Transcript: Trump closes in on a second term in office

This is an audio transcript of the Rachman Review podcast episode: ‘Trump closes in on a second term in office’

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Gideon Rachman
Hello and welcome to the Rachman Review. I’m Gideon Rachman, chief foreign affairs commentator of the Financial Times. This week’s edition comes from Washington, DC. My guests are the FT’s chief commentator here in the US, Edward Luce, and Susan Glasser of The New Yorker. It’s less than a year now until the next US presidential election. Donald Trump’s the clear favourite for the Republican nomination and narrowly ahead of Joe Biden for the general election next November. So are we looking at a second Trump presidency?

Donald Trump in clip
The whole thing is crazy. But you know what? The people get it. And that’s why our poll numbers are high. I’m the only person in history that got indicted that saw about a 30 per cent rise in my poll numbers. Usually . . . (People cheering) You know, we were doing fine before.

Gideon Rachman
That was Donald Trump back on the campaign trail. The former president has to combine electioneering with defending himself. He’s facing four criminal cases as well as a civil suit that threatens his business empire in New York. But President Biden also has his troubles. Opinion polls show increasing voter concern about his age. With both candidates unpopular with the wider electorate, is it really inevitable that America will once again be faced with a choice between Biden and Trump? That was the question I put to Susan Glasser.

Susan Glasser
Well, Gideon, everyone in Washington also says surely it can’t be Trump and Biden again. And yet we’ve been having the same circular conversation essentially for much of the entirety of Joe Biden’s presidency. And we are where we are. There is a chance that it won’t be a repeat, but the overwhelming odds at this point suggest that it will be.

Gideon Rachman
So let’s look at the Biden bit, first of all. I mean, we can see Trump as a primary process. If he wins the primaries, he’ll be the candidate. But with Biden polling so badly, is there not a pressure and a mechanism to get another Democratic party candidate?

Susan Glasser
It’s too late. It’s just too late. The filing deadlines for 2024, especially in the key early states, have already passed. People who’ve looked at this because, of course, this has been a subject of much conversation and analysis here in Washington. The bottom line is that those who’ve looked at it, looked at the calendar and everything, say by the end of the year, ie, over the next couple of weeks, would be really the last possible moment for Biden to step aside and for there to be a robust Democratic party primary process.

Now, of course, we’re not talking about a kind of a health event or some other thing that causes Biden to be unable to be the candidate next year. And there the key question I think you have to look at is, is it before the Democratic convention next summer or after? In other words, is it before the Democratic party has officially sanctified Biden as the nominee, in which case there still could be a chance for some kind of modified primary-type election? Or is it afterwards, in which case Democrats are really screwed, especially the closer that it would come to the actual election. But he’s running. We have to get over that. And it feels like a lot of these poll results are just a kind of a collective cri de coeur, you know, like we don’t accept that he’s doing the thing that he is doing.

Gideon Rachman
And why do you think he’s doing it? I mean, you know lots of people in the administration. Is anybody like tapping him on the shoulder and saying, you’ve done a great job, but you’ll be 82 when you’re inaugurated next time. The polls don’t like it. Or is nobody prepared to have that conversation?

Edward Luce
You know, I don’t think tapping him on the shoulder and saying that would be news to him. And I don’t think it would be good for your career. I mean, if your president wants to run and, you know, he’s not being opposed and you work for him, there’s no real point in telling him not to run. I mean, in his head — and Susan, I’m sure you’ll agree with this — he’s the guy who beat Trump. Hillary didn’t beat Trump. Bernie Sanders might probably not have beaten Trump. Elizabeth Warren probably wouldn’t have beaten Trump.

So Biden’s pretty convinced that he’s the person who can beat Trump. He has a good case regardless of the age issue of saying, this has been an effective presidency and I can argue that a second term would consolidate the gains of the first, etc. It’s very hard to tell somebody who’s won election and is an incumbent to bail out. So I don’t think that kind of conversation has got any upside for anybody who might think of tiptoeing into the Oval Office and speaking some home truths to him.

Gideon Rachman
And what about Kamala Harris? Because people obviously think, well, she could be president if Biden were re-elected. He’s 82. Any chance of her being replaced on the ticket?

