Scott Melker (5:12)

So I'm a little bit nervous about that. Yeah. I had actually tweeted, you know, Trump had a strong hand, but got called twice. You sort of laughed. What makes you think it's a strong hand? I was trying to be politically correct and not say Trump bluffed. Right. So that's the truth. Right. But either way, what was interesting about the initial Liberation Day, as you said, was they clearly got 70 calls or 75 calls from every country, which you would anticipate. Most of them are probably like, what the hell, bro? But China immediately went over the top. Right. So, you know, if you're playing poker, it feels like Donald Trump had pocket sevens or something and tried to show strength and got called. But then, more importantly, I think Powell called. Right. And Powell said on his meeting on Friday, listen, we now think inflation is going to be a bigger problem, effectively saying we're not going to be able to lower rates, which is what Trump was kind of looking for. And then we had bond yields all over the place, but Now, I mean, 4.3% higher than when we started all this Liberation Day madness. So, leading you to believe that if the effort was to bring down the interest rates so they can refinance the debt, all that. That's still not working here so far. So. And we also had reports Trump literally said, I couldn't believe it yesterday that Jamie Dimon called and said, we need to do something, basically. You know, Bill Ackman, it's very clear there's a long list of billionaires who said, enough is enough.

Peter Cheer (6:38)

Yeah. I think. And even with this, I'm still not sure what you do if you're a CEO of a corporation. Right. Okay. Do you change your supply chains because you're. You think these are coming back on? Do you play it as the status quo? And then I think you got to go back. Trump, I do think, really thought he was going to get this income from tariffs. If he's not going to get that, what else is he going to go after? I still think there's a risk that he starts trying to say foreigners have to pay a tax on their treasury, you know, have to pay some fee for the privilege of holding treasuries. I think we're far from being done with kind of weird trial balloons. And maybe that's the best way to describe it. He will throw things out there that no other leader would throw out because of the potential backlash. And he's just not afraid to do that.

Scott Melker (7:20)

Okay, I keep getting told that I have TBS on Twitter and in the chat. First of all, I will once again say I'm registered unaffiliated and equal opportunity critic of both parties and their policies. This is not a statement that I don't like Trump, but we have this 4D chess narrative and I think to put that to bed, first of all, we obviously had Hassett, who's his lead economic advisor. Basically it was fake news two days ago that he had leaked that we were going to get this 90 day thing. But then it ended up being real news. Apparently he just said it too early. Right. And that that was probably in the plans. But he just went on CNBC this morning, I don't know if you guys saw this, and he said bond market influenced the tariff decision, but it didn't cause a panic. So you can't say that this was completely planned and then have your lead economic advisor literally go on TV and say bonds were a problem. So we had to do something.

Peter Cheer (8:15)

Yeah, I think I'm with you. It's. I find now I'm disagreeing with people who I used to kind of agree with and vice versa. And you know, I think what I try and do in Georgia, I think you do the same is you try and provide logic and facts and cut out as much as the political because people are making decisions, need all that stuff cut out. And I do find it frustrating that every time you try and point out a flaw, you're just told you're too stupid because it's 40 chess. And well, okay, when 99 of the world sees flaws in this and then you have to back down, it probably wasn't 4D chess. I think what he is playing is a game where they've sat out and laid out what they think all the other countries will do and they're not responding the way he thought. Not only did G immediately come back, think about Europe. Europe didn't come on their knees immediately. Europe was starting to talk about tariffing services. I'm sure some of the big service industry, you know, tech companies were had their ear full into Trump as well, saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, if they tax us, this is really bad.

Scott Melker (9:13)

I mean, tariffs are a blunt force instrument when there's nuance and a hundred other ways you could go and 100 things that even the president and his top economic advisors would not be able to see at the industry level, to your point or at the corporate level of how this could affect. You don't know exactly how this is going to affect Apple. Right. Exactly what chips they're making or what they need from China or what deal they're working on. So you have to imagine that American corporations who, by the way, pay these tariffs, they're the ones who pay the tariffs to the United States customers. How they reacted to your point and called in to say this can't happen.

