Three Opinion Writers on Trump’s Latest Faceplant

I'm going to sound like the kinds of conservatives I like read when I was in high school. Don't have this victim mentality all the time. Oh, let it out, Jamel. Let it out, Jamel. Testify, Jamel. Testify. I'm Michelle Coddle. I cover national politics for a New York Times opinion. And I am here this week with the usual suspects, columnist David French and Jamel Buet. Gentleman, good to see you. Good to see you as well. Michelle, great to see you. All right. This week, ahead of America's 250th birthday celebration, we are talking about the division that we're seeing in the country and the kind of leadership that might be able to get us out of it. But first, I want to take a quick look at what's been going on in this very exciting news week, starting with one of my personal favorites, the glorious reflecting pool. All right. So as a veteran Washington resident, I myself cannot get enough of the story, Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, for those who have managed to avoid it so far, the basic gist of it is Trump spent millions to upgrade what he calls a swimming pool, most notably painting it American flag blue on the bottom for the nation's upcoming 250th celebration. But unsurprisingly, perhaps the whole thing has turned into a gloppy swampy mess. All G peeling paint, hapless bystanders arrested and accused of vandalism. And of course, the president blaming everyone, but himself. Now this is not the first of Trump's public missteps, of course, not even the first involving one of his crazy vanity projects. So why has this specific face plant become such a hot topic? Jamal, let's go to you first. I mean, I think first because the visuals are striking, it's similar with what the demolition of the East Wing. It's one thing to like be corrupt and stuff and to collect billions of dollars in crypto money. That's all quite abstract. But when to borrow, to borrow from David Roth, that defector, when it looks like they're brewing Yodas and the reflecting pool, it brewing Yodas. I love that. I think it's very funny. Of course people are going to raise their eyebrows, but they're going to notice it. And when the president doesn't just seem obsessed with this, when he really ought to be doing better things, I mean, he, I know he's Trump, but he's also the president with like a real job, but he's obsessed with this and is preoccupied with it. Thank you for reminding us. Yeah, I know. I think all that together makes, it just puts it into the public view in a way that the somewhat more abstract scandals are. It's just like everyone knows what the reflecting pool looks like. You know, this is a major national symbol. And now it's like a sickly green. It looks like GAC. For viewers, my age, late millennial viewers, it looks like Ecto Cooler. You know, my favorite one that I've seen is somebody, some comedian saying that it looks like the world's largest pool of kombucha. Let's just that they're brewing kombucha. Sorry. You know, I think of this and the ballroom very similarly and they both have one thing in common and that is real estate. I mean, this is, this is Trump's thing, right? He wants things to be big and to be beautiful. If there's one thing he thinks he knows, it's real estate. They're also both perfectly representative of Donald Trump in real estate because one of them is real estate plus corruption. And that's the ballroom. Like, it's not being done lawfully. You've got, you've been misleading the public. Is it going to be privately funded? Is it going to be publicly funded? This one is another sub specialty of his real estate plus incompetence. And so yeah, he's very focused on this is this sort of real estate, sort of tangible visual thing. Part of the beautification of Washington. I got to say, Michelle, it is pretty striking. The visual difference in the Trump Washington DC. Now, some of this was already underway. There was already efforts to clean up the city after a lot of the homeless encampments during the pandemic era. And so there were some positive changes in that way. But the reflecting pool undermines any sense afford motion even from like sort of the most mega dedicated person who likes seeing Trump up there. It is, it's a debacle. And it's a debacle that he sort of from his standpoint, perversely enough, is just magnifying every day the more that he talks about it. I have to say I particularly like these kinds of face plants of his because they're farce instead of say tragedy or horror, which is what we usually get from him. I mean, it's this big to do and he looks completely clownish, which helps undermine his whole master of the universe, take charge persona. And it's just something everybody can grasp as you were talking about with the images, Jamel, a dead duckling floating in a pool of slime is something that everybody can kind of go, yeah, yeah, it's the perfect metaphor. It's like, whereas like when he has the military and they bomb a school in Iran, nobody wants to look at that. He wants to think through the horror of what's happening or he's shipping people off to foreign prisons or whatever. This is much more to my mind, the kind of way you undermine his whole get things done. I'm super competent and just have the will to dominate. I mean, he can't even dominate a pool of algae. This is not impressive. I have to say in addition to just the way that it works with familiar symbols of American and civic religion, I do think that when looking at like DC as a whole, because I've been in DC a bunch recently as well. And the