The contention--which is pretty clear if you just read what I said--is that it's bogus for the WSJ to publish a hit piece without showing us the letter. I have no idea if the book exists--WSJ won't show it to us. I have no idea if the letter exists--WSJ won't show it to us. What I find absurd is the idea that Donald Trump was writing poems to Epstein, and I find it equally absurd that a major American paper would attack the President of the United States without revealing the basis for the attack. We all know what's going to happen. They're going to dribble little details out for days or weeks in an effort to assassinate the president's character. They won't show us this book or allow us to refute it until they've wrung every bit of fake news out of the story. And everyone will just move on from the fact that the WSJ is acting like a Democrat SuperPAC. It's disgraceful, and it's why the president sued.