Andrew Ross Sorkin

And you're right.

History has looked quite fondly.

on the powers that he ultimately took, but they look fondly upon them, I think, because they worked.

There was an effectiveness about him.

And I would also argue that it didn't seem... Now, at the time, if you go back, some people thought it was a power grab,

But it didn't seem like it was a capricious power grab for the purposes of their own power.

However it was communicated to the public, it was communicated in a way that I think the public did believe that he was doing this at their behest for them, not for him.

And it's an interesting sort of –

distinction to make.

And maybe it's a distinction without a difference.

I don't know.

I'm curious what you think.

So the other thing that I found fascinating about Roosevelt, also Hoover to some degree,

But given Roosevelt's public commentary about bankers and about wealth, he doesn't get really into a sort of larger question about capitalism, I think, the way we are discussing those questions today.

But he did have a relationship with all of these business leaders.

I mean, these business leaders, in an almost Trumpian way, were making these pilgrimages to the White House to sit in the Oval Office and to plead their case to him.

And he had a

a somewhat, it seemed like, friendly relationship with the leaders of these institutions.

I will say one thing, though, about all of these bankers and wealthy individuals in the 20s and even now.

And by the way, back in the 20s, not inflation adjusted, for real.