don't recover from that. That would be the end of your business life. It would probably be the end of your marriage if you're married. It would destroy people.

But do the victims have that right to destroy these lives even if a few extra people got destroyed who may have just been sucked into the airplane ride or the island but didn't do anything beyond that? Or do you believe that there's no such thing as an innocent person who flew on the plane and went to Epstein Island? It's kind of hard to believe they'd be totally innocent. Yeah. So I don't know. At least we know the answer, which feels partially satisfying. I mean, the people who need to be satisfied are the victims, and they're definitely not satisfied. And I feel like this is a tough one.

Remember, we don't know what Trump knows. So he knows who the people are and he probably knows them personally. Some of them are probably personal friends because he knows everybody important anyway. But what if he's literally just protecting some people because he doesn't think that they did anything wrong, but they would be lumped in with the people who definitely did things wrong? How would you feel about that? And I'm not saying that that's the situation, but suppose you knew somehow. Suppose somehow you could know that he's really protecting people who didn't do anything wrong. Do you think in that case you'd still want to see the names because it would destroy them? Their lives would be destroyed. That's a tough one.

You know, if I put myself in that position, I hate to say it, but it might depend who those people were. You know, if there were people who genuinely were good people and just found themselves trapped into this wrong situation, it would be hard to throw them under the bus. On the other hand, it's the only way we'll get past it. So it could be that if I didn't know them personally or have any connection to them, I might say, "Well, you know, you made your choices. Life is tough. You're going to have to deal with it. It's not for us to fix." Yeah, it's a tough one. I have some empathy for the situation that it puts Trump in because he doesn't want to destroy innocent people. And here I am making an assumption that some of them might be innocent. I don't know that. Maybe they're all guilty. But I wouldn't want to destroy innocent people if I could avoid it. Yeah. Anyway, there's no good answer. Every answer is very unsatisfying in this case. But the only way we'll get past it is just see all the, see everything. So I guess I would be in favor without knowing who those people are.

I'll make you a deal. All right. Make you a deal. I will be strongly on the side of full disclosure, but I will also be strongly on the side of defending anybody who doesn't have really solid accusations. So if there are people who don't have any women making specific accusations but they were just somehow got dragged into that world, I'll defend them, but only if they don't have a specific criminal allegation. If they have a criminal allegation, not my problem. That's between them and the law and the accusers and the public. I'm not going to defend anybody who has a legitimate criminal allegation. That's just not m