big banners of Trump on federal buildings, it cuts against, I think, Americans' expectations of what their government does, right? Like Americans don't, Americans associate that with tin pot dictatorships. They don't associate this sort of thing with the United States of America. And I do think that Trump may under, Trump may see all of this as sort of glorification for him. And certainly his supporters see this as, you know, look at what Trump is doing. But I think a lot of people look at it and they're like, what do you, what's this about, man? Like, no one elected you to be to make yourself pretend God Emperor. They elected you to lower prices. And that hasn't happened. So what do we think it says about the fact that the reflecting pool, all of these July 4th celebrations that the White House has been cooking up, have instead of becoming a unifying event, have basically split everybody even further. This just, this is the piece of this that depresses me, even as I'm laughing my butt off over the reflecting pool. So I see that it's very intentional from the administration. But the White House doesn't conceive of all Americans as being American in the same way, right? Like some of us, some of us don't count the same as others. And the dividing line seems to be, do you support their political project? The notion that the president is the president for the entire country that yes, you have your supporters and yes, you were elected by your base and you have your party. But like the office represents the whole people. Just is an aftermath to this White House. They don't think about it and that translates to their celebrations. The weird, you know, the weird special event for our birthday boy, Mr. President, what, two weeks ago with the UFC fight and all of that. That, that wasn't, not only was that not meant for the broad public, right? Like you had to have a paramount plus subscription to even watch it. First of all, it was meant for just like a subset of even his own supporters. It wasn't any kind of attempt to bring the country together in under like, common civic rituals. And to me, that's just, that's a, it's an intentional thing. They're thinking of the 250th as an attempt to kind of glorify. And I use that in like the religious term, the religious way to glorify Donald Trump. And not as an opportunity to, despite our many divisions and fractious nature and all that, not to kind of think about our common origins and our common purpose. And the last thing I'll say, and the last thing obviously, the thing I'll say for this little riff is that when you consider the extent to which the intellectuals associated with America, and I include the vice president, the extent to which they articulate a kind of hostility to be a egalitarian reading of the Declaration of Independence, to the notion that credal nationalism and notion that would make some American is your commitment to a set of ideas that they are hostile to that. It all makes sense, right? Like the very thing that anniversary celebrations in this country have tried to focus on. I was reading Gerald Ford's address during the 200th, not long ago, which is not just common origins, but common purpose, common ideals. They reject straight up. And so what else are they going to do, but have like a bunch of meathead professional fighters and like guys on motorcycle. goes right around the White House law. Like what else is there to do? - David, what else is there to do? - There's a middle finger aspect to everything the administration does. So it's exactly what Jamel said. It's the opposite of unity. It's the opposite of an inclusive version or vision of American life. It is to stratify certain kinds of activities and people as real American or not. And so these are the real American sports. And you had initially with Freedom 250, kind of an array of like country and American Iraq performers. That's real American music. - They couldn't even get that though. - But he couldn't even get that. Once people realized what was happening, whoa, but that was huge. You saw the original vision of it. And so it's always subdividing and slicing to where there is a kind of sport. There is a kind of activity that is the real American activity. It all fits with the sort of MAGA aesthetic. It's this constant stratification. It's this constant sense of a pecking order. And then this constant sense there is always, always in the back of their mind, something that goes like this. How can we do this in a way that will make other people mad, that will make our enemies mad? How can we make our enemies mad today? As opposed to how can we bring the country together today? It really does seem to be an absolute communications. Priority of this administration is to just go ahead and decide to tick people off on purpose as long as it's the right people. - Yeah, that strikes me as at the root of the president's movement all along. You know, it's like whatever you think of his policy, whatever you think of his politics. It's all about ticking off the elites. - Yeah, which is hilarious because he is an elite of sorts. He's just an elite who's always had a chip on his shoulder and has never released it. - Elite series defined in a purely cultural non-material way. Elite, for these people, if you are like a barista with an English degree, making $15 an hour, you're an elite because I don't know, I guess like there's like Netflix producers like to make shows for you sometimes. Whereas if you are a billionaire buying pardons for your buddies, not an elite because the cultural tastemakers