Peter Cheer (9:51)

Yeah, one thing that kind of plays onto that. We were at the Naval War College this summer and played a war game, and it was, you know, China blockading Taiwan. But the neat thing to me was I never really thought about this way. But during that war game, they had the U.S. government as a separate entity from the U.S. corporate corporations. And I think that's really resonated with me is that Trump behaves as though there's this US Company and there's a German company, and all these big companies are multinational companies. They've got constituents across the globe. They're all working their supply chains to maximize their efficiency. They know they have customers in Italy, so they have to do certain things in Italy to keep them happy. And Trump is trying to shrink this into what may have worked really well 100 years ago, where you did probably have US companies versus German companies versus Japanese companies. All the big companies are really so global, especially the US juggernauts. Right. 40% of earnings for the S&P 500 comes from overseas. And I think he's been so disruptive in how he plays this, and it's just not very well thought out. And one of my pet peeves has been, you know, he talks about autos and European tariffs on autos. Europe tariffs our autos 10%. We tariff their autos at two and a half percent. I do not believe that 7.5% difference or even the 10% is why US automakers struggle to sell cars into Europe. US automakers have figured out they make a lot of money selling pickup trucks and big SUVs. Those do not work in Europe. We make plenty of money here. Germany Mercedes makes all sorts of cheap Mercedes that they don't bother sending to the US because it would degrade their brand. Things occur, and tariffs, I think, are a tiny fraction of the issue and maybe not even a big important thing at all in many cases.

Scott Melker (11:30)

So yesterday, obviously, as a result of this policy, and of course, him saying, hey, buy everything. Dow was the biggest, second biggest day for the NASDAQ ever, right up 12% on the NASDAQ, which is pretty crazy because Just a few days ago, we actually saw the fake news, reported fake news that was a few days early and in 10 minutes saw a 10% move on the S and P, which is insane, an insane level of volatility that you shouldn't see in a healthy market, no matter what the news is, in my opinion. But now we have dow futures dropping 500 points, S P down roughly 2%, Nasdaq down a bit more after yesterday's historic move. Is this normal? I mean, are people just kind of absorbing it and saying, okay, let me actually think about this and you know, maybe the problem isn't completely solved. By the way, China is the only thing that really matters because that's, you know, we get most of our things from them. I mean, what do you make of this? And I should note, I think the last big move like that was in 2008 in the depths of one of the like, worst markets that we've had. And these huge volatile times to the up and downside generally don't occur in a steady bull market. They're in the depths of a bear market when people are just looking for an excuse to get in and out because they're panicking.

Peter Cheer (12:48)

Yeah, I completely agree. I was joking that this is like living through TARP vote every, you know, every single day. And someone told me that I was underestimating because at least TARP vote was scheduled. Like this is just. You're sitting there in a meeting and all of a sudden you're up 11% on some tweet. I think it was overdone, I would say. I've been very cautious about liquidity as a whole. I think there is very little depth of liquidity and every market maker is providing less and less liquidity. They're creating bit wider bid offers and smaller size on those bid offers. So any move just amplifies it and it gets triggered. So one thing, I have not been comfortable using stops right now in this market because I feel this market just whips you through stops. So you're, to me, you're better off playing in much smaller size and comfortable that you might be down 10% on nothing or. And how do you play that rather than relying on stops? Because I think you're just going to get whipsawed and taken out of good trades if you rely on stops.

Scott Melker (13:45)

I just think it's wild that what you just described is how we've always had to approach trading illiquid altcoins in crypto. But you're talking about doing it on the mag seven and the spy and the market in general. I mean, that's crazy that you guys are now having to worry about long wicks in both directions. The Darth Maul candles. We talk about where you get the up and down and end up in the middle on Nvidia.

Peter Cheer (14:09)

Yeah, right. It's crazy. And you know, you had, I think tqq, which is the triple leverage Q like that was up 30% yesterday. And retail bought a ton of it on Friday and Monday. So they did phenomenally well. You know, it's. But this market's just like you say, it feels like you're trading a mean coin. I, I would say it feels to me a lot like an emerging market country. Right. Like where you get these swings because one politician says something and you know, there's still even questions about whether Trump has so much authority really in tariffs and things like that. This whole thing is just very messy. But yeah, I think you're right. It's. We now have to trade everything much more cautiously, like it's two or three levels down in terms of liquidity than it used to be.

Scott Melker (14:52)

That's crazy. Just taking a look, this is the 10 year yield. I mean, obviously it had that spike yesterday and naturally came back down, but still higher than where it even opened yesterday before this happened. Now at about 4.35%, looks ready to bounce back up again. And you go and look at the S and P that was the monster candle yesterday, but still not back to last Wednesday.

Peter Cheer (15:16)

Right.