Edward Luce
Not while Biden’s the nominee. I mean, if as Susan says, you know, we get into some medical event before the convention, before the crowning, we get into an attenuated primary or even some kind of old-fashioned brokered convention, then anything could happen. I don’t think Kamala Harris has much of a base. I don’t think Biden would feel he owes her the presidency. And I’m just sort of shooting the breeze here. But I think he would want it to be contested if that were the scenario. So I don’t see Kamala Harris as being the heir apparent in that scenario. And she is very, very unpopular. So it would be a drag on his ticket if his age won’t track enough.

Gideon Rachman
OK. Let’s switch to the Republican side for now. Trump — he’s way ahead in the polls. Ed, you’re writing about Nikki Haley this week. She seems to be the only candidate who might knock him off. But can you have a plausible scenario when he’s 30 points ahead of her?

Edward Luce
You could have a plausible scenario. I don’t think it’s likely, but you can have a plausible scenario that she comes a strong second in New Hampshire. Chris Christie’s voters sort of evaporate and go towards her as the only viable non-Trumpian. And then she goes on to win South Carolina. Just remember, Super Tuesday happens the day after the beginning of his Washington trial, March 4th and 5th, respectively. I mean, Susan should comment on this. And if there were going to be a sort of America season nine moment, that might be it.

Susan Glasser
OK. Well, first of all, for a little bit of context here, we should start any conversation about the Republican primary by noting that no candidate with as big of a lead as Donald Trump has right now has ever lost in the Republican primaries as long as they’ve been having sort of this modern process. So let’s stipulate to that. Trump’s lead in terms of history would appear to be essentially insurmountable in that no one else has ever done it. But of course, this whole era has smashed the historical playbook again and again.

I just put that out there because it’s almost a little bit wishful thinking when we talk about Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis and the other candidates in the sense that they are so far behind Trump. Normally, we wouldn’t be talking about someone in that position as a serious candidate, for example, a year out or a little bit less than a year out. In previous primaries, it’s true that the frontrunner was not necessarily winning at that point in time, but he was within 1 or 2 points of winning. So, you know, when people talk about in 2016, well, Donald Trump wasn’t leading at this exact historical moment. It was Dr. Ben Carson. But Trump was within 1 point, not having a challenger who was double digits ahead of him. So I think that’s really important for people.

Again, we’re still in the like, woe is us, tell us it ain’t so. Give us an alternative. And this is the tragedy of American politics really in recent years, is that we’re trapped in this cycle of extremes and outcomes that a large swath of Americans in the centre of both parties say they don’t want. And yet again and again and again, they make partisan choices that lead to these outcomes. I agree with Ed’s scenario here. So people should be looking at January and February, the early races, as do they put Nikki Haley or someone else in a position to be able to pull off an extraordinary upset? And I don’t rule that scenario out. I’ve always felt that she was the most logical, viable person because she has the ability to capture the attention of the remaining traditionalist, the establishment left maybe 20, 25 per cent of the Republican party that is sort of never Trump or at least no more Trump and then peel off some of the other voters who might be Trumpy or. Remember, though, that Nikki Haley, along with everybody else on the first debate stage except for Chris Christie, raised her hand and said that she would accept Donald Trump despite his lies about the 2020 election if he wins. And so she’s trying to have it both ways.

Edward Luce
And I think she also promised to pardon him if she became president.

Susan Glasser
She did. And a lot of people I’ve spoken with — and I’m curious, Ed, whether this has started to come up in your conversations — a lot of people I’ve spoken with think that, in effect, might be the trade-off, you know, that were Haley to put together a credible enough performance early on, that she actually would have some leverage, that she and the other party leaders could actually say to Donald Trump, OK, if you bow out and don’t destroy our chances in November, we could pardon you.

Gideon Rachman
Well, we’ll get in a second to the whole criminal indictments hovering over Trump and what that might do to the election. But just before we go there, I mean, I think one of the things that people in this country and overseas find incredible is we saw Trump essentially trying to stage a coup in my mind on January the 6th. And yet the American public, at least half of them, if it’s Trump leading Biden, are gonna overlook that. Why is that not disqualifying him?

Edward Luce
Well, I mean, it is disqualifying by any reasonable measure. I think that he’s managed to become the symbol of victimhood. Everybody has a grievance nowadays. The Maga base has got a particularly toxic but a particularly deep-seated grievance politics. He’s able to personify himself as the victim-in-chief, as the person who feels — not their pain so much; this isn’t Bill Clinton — but their anger, their retribution.