supposedly look down on you. It's a very self-aggrandizing vision of who constitutes an elite and one that allows people with actual wealth and actual power and actual influence to obscure that under cultural grievances. But it's so darn exhausting. It's like I grew up going to like mudbugs and tractor poles and I've been to a rattlesnake roundup. I challenged the president to find somebody in his cabinet who's been to a rattlesnake roundup. But I don't understand how you can just spend so much of your time being angry and aggrieved about somebody not appreciating your cultural integrity. - And constantly thinking about social hierarchy and social status. It's just constantly thinking about it. And in a way that's always self-aggrandizing that always puts you sort of like it's the scrappy underdog role. Like so what Jamel said was exactly right about elites. You can be an underemployed brown English or art major grad and that's an elite. And if you own five car dealerships and say, "Hattiesburg, Mississippi, you're just a workin' man." And so it's that sort of where you're constantly sort of on the bottom of a particular pecking order that by the way is not the pecking order in their community and in their lives. So in the actual physical space that they occupy, somebody who's a very prominent mag a person will be often revered in the community, very respected in their community. Somebody who might be on the elder board of a church and the head of the local Kiwanis Club or has their name on a building and they'll local college, right? And they will view themselves as the scrappy underdog because the gender studies department in Oberlin looks down on them. - Oh my God. - And that kind of constant. - Constance. - That's all I've gotta say to the president, it's just boohoo, get over it. Okay, get over yourself. - I mean, I'll say it's not even that anyone's looking down at them. It's just like the people who they associate with cultural prestige aren't necessarily thinking of them. But I just, I personally find this whole way of experiencing the world totally alien. It's sort of like, I don't know, man. Like to be a little real for a second, like I'm a black American. Like I know for a fact that there are not insignificant portions of the country that I think kind of nasty things about sort of like my particular cultural background. And it's like, all right, who cares? - It's a little bit more like, you know? - It's a big country, be a grown up. People will be prejudice, whatever. Just like, I don't know, grow up. Don't be a snowflake, right? I just, I really do not understand that this, I'm about to sound, I'm gonna sound like the kinds of conservatives I like read when I was in high school. - No, I'll let it out, Jamel. - Let it out, let it out, let it out. - Justify, Jamel, justify. (laughing) All right, as much as I hate to do this, I'm gonna move us from the pool over to Capitol Hill. There, the Republican-led Congress is in a Trump-induced, swive it. I love it. So we're taping this, I should say. We're taping this Thursday morning. Who knows what's gonna happen? But Trump earlier this week, abruptly canceled plans to sign a bipartisan housing bill because he's mad that Congress won't pass his beloved save act, you know, working to restrict voter access or whatever. So this has even Republican lawmakers spitting mad. We've talked about the save act before and Jamel, I know you have many thoughts. So you wanna just first give us a refresher on the legislation and its current, sorry status. - Yeah, so the save act is just this voter integrity bill. You could say that is more or less designed to sharply reduce the number of people who might participate in the electoral system. The big thing it does is demand you prove your citizenship before you can register to vote. And I think as we've discussed here before, that will disenfranchise millions of Americans. Not because there are millions of illegal voters, but because it's actually kind of difficult to prove your citizenship if you don't have all the exact documents you need. And to be clear, real IDs, drivers licenses, that very few states have ones that would count, right? You would have to whip out a passport, a burst certificates, things like that. You can't just take your drivers license down. - Exactly. So many Americans do not have immediate access to birth certificates or passports if they have them that would prove citizenship. It costs money to get birth certificates in most states. It definitely costs money to get a passport. To the whole thing, I mean, in my view, amounts to an unconstitutional politics. And it also put restrictions on mail-in balloting and the like. And Trump, who believes he lost 2020 because of mail-in voting and illegal voting, once this imposed to help Republicans try to hold on in November, Republican lawmakers, other than kind of the most sycophantic mega house reps seem to grasp with that this could very well disenfranchised a bunch of Republican voters. And having kind of, as I see it, they've been basically humoring him on this, saying, yeah, we'll put it up for a vote, sure. But no intention of trying to get this thing out, precisely because the Republican coalition relies on a lot of people who have you asked them tomorrow to prove that their citizens, they probably couldn't. They probably couldn't. - All right, so David, why does Trump's refusal to sign the housing bill and hold it hostage, put his congressional team in such a tough spot at this moment? - Well, the congressional team, they're all one third of the