Scott Melker (15:17)

So, you know, we, we have Trump, obviously, he loves now he loves the market again, which is good. Huge credit because nothing spooked the market more than the guy who said literally, like throughout his campaign and last administration. I look at the stock market as a gauge of the success of my administration. When he went for a few weeks, they're saying we don't care about the market. That scared the market, I think, as much as anything else. Well, yesterday, bragging about, you know, how well the market traffic doing after he did this deal fairly. But also we're still not back above Liberation Day. So it feels like. And even with bitcoin, which I love that move, it still feels like we're in this range of tariff nonsense and there's nothing really clear to celebrate yet.

Peter Cheer (16:00)

Yeah. Remember When Bitcoin broke 100,000 and Trump said, you're welcome to the bitcoin community, and we haven't seen 100,000 now for a while. So I think the same sort of thing can happen here in stocks. He drove it. It's very illiquid this combination of leveraged ETFs, lack of liquidity, zero date expiration, I think it pushed us well through. And I don't think we should be back to where we are in the Rose Garden before that announcement because the announcement was so bizarre. Like, you have to have some lack of trust. And my current theme has really been the American brand. And I think Trump has done something where he's so fixated on trade, he missed the intangibles benefits that we had from being kind of this world leader. Right. Capital flew into the U.S. people wanted their capital in the U.S. that's been reversing course. I think people wanted U. S. Brands globally. Right. There was an association with that. And one of the quotes, one of our generals. So I work with 30 retired generals and admirals, many of who've been in various administrations with these guys, but they quote the Singaporean defense Minister. So not a huge person on the world stage. But the quote to me resonates. It's like the US Went from being a Beneluva benevolent superpower to a landowner extracting rent. And I think that's the worldview right now of the US to some degree. And I think that's. I don't know that that's changed. You know, in a relationship, you say that one thing that you wish you hadn't said and you can't take back. I feel we've broken some things that are much more permanent with these countries. And, yeah, they'll come to the table, they'll smile, they'll do deals. But secretly, I think everyone's trying to figure out, oh, my God, how do I avoid having to deal with this guy?

Scott Melker (17:29)

I mean, does that look like an acceleration of Brics rhetoric or trade deals from foreign countries? We had news that was actually pretty cool for us that Bolivia, Russia and others are actually doing their energy deals in bitcoin right now. That's cool. And bitcoin, it's not so cool, obviously, if you're the global reserve currency and want all those deals done in dollars. I think there's a sentiment that China, as you said, is on an island now. But do you think that this could push others towards China in some degree to do more trade to minimize their exposure to the dollar?

Peter Cheer (18:06)

Yeah, I think if you're Canada, for example. I'm Canadian. Okay. We had this great deal we send down. I think it was a great deal for both sides. We've got all this heavy oil from the tar sands. We ship it to the U.S. the U.S. has built refineries that handle this very well. That equation is getting broken. You have softwood lumber, all these things. Who's the biggest importer of raw resources outside of the U.S. china. So you've got to probably call China and see what they. Is there a deal to be had? And again, it seems silly that we kind of took all these things that had been designed very well together and were cooperative. Again, I think this hatred of trade. So yeah, I think people are going to push towards it. And I haven't bought bitcoin in a while. I think everything was overdone yesterday. But I probably will be buying it through the ETFs. Just it's simpler for me that way because I. You probably have to trust that this administration is going to try and do something. They've talked about it and they like it. But I do think people are getting turned off from the dollar.

Scott Melker (19:00)

Listen, long term, I don't Bitcoin in the 70 thousands when I've already seen it in 109. Looking at the historical trajectory of the asset, if you zoom out, not concerned, as you said, even with your stock positions going down 1015, I'm not concerned with Bitcoin going down 20 or 30 with implied volatility. It's going back in the hundreds eventually. I have no doubt about that. Now I want to hit you with an article here. That is our title because I would love your opinion on it as a not necessarily focused on bitcoin everyday guy like us Bitcoin to hit 250,000 this year and Magnificent Seven to adopt stablecoins. This is from Charles Hoskinson, the Cardano founder. It's interesting. We get hyperbolic price predictions about bitcoin. I don't think any of us really care if it's December 31st or next February or not. My audience. Right. But I don't care. I don't know if it's going to 250,000 this year. But the sentiment there is that whatever we're doing now is a hiccup and we're still heading up. What do you think of that?