Gideon Rachman
He says I am your revenge.

Edward Luce
I am your revenge. I will be your retribution, etc. And therefore, in sort of a counterintuitive season nine sense in which this is going, the more trials he gets subjected to, the more criminal indictments that come flooding in, the more plausible he is as their lightning rod for victimology. I don’t think we should underestimate the degree to which we sitting here might not think the Hunter Biden stuff and the Biden crime family stuff has any real basis. But there is a whole world out there that listens to a very different media that is absolutely convinced that Biden is head of the Biden crime family.

Gideon Rachman
Yeah. But when you look at those polls, Susan, I mean, they show incredible things. And wasn’t there a poll saying that like 25 per cent of Americans believe the paedophile ring was running the United States. I mean, maybe I’m getting that one wrong. But the whole Hillary Clinton conspiracy theory that a paedophile ring was being run out of a pizza parlour, a lot of people believe that.

Susan Glasser
Well, in fact, that conspiracy theory then grew and morphed into the even bigger QAnon conspiracy theory in the 2020 election, which Donald Trump openly flirted with. There’s nothing when you have an unprincipled, kind of soulless, transactional person like Donald Trump campaigning. There’s nothing that he considers off-limits, right? That’s what we’ve seen, that there are really no guardrails that he abides by. So the question is, are there guardrails that others will somehow not let down for Donald Trump? Because Donald Trump, if the numbers suggest that, you know, he should say that Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States and isn’t a real president, he’ll say it. He has no such thing as remorse or caring about whether it’s true or false. If people think and are crazy enough to believe that there’s a paedophile ring out of a pizza parlour that Hillary Clinton is implicated in, sure, Donald Trump will blow the whistle to those people as well. And so you should expect that conspiracy theory will morph into something else by the time next fall’s election rolls around involving Joe Biden.

So the problem is not that there are individual, even large percentages of Americans who believe crazy things, because my guess is there are large percentages of Britons who believe crazy things as well. The issue is when you have a leader of one of our two formerly great political parties that not only encourages those things, but is so cynical and so successful as a demagogue and as a communicator as to use and manipulate that. We have had demagogues like Donald Trump before. What we haven’t had is that person as the head of one of our two political parties and as a former president and president when he was in office. So I think it’s a uniquely dangerous moment in the sense that this is not 2016. Trump has experienced what it is like to blow past the guardrails. There’s almost no constraints upon him now. And were he to be re-elected, especially on the other side of four criminal indictments, the world really should worry about that.

Gideon Rachman
Yeah. But let’s look at those criminal indictments, Ed, because what’s the timetable? I had assumed that they wouldn’t move fast enough to stop it, essentially, because he can always delay and so on. But you suggested to me earlier that you think it’s possible, maybe even likely that he’ll be convicted in at least one of those cases and maybe even sent to prison during the course of the election campaign?

Edward Luce
I’m not sure whether he’ll be imprisoned during the campaign, but I think conviction in the Washington trial, the one about January the 6th that begins in early March, is a reasonable possibility. There is the trial in New York over Stormy Daniels, the hush money for the porn star, that is later that month. Again, you could get a result in that pretty quickly. So those two for sure.

The one in Florida, well, there’s a judge there who Trump appointed who is clearly angling to be appointed to the Supreme Court if he’s re-elected. She’s going to, I suspect, continue to drag her feet on the date of that and allow all kinds of stays and delays that the Trump legal team is asking for. And then finally, you’ve got, I think, probably the most powerful, dangerous case for Trump, which is Georgia, trying to throw the election in Georgia. Lots of former Trump people have flipped, which means they’re turning evidence against him. They’ve plea-bargained. That’s a very dangerous one for him. But that’s an eminently delayable one. So in terms of Trump being convicted for something during the campaign and possibly receiving a jail sentence that he would appeal, the Washington trial and . . . 

Gideon Rachman
Because Jack Smith, the prosecutor, has stripped it down to make it something that goes quite quickly, isn’t it?

Edward Luce
Yes. Yeah.

Gideon Rachman
So the Washington trial, so let’s say he’s convicted. And my guess is, given the weight of the evidence and probably the fact that it’s taking place in Washington, he will be. But you don’t think he’ll necessarily go to prison? He could delay that.