Senate and the whole house is facing an election, an election in which affordability, especially housing affordability. We talk a lot about groceries and gas prices, but housing is huge, it's huge. And so this is something it was passed on a bipartisan basis that would allow Republicans and Democrats to go back to their districts and say, we hear you, we've done this thing, it's going to do these specific things for you. And so it was something very important for incumbents who are trying to defend their seats. Trump doesn't care about them at all. So this is one of those points where Republicans for the umpteenth time, remember he's in it for himself. So this just, as every point that goes down and his aggregate poll average, there's like a one percentage point increased chance that somebody somewhere in the Republican caucus will say enough and we're starting to see that on the edges. with these war powers resolution votes. He's triggering intense anger on Capitol Hill with this latest stunt. He is very slowly, but very surely eroding his goodwill even with some of his core on Capitol Hill. - Yeah, I wanna say that his trip to the Hill and the yelling with the senators wasn't, he was really attacking the Republican senators who voted for this around resolution thing. I mean, he's just, I do like your math, the one point drop, the one point improvement and chances. I just wanna one more thing on that was just to zoom out and say, this is not just about the Savak to Jamal's point. He is really obsessed with it. It's like Jamal is so right on with that. But even more than that, what he is hoping to do is cause such chaos in the Senate that the leadership there has no choice, but to do all of these kind of broader based things he wants, kill the filibuster or fire the parliamentarians so they can ram through more things along party line votes. He is just blowing the place up and I do think that because of his lame duck status and his toilet level popularity numbers, I just like, I think that we are finally seeing a few of the Republicans go, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, had enough. Maybe I'm just an optimist. - I think you're right, Michelle. I think also politically for them, it's just like, it's been too late, right? That they've, they already spent all of 2025 tying themselves incredibly tightly to the administration. Under, as I read it, it's just like irrational exuberance, this idea that kind of caught hold, I think, throughout a large part of American politics that Trump's win represented, we've talked about this, Trump's win represented some sort of magazine change in American life. And as that, I think, I think, and I believe I wrote multiple times, like in December 2024 that this wasn't the case and that what you would see pretty quickly was kind of reversion to the meme, the meme being people actually don't like this guy very much when he's president. And now we're at this point where, yeah, Trump's approval ratings are, you know, they are the political, coven of green algae and they're reflecting pool. And Republicans, I think are beginning to distance themselves from him, from him, but I think it's a bit too late because they've already, there is no separation prior. And so I think for voters, it's like, well, of course, yeah, of course you want to get away from them now, look how unpopular he is. Like the double edged sort of Trump for Republicans has always been that, yes, in presidential elections, he can turn out a bunch of low propensity voters, a bunch of non-voters who then vote for Trump. They don't vote down ballot. They don't show up in midterms, right? They, they, it's like a sugar rush and it's not sustainable. And Trump does not identify himself with the Republican Party. He identifies himself with his own political standing. So he feels he needs to do something to protect his standing that harms Republicans. He'll do it without even thinking. And that's, I think Senator Republicans in particular who did not expect to be fighting for their majority this fall are somehow only now coming to understand that, yes, if you are in his way, he is going to, he's going to make life difficult for you, even if that costs you a Senate majority. And there's like a, there's like a, there's like a, what, 50, 50 chance, 60, 40 chance, but yeah, it costs the Republicans a Senate majority. And the, the, the element of that, that, you know, the one area in which you can sort of get Trump to care about these races is if you can convince him that, if the Republicans lose, that it's a repudiation of him. And sometimes you'll see this, sometimes you'll see this awareness dawn on him. But then here's what I think the failure of the sayback does for him. Internally in his mind, it creates the alternative explanation, which is, well, they didn't pass the sayback and the Democrats stole the election. That's not a, that's not a reflection on me. It's just more fraud like 2020. And so you can already see this process starting to lock in because the rhetoric, you know, in that Twitter podcast right is, this is, this is the fate of the Republic. Everything depends on it because it is so locked in to the minds of lots of people on the right that they cannot legitimately lose. All elections are stolen from them. That is the excuse that Trump is already building in into, you know, that mental architecture so that he is not repudiated this November. And, and, and, but that's the only way. If you're a Republican member of the House or Senate, the only way to get him to care about the midterms