Peter Cheer (20:00)

Yeah, yeah. I think everyone's going to have to rethink the dollar as this reserve currency. And I can see that people will start looking at bitcoin again. I would have said before all this a month ago, highly unlikely big corporations look at it. It was just. It doesn't fit. There's also, you know, obviously microstrategy or strategy loves it and has this whole strategy built around it. I think it's going to be very Difficult. But I think all Trump took the table and threw it over and he's putting the pieces back together on this table, but no one's looking at the same. So I think people are going to explore it. I don't know that it goes that quickly. The one thing I would love to see, to get really comfortable with Bitcoin, I would like to see the MSTR premium to its holdings shrink. I feel that's a impediment. And until that shrinks, it's going to be hard for bitcoin, I think, to really rally. But, yeah, I think we're all stuck, including myself, having to rethink this because the world's just changed in the last week.

Scott Melker (20:59)

So let's take the other side of this entire tariff argument. So it doesn't sound like we're screaming with TDS here. Maybe this was a masterful move. Maybe getting 10 on everybody was the end goal to isolate China. And maybe eventually that gets us the External Revenue Service that Lutnick was talking about. I still see personally just this conflict between. Was it. If it's a negotiation tactic, that's basically saying tariffs are bad, let's get them down. If it's not negotiation tactic, it can replace the irs, External Revenue Service. You know, the future of America is funding our government with tariffs. But if this is his plan, what do you think happens in the next 90 days? It's not like this is permanent now. It's just like we have a 90 day clock on the insanity to some degree.

Peter Cheer (21:48)

Yeah. And again, I think he's going to push very hard for countries to. I think if he just said to countries, even without going through all this, hey, reduce your tariffs, people would have done that. I think tariffs are less of an.

Scott Melker (22:00)

My question was like, why not just go after China and everybody would get scared and see what happens. That was my thought, but maybe that.

Peter Cheer (22:07)

Was kind of our thought. You know, we view China as our strategic competitor. China's the one that we've got to pull things away from. We would have used Canada and probably Mexico. Yeah. And I think Mexico tried pretty hard on the border. The Trump has done a phenomenal job on the border. Right. That was one of the things he was elected to do. He's done phenomenal. So I think my issue is he is probably going to demand quotas from company countries to buy our goods. I'm not sure every country can live up to those quotas. I think he may try and put demands that countries can't trade with China. I'm not sure Other countries can live with that. So I think we're a long way from getting these deals. And it's really unclear how much he was bluffed. I'm sure he was getting 70 phone calls because everyone had to call. I'm not sure how much begging for deals versus more. What you said, like, what the hell is even going on here?

Scott Melker (22:54)

What are we doing here, man? Give us some clarity. Actually, I'm still. Because I haven't spent the time on it. I don't know if I'm clear on what the 90 day pause actually means, who it refers to specifically how that's going to be calculated. I think a lot of that is still up in the air as well. So I'm assuming he's still getting those calls.

Peter Cheer (23:15)

Yeah. And you know, he still has the potential maybe to target pharma. Right. Because so my understanding, again, this is all a bit vague is the tariffs on Canada and Mexico remain in place. The global tariff on steel and aluminum I believe, remain in place. So we might get a headline tomorrow announcing pharma tariffs or tariffs on something else. So, like again, the True Social tweet or whatever. I don't know what it's called when you post on True Social. Yeah, it lacked clarity, certainly.

Scott Melker (23:44)

I call it True Thing.

Peter Cheer (23:46)

True Thing. Okay. But yeah, so I think there's all sorts of other potential avenues he goes down because I don't think he sees a pharmaceutical tariff as being anything at all to do with his reciprocal tariffs.

Scott Melker (24:00)

Right. Yeah. There's so much more on the table here. I do have to kind of bring up one piece of news because it's really relevant for us. Paul Atkins lead the SEC as an interest crypto friendly era. He's been confirmed. So I think there's a one item in a long list of tailwinds for the crypto industry. I can't speak to how that affects price or any of these beaten down tokens and projects and companies that will benefit from this. But it's important for us. Right. And to be quite frank, Hester Purse has already done all the things we would have hoped for from Atkins by rolling back the Gensler era. But still, as you think about our industry and you try to eliminate all of the global madness and the macro and the tariffs, my feeling, and I don't know if you share it, is still that things are headed in the right direction.