Edward Luce
It’s conceivable. Season . . . 

Susan Glasser
Well, of course he can appeal the sentence. So I think that it’s fair to say nothing will be finally resolved. But that’s where maybe Ed and I disagree a little bit, but because of the ability to appeal these cases — and remember, you can have motions before the trial ever happened that then require extensive litigation that can also end up going to the appeals courts and then even to the Supreme Court. We don’t know over what issues will arise, but Trump will be seeking to delay this as long as possible. And it seems highly unlikely to me that a final, final resolution of a case, even if there is a conviction on paper. A conviction could definitely affect the general election. What it’s not going to do is affect in a definitive way the outcome of the Republican primaries. And this is, of course, one of the great tragedies of this moment, this unprecedented intersection of courtroom and campaign, which is to say, if the federal government was always going to indict Donald Trump on January 6th, the failure to do so in a more timely fashion made it inevitable that millions and millions of Republican voters would go to the polls without these cases being resolved.

Gideon Rachman
Why did it take so long? I mean, if I was a Trump conspiracy theorist, I would say, hang on, it’s a bit suspicious. You come to election year and suddenly he’s facing four cases. What happened?

Susan Glasser
To me, it’s less a, you know, suspicious conspiracy than a screw-up. What happened was the attorney-general, Merrick Garland, a very cautious and careful man by all accounts, perhaps better suited to the judgeship that Republicans denied him on the Supreme Court than he is to such a thrusting role as attorney-general, didn’t seem to be pursuing with much zeal building a case against Trump or those who were the reason for this catastrophe on January 6th. They were going from the bottom up. They were prosecuting and arresting thousands of those who stormed the Capitol, but not the, in effect, organisers of the event. And it was only after the House of Representatives, controlled then by Democrats, launched their January 6th investigation that pressure grew upon Garland, and he then very belatedly appointed the special counsel, Jack Smith. And then Smith actually moved with great alacrity, it seems to me, to build these two cases against Donald Trump, the classified documents case and the January 6th or really the 2020 election case.

Gideon Rachman
So then the scenario is that the legal process is still running. Trump is not in jail. He’s got a lot of time when he’s got to be in court, but he can run. And he then, according to the opinion polls, Ed, I mean, he’s well ahead of Biden at the moment.

Edward Luce
I don’t think opinion polls a year out are necessarily that informative. We don’t really know. A lot depends on how people feel about the economy. I mean, remember, there are people out there who aren’t obsessing about any of this.

Susan Glasser
(Laughter) Lucky them.

Edward Luce
Lucky them. My view is something Chris Sununu, the governor of New Hampshire, said. I was listening to an interview with him. He’s probably gonna endorse Nikki Haley for what it’s worth. But something he said was he feels that the first party to dump their incumbent, whether it’s Trump or Biden, will win. Doesn’t mean to say either party will. But I think there’s something to that. And I think, unlikely though a Haley nomination is, if the Republicans had her as the nominee then I would be going to Biden and I would be knocking on that door and I wouldn’t be tiptoeing. I would be telling him in no uncertain terms, get out.

Susan Glasser
Well, I think you’re right that she is a strong potential general election candidate because part of the conversation in the US is misleading because of where we are in the calendar. And so we’re focused on Trump’s strengths with this passionate minority of Republican voters who are his kind of superfans. And that has caused us to not focus as much on his weaknesses in a general election. And of course he has significant weaknesses in the general election. There are millions and millions of people who they didn’t vote for him in 2016. They didn’t vote for him in 2020. And now after January 6th, after everything, now they’re gonna be like, oh, I really like Donald Trump?

So, you know, there’s a presumed ceiling for Donald Trump. And that’s one factor that I think in the end might propel Haley’s candidacy. As far as Biden goes and these polls, my take is that a lot of what’s powering it, of course, is actually disillusion by Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. And I think they were still in the message-sending mode of like, we don’t want an 81-year-old incumbent running. Remember that Joe Biden would be 86 years old at the end of his second term. Putting aside Donald Trump, that’s an incredible risk factor for our country. Arguably, it’s an incredible risk factor for the world, given the importance of the role of president. So I, up until the last couple of months, felt like a lot of those numbers were about signalling and sending a message, you know — we don’t want you to run again. Now that it’s clear we’ve run out of time and he’s running again, I think the message is getting louder and more worrisome for Democrats in an actual electoral sense.

