical experts, not really by the President of the United States. I mean, he's obviously steering it from a leadership point of view. Again, I think it's results oriented. If it turns out bad and we go through a really bad time and the virus comes back

and we're badly positioned than the economy takes forever. You know, you're likely looking at a President Biden come 2021. Okay. Now to the Brett Bear behind the scenes. Everyone sees you on TV. I'm not sure they know fully

that you actually spend a good amount of your free time in wonderful charitable activities. First of all, this week I understand you awarded the first of the Charles Krauthammer Scholarships, which is really exciting and a great honor to the person that's named after. And if you want to say a few words about that, but my real question to you is every year you are pretty famous inside the Beltway for performing at the Gridiron Club dinner, which also awards scholarships.

And this year it was canceled. And so my question is, what show tunes did we miss out on this year? Oh, my goodness. It was really going to be good. I was, uh... Did he sing in college, Steve? We did. So did Steve.

This is, this is... Oh! You know that? Wait. Wait. I thought we weren't going to talk about this. Exactly. I think we both did stints at the front of the house band.

We did. And... What was Steve's go-to? I think we did a bunch of R-EM covers. Yeah. Is that what I said? Yeah, really. It's true.

But I was also, weren't you, I mean, this is really probably something we shouldn't admit. Although I loved it. I had a good time. I think we were both at one point or another in the all men's acapella group, men of note. We were. We were. Men of note. Men of note.

We were men of note. Always, always a pun with those things. Yes. The gridiron, I was Thomas Jefferson. No, let's see. I can't even remember. We had two songs. It was Garth Brooks in Low Place.

and then I had one where I was Michael Bennett and I saying what's the prison Johnny Cash. Yeah, Folsom Prison. Yeah, Folsom Prison with different words. But we're going to recast that, I think, for next time. Oh, good. The Great Iron's a lot of. And for Dr. Crouthammer, let me just say, it's a Fox News thing.

It was really great that Fox put it together. scholarship, two people, two kids, college scholarship for, and through the National Merit Scholarship Foundation, and Fox set it up for the annual Dr. Charles Crathammer scholarships. And his son, Daniel, did a big rollout, and it's just great to be able to remember Charles. We remember them all the time, but to remember him once a year like that, he would love it because he was big into education. that's wonderful the gridiron dinner by the way is now on the record but there's no video so people still miss out on the outrageous outfits that you have worn in the past that's true fortunately i've now seasoned so i don't have to do the first year costume the animals the animals

yeah thank you so much for joining us brett i know you've got a busy schedule today always a treat to hear stories about steve as well feel free to just text me any additional that we could add in later, I will keep you as a confidential source. All right. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Brett.