Peter Cheer (24:52)

Yeah. I think people are going to adopt more and more stable coins. I think Circle, for example, really set a high standard early on. It's great that I can look at the BlackRock ETF that has Circle's investments, you can see what they've invested in. They created a lot of transparency. I think that's forced the hand of some of the industry to do these things that make it much more investable. Right. People who aren't as comfortable with the technology or the ecosystem, you know, that's a high degree of comfort. Okay, I can pull up my. The BlackRock fund that circle invests in, I can see those things. So I think there's going to be developments. I think you're going to start seeing, you know, to me, someone's maybe going to start figuring out a way to pay interest on stable coins. Then it becomes even more interesting. Right. Okay, now I can get some interest because if they're sitting there buying T bills and earning 4%, can they pay me something? So, yeah, I can see a lot of potential innovation. And for me, the starting point is probably going to be for larger investors. You look at stable coins, you kind of dip your feet in and go from there. I don't think the altcoins are ever going to catch on in a material way. I just can't. There's just too many. They're too easily created and, you know, aside from the fact that they may be very effective for politicians to raise money, but that's a separate issue.

Scott Melker (26:04)

My take on that is that there will be a select few that do exceptionally well and it'll look like the dot com bubble and the rest of, you know, you get the seven or eight amazing Amazons, Googles and such that come out of it and the rest of them will slowly wash away, I think, as they kind of have.

Peter Cheer (26:19)

One thing I can say is so some of the people I work with were very big, you know, and, you know, the operation side of, you know, big banks and things, they all seem to love Ethereum and yet Ethereum just doesn't seem to do well. Is there a big case for Ethereum or is that just going to continue to languish? That.

Scott Melker (26:34)

I think there's a big case for it and it may still continue to. So why not both? Like the little meme, you know?

Peter Cheer (26:44)

Yeah. So I think things like that again, to me, some of the people can kind of get on board a bit easier with Ethereum where there is this, this use sort of case away from just, you know, wealth effect and limited number.

Scott Melker (26:56)

Well, I can say that Ethereum has somewhat bounced right off of the 2018 highs. We took a time machine back, so not looking horrible there. Peter got a go To Dan from the chart. Guys, I appreciate you. Great, man. You really break it down. And I think in terms everybody can understand, can't wait to have you back again soon.

Peter Cheer (27:14)

Thanks again and really do appreciate that you're out there kind of diligently telling what your views are and why. And it's been very helpful for me to follow.

Scott Melker (27:22)

I try. Thanks, Peter. Have a good one.

Peter Cheer (27:24)

Thanks. Take care. Bye.

Scott Melker (27:26)

All right, guys, before we jump over to Dan, I want to tell you obviously about our awesome sponsor that we have here here on Thursdays, and that is L Bank. As you know, endless incentives, no KYC on the exchange. If you sign up, you can get trading bonuses, reduced fees, referral bonuses, basically everything you could possibly want for signing up. And as I said, no KYC with certain thresholds. You can see the exchange popping off right here. Good segue into Dan, because as I'm looking at this chart, which is the four hour on LBank, you can see a perfect double bottom that broke the swing high right here. Confirming the double bottom. And a perfect retest of that. That's kind of nice, Dan. I'm looking at that chart. That, that is a classic perfect double bottom.

Dan (28:15)

It's testing. And that's exactly what I'm watching on the Nasdaq and the S&P 500 as well. We're not testing yet, but we have a double top, same spot, and we're, we're fading back down. Let's just look at that real quick while we're on the topic. So here's the Nasdaq and again, this is the double top. The most important information that I'm going to get over the next day or two is does this hold as support on the backtest? Because going straight up is great, but if you don't build supports along the way, the retracement can be more significant. And we're still in downtrends daily downtrends on a lot of names. So, you know, as you mentioned, back in 2008, we had multiple bounces of this magnitude that did result in lower lows. So obviously we're not in 2008 at the moment. But that just reminds me that there's still work to be done and there's still going to be massive opportunity in both directions.

Scott Melker (29:03)

In a healthy bull market, you don't get 12% moves to the upside or downside.

Dan (29:07)

This is happen.

Scott Melker (29:08)

And I'm not saying we're in a bear market. I'm just saying that you can't draw as many conclusions with this much Volatility and it tends to be the fact that those are eye opening. A lot of people are really excited to short the top of yesterday. I can just tell you that it's.