Gideon Rachman
Yeah. I mean, one of the things that’s clearly gonna complicate the race is that you’re gonna have third-party candidates. I think Robert F Kennedy Jr has said he’s already running. Is that correct? And there’s also this constant murmuring about a no-label centrist candidate, possibly former Senator Joe Manchin, and then others on the left.

Edward Luce
Cornel West.

Gideon Rachman
Cornel West, a Green candidate.

Susan Glasser
Jill Stein.

Gideon Rachman
Jill Stein.

Susan Glasser
You can thank her for Donald Trump in 2016, yeah.

Edward Luce
He’s evergreen. The evergreen.

Susan Glasser
The evergreen, right.

Gideon Rachman
Because in 2016, she took enough votes to tip it away from Hilary.

Edward Luce
She did.

Susan Glasser
Yeah, and that’s what . . . And again, remember, I think it is a little misleading, right? Because we often talk about polls and the national polls, but in reality, American elections are no longer national elections. In effect, they are battleground state elections in a very small number of truly contested states. So, you know, whether you say that number is three, six, it’s under 10 of our states that are really genuinely competitive. Everything else is essentially either pretty fixed as a Democratic state or a Republican state. And given that, it’s even more warped the influence that one particular campaign can have. A Jill Stein, a RFK Jr, they don’t need to campaign in 50 states. They need to screw it up in one or two battleground states for it to really make a difference.

Edward Luce
Yeah. Cornel West takes 30,000 votes in Michigan could tip the president . . . 

Gideon Rachman
And you mentioned Michigan because it’s got a lot of Arab-Americans in it and they are very, very upset with Biden over Gaza, yeah?

Edward Luce
They are. I mean, I think there’s been a lot of slightly sort of false argument that Arab-Americans would vote for Trump. It’s not that they’d vote for Trump, it’s that they wouldn’t vote for Biden to punish him over his perceived, whatever it is, crimes over Gaza, that they would either not vote or they would vote for a protest candidate like RFK Jr or Cornel West. But as Susan says, really, we took him in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, a handful of states and Michigan, you could get a few thousand votes being absolutely critical in a couple of these states to who is the next president of the United States and the future of the world.

Gideon Rachman
Yeah. Astonishing. Is there also risk of political violence? I was on a discussion with Larry Sabato, a well-known political scientist, who said in a phrase that slightly chilled me, anybody who writes that off is an idiot. He said, you know, the level of political polarisation, anger and frankly, people with guns, it’s possible. What do you think? And I mean, I guess there seems to me more likely if Biden wins that there would be some kind of revolt than if Trump won. But I don’t know. What do you think, Susan?

Edward Luce
You know, it’s so sad in a way, right, that we, it’s almost like we can’t process the events that have already occurred. We’ve already had political violence. We have already really blown past that taboo in our society. The events after the 2020 election were as close to an armed rebellion as you can have in the modern context. I mean, let’s be real. The takeover for hours and hours of the US Capitol in a way that actually did stop the counting of the US electoral votes in January of 2021 was the first time that the US Capitol had been occupied by a hostile force for any period of time since the war of 1812. (Laughter)

Edward Luce
We have been very polite. You mean since the British?

Susan Glasser
(Laughter) Since 1814? Yes, exactly.

Gideon Rachman
Take that note of pride off of your voice.

Edward Luce
No, no. Genuinely, no.

Susan Glasser
Yeah. It didn’t work out that well, you know, for the British.

Edward Luce
The bullet holes are still visible.

Susan Glasser
Yes, exactly. The bullet holes in American society. What I would say is that throughout this Biden presidency, rather than a restoration of the status quo ante, rather than a return to normalcy, which was one of the implicit and at times explicit promises of Biden’s campaign in 2020, Biden was the candidate of I want America to be America again. And I think that was a big part of his appeal. Americans, in the context of the pandemic and the Trump craziness in 2020. Enough, enough. Right? And Biden seemed like a sort of a reassuring figure.