or your seat at all is to tie it to him personally. - So I want to look at where we are as a nation. Right now, we're looking at a 250th birthday celebration. But it's been with this administration and this president of sort of weird, unsettling time to think about breaking out your party hats for a democracy here. How are you both feeling about kind of this upcoming anniversary and where we are with all of our divisions and chaos? - So one thing I think is worth thinking about is that these anniversaries, these 50 year, every 50 year marking, marking the Declaration of Independence, have often fallen at times of like heightened political division. It's actually sort of striking to look at. So 1826, it's just in the wake of a Missouri crisis where the country, the first major sectional crisis over slavery, that is so fresh in the mind of everyone there. And it's just two years after an extremely bitter presidential election in which famously Andrew Jackson loses after the election goes to the House and it's a real time of heightened political division in the country. 1876, that should be a year that is familiar to people. 1876 is the year where we tend to mark the end of reconstruction. And the prior two years, see is really horrific political violence throughout the South, again, a time of heightened division in the country. Even 1926, this is a high water mark for American nativism. And there's quite a bit of division in the country. Even 1926, this is a high water mark for American nativism and there's quite a bit of division in the country. And 76, obviously in the wake of Watergate in the wake of the Vietnam War, a time of malaise, you might say. So there's this funny way in which this 2026 celebration which is in the midst of a period of heightened division and anxiety about the future, is very in keeping with what happens during these celebrations, during keeping with how these things have. - So you're saying we're right on track? This is where we're going. - We're kind of right on track. - I'll say this, I think, from the White House, as we've discussed, there's really no interest in putting forth a more, a good celebration or a commemoration that you aimed at, at least trying to pretend like the divisions aren't there, at least trying to aim for the notion that this is, we have a common heritage here, we've common ideals. But I do think that there are plenty of opportunities for just like individual communities, for states to play that role. I might myself, I'll say, go up to Manichello in Charlottesville where I live and attend the naturalization ceremony that happens at our Vigilai fourth where they do a public reading of the Declaration of Independence. I find it very fantastic. - I find it very moving. And I think just because our politics are heavily divided, it does not mean that we can't, in our own, collective ways, try to think about the high ideals of the country, the aspirations we've had, the extent to which we need to still try to reach them and mark the period that way. Like this is, I don't wanna go too long. I'll say this, I'll say this. The Declaration of Independence, obviously written in Philadelphia, post up in Philadelphia, but like it was printed and it was printed and distributed throughout the country and it was read publicly throughout the country. It was in a lot of ways a public and democratic document with different communities of Americans across the colonies, reading it for themselves, understanding it for themselves. Some people who weren't included in it, hearing it and taking ownership of it for themselves and match spirit of taking ownership for yourself, of your community taking ownership. I think it's like the right spirit for this particular moment. - Data. - You know, when I think about it, and I love Jamelle's run down through American history, which actually shows this very messy moment, the ran is also a very American moment that we sometimes suffer from. this halo effect about American history that sort of, you know, looks at it with these sort of gauzy, filtered eyes. When the reality is this, this thing, this, this, this American nation has always been a tenuous project to live up to the noble ideas of its founding. And it, you know, when I think about it, you have this beautiful idea. We're endowed by our creator with certain and alienable rights among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This beautiful idea and advanced by some deeply flawed people. I can't think of a better illustration for this American experiment. It's a beautiful idea that is always laying on top of a deeply flawed people. And some years, some generations, we have picked up the torch and we've carried it and we've advanced and we've moved closer to that beautiful idea. And some generations and times we've sort of like taken steps back away from that beautiful idea. But for 250, the way I'm putting it and thinking about it, you, it doesn't take me, take much to convince me to celebrate the American idea. I can celebrate it on July 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, that, you know, whenever you want me to celebrate it, I can celebrate that. And I think we should celebrate it. But against the celebration, in the backdrop of the celebration is an indictment. The indictment is, what are you moving towards that beautiful idea? Or away from it. And right now, I feel like we're in a period of national backsliding. And so in that sense, I think 250 can be a tonic and a corrective because it can remind us of who we are supposed to be and remind us of the