 Hi, usually when I do these, I try to make them a little funny, kick them up some, but today I actually want to talk about something really important. Anybody who does antitrust will tell you that from a legal perspective, the Department of Justice case against AT&T is one of the most important antitrust enforcement actions in a decade. It's going to set the tone for antitrust enforcement going forward and it will be a real test as to whether the Department of Justice's theories about how to do antitrust in the 21st century are right or whether those who like AT&T have argued for different standards of enforcement are right and a court will decide. That's how it should be. But there's another battle that's important here and that is the future of antitrust enforcement and the soul of antitrust enforcement. Since Teddy Roosevelt stood up to standard oil, we've had a tradition in this country that real antitrust only works when we keep politics out of enforcement. I'm not so naive and no one is so believed to think that politics has never mattered. But the fact is that we have had a very proud and strong tradition in this country from the break up of standard oil to the break up of AT&T in 1984 in keeping enforcement apolitical. That's how it is, that's how it should be. The political branch sets the priorities but when the Department of Justice says no, as the White House said yesterday, this is an enforcement matter. It's not a matter for the White House or the political branch. That's essential for the rule of law. That's essential for the respect for law. It's essential so that everyone in this country can believe the promise of this country that we are all treated fairly under the law. AT&T has the right to make its legal case in court. Its supporters certainly have the right to make supporting arguments for AT&T and many of the arguments that have been made in support of this merger about jobs, about expanding wireless broadband, if you believe that they're true, are completely and totally appropriate at the Federal Communications Commission. The Federal Communications Commission approves these mergers under the public interest standard where it is entirely appropriate to think about whether it will add jobs, whether it will bring more broadband, whether it will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. But those factors have no place in an enforcement action. The Department of Justice determined after long and detailed consideration that AT&T's proposed takeover of T-Mobile violated the antitrust laws. They did what was appropriate. As soon as they made that determination, they did not hesitate. They went to a court and AT&T will have its day in court. For the system to work, for the soul of antitrust, that day in court needs to come without political interference. For all of those who are urging that the antitrust complaint should go away, not because you think that the antitrust argument is wrong, but because we should trade off antitrust for jobs, because we should trade off antitrust for wireless broadband, I ask you, is that the future that we want, where you buy your way out of law enforcement?