Dan (29:24)

I've, I've never seen anything like this. And trading fully into all the markets, I'll say 11 or 12 years, I was in penny stocks before that, but it's very unique. And as your guest Peter was just talking about, liquidity is a major aspect of the volatility that we're seeing. And yeah, it just means, you know, I like what he said. I'm still using stops. He's not as much. But I like what he said about sizing down. You know, I trade Tesla day trade Tesla all the time. And I'm using 60% of my position size, what would be a normal position size because of this volatility. But with regards to where bitcoin stands, it's still back testing monthly EMA 12 like last time. And we know the bulls want to hold that level. And I'm just watching the possibility of a daily falling wedge. And falling wedges, all patterns have a very different probability based on prevailing trends. And if you're in a monthly, weekly daily downtrend falling wedge means nothing to me. But it has to align with the most likely scenario on a longer term time frame. So I'm watching for the possibility that bitcoin has a daily falling wedge to shape up a monthly higher low. Because for me the monthly higher low compared to 49,000 is the most likely scenario. So it doesn't mean I'm buying off support, it just means that this is my visual guide. And when it breaks bull, my statement will be that's either the monthly higher low or I'm wrong. And if we were to break the low after that, it would be a red flag for me as far as the longer term for the rest of 2025. Really. So just gonna keep paying attention to this. Again, still daily downtrends, most altcoins not even doing anything on their daily timeframes. There's a couple that are standing out to me. I like TRX for a little bit of relative strength. I like it's tightening sideways range over the last couple of months that tells me volatility is coming here. And CRV is just another one that stands out in the sense that we didn't break to the lower low, confirming the weekly bear flag. So there's a support level nearby that's still holding. But vast majority of altcoins drop into lower lows. XRP is another One where a monthly higher low is the most likely scenario and there is a potential falling wedge type of setup shaping up. So again, that's just another one that I'm going to be keeping an eye on into next week. But again, you know, sizing down, just being protective. I'm more cash than I've been in years at this point. 2022 is the last time.

Scott Melker (31:45)

Good job, Buffett.

Dan (31:47)

I sold. I wish I sold more. I. I sold 20% of my 7 year holding a Bitcoin at 105. Because again, my mindset was if we top out on a Trump meme and I don't act, I'm gonna feel like an idiot. And so it was just idiot protection is really all I was doing.

Scott Melker (32:03)

But honestly, I didn't sell a lot. I didn't sell any bitcoin because, you know, whatever. But last week and even after, like at the beginning of the first drop, I did trim a lot of stock and then I used that money to buy bitcoin in the mid-70s.

Dan (32:18)

So, yeah, we'll see how it works out.

Scott Melker (32:21)

That's my cash position, you know.

Dan (32:23)

Right, yeah, that makes sense. Yeah.

Scott Melker (32:25)

And again, you're watching in this mayhem.

Dan (32:27)

I mean, not really. I mean, the major names, Tesla, Amazon, nvda, they have so much volatility, it's insane. But again, if you take me back in time a week and a half ago and you say, hey, the NASDAQ's about to drop 15% in three days and Bitcoin is going to be trading at 79, 80,000, I'd say, whoa, that's a big win. So have to keep it in perspective. You know, people talk about the decoupling. I think it's going to be extremely hard to decouple with the ETFs and all the automated trading systems that, you know, everything so linked in this global market world. But again, all things considered, bitcoin bulls can't be too displeased with where we stand compared to the broader market.

Scott Melker (33:06)

I totally agree with that, Dan. Thank you so much. Everybody give chart guys a follow. Give Dan a follow. Check out YouTube, his YouTube, his Twitter. Everywhere else that he's at, he has endless content like this. Thanks so much, Dan.

Dan (33:18)

Thanks, Scott. See ya.

Scott Melker (33:19)

I have to run in two seconds to go. Too serious. I'm just laughing at the comments. Scott, you are just too stupid to understand the tariff issues and the consequences of doing nothing. Yeah, you're actually not listening to me. I've never said we shouldn't do anything. I never said there wasn't a problem. I question the method in which it was done. You can't call me stupid. I mean, you can. It's fun. Actually, I'm pretty stupid. You can call me stupid. I guess I don't think that questioning the means at which a problem is solved makes someone stupid. Actually just feels like maybe you're a sheep who thinks that great leader, whatever he does, is perfect and that he can do no wrong. I view him as a human person who's going to make good decisions and bad. I got to go get on serious, guys. I'll see you tomorrow for the Friday 5 with NLW. Bye. That's dope. That's dope.