vision upon which we were founded. And we, it's a great opportunity to hold that vision up and look at it and compare where we are. And then to say to ourselves, it's, you know, it's our time, it's our time, our moment, to preserve this vision, to stop the backsliding and to maybe even turn this ship around a bit, to make a move or two back towards it. And it's the battle between the incredible virtue of the ideas of the founding and the remarkable vice that we as human beings can demonstrate and selfishness and, and greed and all of the things that we're prone to. But one thing I love about this country is every time we, it march towards vice, we are indicted by the virtue of the founding. So this is, I think, an important part. When I talk to people who are discouraged about what's going on or they just seem a little bit convinced that it's never going to get better, you can't see the field in terms of pride in the country. So obviously there are a lot of flaws. Obviously there are a lot of problems. Obviously it's not headed in a direction that a lot, that many Americans feel good about. But, you know, this is a moment to look back and to look forward and to not kind of just shrug your shoulders or throw up your hands and say, I just can't deal with it. You have to. Your democracy has to be tended or it winds up in the hands of the kind of people who will play with it for their own devices. And with that, I want to shift to recommendations and because we are, where we are, this is the last time we will get to chat the three of us before the big independence day. Who? I'm wondering if maybe you'll have suggestions that kind of fit into the spirit of the occasion. David, anything? Yeah. So I'm going to make a recommendation that, you know, it would be, you know, if you're going to go and you're going to say, what can I watch? I'm going to stick to my wheelhouse, Michelle. You know, it's got to be streaming. It's got to be, you know, one of these television recommendations. And there are some that immediately come to mind. Like if you're going to, you're going to talk about sort of the best of America in this moment and sort of, you know, so you could think about band of brothers, for example, but I'm going with something a little bit different. The John Adams mini series from HBO. If you've not seen this, if you've not seen this, this is several years old. I might be more than 10 years old. It's like 20, 20 years old. Oh, Jim, you're telling me why you got to. Why are you doing this? Come on. Why? I was a flat circle. I was a teenager when I came out. Oh, stop. David, I say, we shunned Jamel for the rest of the year. Yeah. This is terrible. This is terrible. I hate this. So even, okay, now that I know it's like 100 years old, I can even recommend it with double enthusiasm because I know that a lot of the listeners may not have even heard of it, but it's a John Adams mini series. And it is this look at John Adams and the founding through his eyes. And it's really fascinating because it takes place in the United States. He's got time in France. He's got time in the Netherlands. He's got time in England. It's just sort of this. And it really gives us picture of the American founding of all of the various moving parts. We tend to think of it signed declaration, fought battles, won independence. But in fact, it was signed declaration, negotiate here, negotiate there, compromise with this person, compromise with that person so that you know, you had, it was a multi front battle. You had Washington in the field. You have the continental Congress with each other. You have the American diplomats spreading out to try to bring legitimacy. It's just, and it's just so well done. It is a delight. So that's my recommendation. Jamal. I will say, we've been talking about the declaration. There's a very strong case to make that the declaration that we understand it is not the one that was signed in 1776. It was the one that was reinterpreted by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg. And so I will recommend that you read Gary Will's book Gettysburg, which is about the writing of Gettysburg Address, the meaning of a Gettysburg Address, which famously begins four, four and seven years ago. Our fathers conceived found a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition of the Elmenacrated Equal, like the, the speech begins with this evocation of the declaration and Will's really explores both the form of the speech, but also the meaning of the speech and the speech does seek to not just make the declaration this, you know, important document, but kind of the mission statement for the American Republic and a way that it wasn't prior to the war. Okay. And I will wrap this up with every year. Long time pod listeners will know July 4th. I reread The Great Gatsby, which for me is the Great American novel, whether you're talking about kind of the self creation and self-destruction of the central character, Jay Gatsby, whether you're talking about Daisy Atom, the story and the characters can be mapped onto all kinds of political eras and moments. And it's just such beautiful writing, which is why in my opinion, it can never be made into a good movie. They've tried a couple times, but the book itself is incomparable. Just go for it. Read it. That's my recommendation. That's what I will be doing as I fly on the 4th of July. Just say. All right. And with that, I'm going to land this plane. Guys, thank you so much and joy the holiday. And we will do this again on the other side. Yeah. Thank you. See you later.