But we can now see pretty conclusively that we can never go back to the status quo ante Trump. And that the old normal is just gone. And so then the question becomes, what scenarios can we contemplate? And I think a renewed — call it a cold civil war, you know, a division, a sundering of the country, that’s already happening with different sets of laws depending on where you live in the country. I mean, if you consider, for example, and I’ll stop, but if you consider women’s reproductive freedom and their ability to control their own healthcare choices to be akin to a fundamental right, why should it matter whether you live in Austin, Texas, or Ann Arbor, Michigan whether you have that right or not? We already have, in a practical sense, a division in the country and different sets of laws for different people depending on where you live.

Gideon Rachman
Well, I mean, I guess maybe that’s in a less than satisfactory way, a way of keeping the country together if there are such big divisions that you allow very extreme federalism. But just to look a last thought, you can please contradict me on that and we might, my rounding-up question. But some people might say, look, we’ve had a Trump presidency. The world didn’t end. There is a counterargument, however, that a second Trump presidency would be much more radical than the first Trump presidency. So let me just finish by asking you both. Give me a sense of, OK, Trump wins. What happens then? Ed, what do you think?

Edward Luce
I mean, serious plans are being drawn up for what Trump would do if he did win in a way that just wasn’t true in 2016. The Heritage think-tank, there’s a whole sort of Project 2025 working for Trump involving hundreds and hundreds of people — lawyers, think-tank people, supporters with money — as to what he would do. And there’s a couple of things here. One is invoking the Insurrection Act on day one. There’s very little legal limit on what a president can do. It’s not reviewable by the court.

Gideon Rachman
So basically giving himself a state of emergency.

Edward Luce
That you can send troops basically into sanctuary cities like Chicago or whatever, in California to the border. You can use them to go after all kinds of people. So that’s one thing. Another is a “Schedule F” plan, which is to fire the deep state in their eyes. So we are looking at Trump himself may be no more competent. I mean, that was always the great saving grace of Trump in the first term, was that his incompetence outran even his malevolence, but that the team around him will be the team he wants from day one with a plan. So that’s quite different, I think. Susan, I’d like to hear your views on this, but I think you probably agree quite different to Trump coming in January 2017. Trump coming in January 2025 would be a different scale of problem.

Susan Glasser
Well, it’s interesting, Ed. I do agree in a big-picture sense, and I think it’s the answer getting into your question of is it a recipe for keeping the country together or ripping it apart, a Donald Trump presidency? A second one is a recipe for ripping the country apart. When you demonise your opponents as vermin, as Trump has recently done, there is no accommodation between a different set of laws and just let everyone live according to their own thing. When you dehumanise the other and you are willing to use what they might call in Russia the power ministries on your own behalf, then you are talking about a country that moves from a rhetorical state of division and civil war into a much more actual one.

As to the specifics Ed is talking about, I think it’s important for people understand these are not new ideas from Donald Trump. If you want to know what a second term would be like, look at the things he wanted to do but couldn’t accomplish in his first term. Donald Trump wanted to invoke the Insurrection Act in his first term and to use the American military in the streets against his own people. He was constrained by advisers who will no longer be present.

Gideon Rachman
Give me a little bit more detail. What is the Insurrection Act?

Susan Glasser
Well, this goes all the way back, actually, to the early years of the US founding and essentially it gives the US president the right to decree that there’s such a state of, in effect, emergency that he must mobilise the US military domestically inside our own borders. So it’s a very, very powerful thing. Donald Trump wanted to invoke it in 2020 during the Black Lives Matter protests. And as we documented in our book The Divider and others did as well, there was an absolute lay-down fight that went on for days inside the White House in the Oval Office between Donald Trump and his most extreme advisers, people like the anti-immigration hawk Stephen Miller, who wanted to invoke the Insurrection Act, and Bill Barr, the attorney-general who is no liberal, let’s just say, who basically laid his job on the line in order to stop it. The chairman of the joint chiefs, who laid his job on that line in order to stop it, the then defence secretary, they all basically locked arms and opposed Donald Trump. So when Ed says the second term will be different than the first, it’s not because Donald Trump isn’t unhinged enough to want to use American soldiers to fight American people. What it is is that who’s gonna be around him when that moment of decision comes?

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Gideon Rachman
That was Susan Glasser of The New Yorker ending this edition of the Rachman Review. You also heard from my colleague Edward Luce. That’s it for now. Please join me again next week.

[MUSIC PLAYING]