Trump's allies bail amid latest ICE shooting

24:46You know, the Overton window, like that concept's almost gone. You know, he just sort of like shoves the Overton window, you know, he doesn't push it. So yeah. Is it a distraction from Epstein? Sure, it served as one. Certainly there was a period of time when the Epstein files really were exploding where they were looking to talk about anything else. I mean, that was when they rolled out the we're going to prosecute Barack Obama for treason button. That's right. Remember that? There was a week where like anything, anything literally spaghetti at the wall all day long. But yeah, I mean, they also called for Oprah to be prosecuted that week.

25:19Of course they did. Of course they did. I do think he really did want to annex Greenland and had to climb down because it was a disastrous. Correct. And I think, you know, there is a lot of things happening. But I think the easiest way, at least for me to think about this, is that these are all smarts, small parts of a larger whole. Watching Donald Trump engage in this dangerous ice activity, watching Donald Trump, you know, alienate our allies, alienate the U.S. on the world stage and try to invade sovereign countries. watching Donald Trump, you know, try to wiggle his way out of releasing the Epstein files, despite the fact that it was signed into law by him.

25:51It just goes to show that like the things that he wants to spend his time on, he spends his time on. Like he can find time to go into Greenland. He can find time to wage an oil war in South America. He can find time to decorate the friggin new ballroom. To decorate a ballroom, to encrust the Oval Office in gold, to buy himself a couple of Gulfstream jets that Kristi Noem can use. Or get one from Qatar. or get one from Qatar. So if he wants to do something, he finds a way to do it. He's not going to let the law stop him. He's not going to let prosecutors or judges stop him. He's not going to let Democrats stop him.

26:24He's not going to let the Constitution stop him, which goes to show that when he doesn't do something, and by that I mean lower costs, lower inflation, make IVF free, protect earned benefits, release the Epstein files, end the Russia-Ukraine war on day one, when he doesn't do something, it's because he just doesn't have the will to do it. Yeah, he just doesn't care. I mean, look, and this is ultimately his greatest political problem and threat, which is that they've done nothing on the economy. I mean, there's a New York Times pullout today. His disapproval is at 56 percent. Forty nine percent of voters say the country was worse off than it was a year ago.

26:55Nearly 70 percent rated the economy unfavorably. And then even on the ICE stuff like that has been their primary focus has been immigration enforcement. Sixty one percent of voters, including 71 percent of independents, said ICE had gone too far. So So Trump is very effectively distracting us into the media, at least into talking about Greenland, something that's unpopular. But people also feel like he's not doing the job they want him to do. And that's bad. It's bad for him. Yeah, he's going from like one unpopular thing by distracting us with another unpopular thing, all of which kind of entrenches this idea that he's not working for Americans also, which is an unpopular idea.

27:30So with that said, we will continue to stay on top of this stuff for everybody who's watching right now. Now, if you are not yet subscribed to Podsafe America's YouTube channel, I'm going to put that link right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video. Small step everybody can take to help build up the progressive media ecosystem so that when new people come online, they're not automatically sorted into right wing sources and fall into those rabbit holes. So, again, completely free. Great way to support us and a great way to support independent media more broadly. Tommy, thanks so much, as always, for taking the time.

28:01I'm joined now by the new governor of New Jersey, Mikey Sherrill. Thanks so much for joining me. Thanks so much for having me. So I want to talk about about what you've been doing in New Jersey. But first, some national news is that we have seen Trump kind of take his revenge against any blue cities and blue states by going state by state and sending in ICE. We've seen it happen in my state, in Los Angeles. We've seen it happen in Chicago, in Portland, in Washington, D.C., in Minneapolis. And as the governor of, you know, a true blue state in New Jersey, is there some concern that Donald Trump is going to, you know, eventually turn his attention into New Jersey, where there's obviously a flourishing immigrant community and kind of do what he's done everywhere else and seek vengeance upon the people of your state on behalf of the Republican Party?

28:49Well, he already is doing that, not with ICE in this instance, but he's actually targeting quite a few blue states, 11 or 12 blue states, including New Jersey, with spurious investigations to root out fraud. So his typical use targeted investigations against his political opponents, contrary to really all the values of our democracy. So he's already started on that. And then the question becomes again and again, how do you continue to fight back against this completely out of control president who is, as you mentioned, putting a proto military force and ice on the streets of our nation against the will of the people of this nation and then targeting them politically in every single way, acting as if sort of a real lawless dictator.

29:41later. And how do you push back against that? And that's exactly what we're working to do here in New Jersey is find a better path forward, work hard for those values of liberty and prosperity that have been in our state seal and our state motto for almost 250 years. That is what I'm fighting for. And that's what the people of New Jersey resoundingly said they wanted last November. Can you talk a little bit about cooperation with ICE? I know that, for example, Governor Spanberger in Virginia immediately ended a contract that would force the cooperation with ICE in different municipalities across the state.

30:18Can you talk a little bit about where New Jersey stands in that whole process? Again, it should be striking to people to see someone like Governor Spanberger or myself, people who have worked in the military and in law enforcement, in her case, in the CIA. We, I think, deeply revere public service and those people who serve the public. This ICE agency is different. This president is really putting together his private militia. I've been flagging this for months now as we started to see them on the streets with masks and no insignia acting outside the purview of their duties. We've seen it as they picked up people who are here legally and yet they refuse to allow them to prove that.

31:08We've seen it as he's put ICE agents in areas not to keep the peace, but to actually incite the people of that state in a maneuver to attack them politically. And so to see someone like Abigail Spanberger, who's former law enforcement herself, come in and say, this is we are not working with them. They are that bad. To see someone like her, who has a lot of federal workers in her state, say we cannot work with this federal agency. Certainly here in New Jersey, we have the Immigrant Trust Directive, which I will continue to carry out to ensure that our public safety officers, our police officers are acting in the interest of the public.

31:50So I want to switch over to a little bit about what you've done in just the few days that you've been governor of the state. Can you talk about the first state of emergency that you've declared? Yes. So I said, you know, I made a commitment during my campaign as I was I was focused on lowering costs immediately that the minute I got in office, I was going to declare a state of emergency utility costs, freezing rate hikes and then working over the long term to drive down costs by expanding power generation. And I stopped in the middle of my inaugural address to do just that, to sign these two executive orders, which will do that, because I wanted people to know I was every bit as fed up with business as normal and the status quo.

32:32I was going to get to work. I was going to hit the ground sprinting and make sure I was addressing those key needs right away. So we did just that. So can you talk a little bit about about the extent to which renewable energy is going to be a part of, you know, this whole energy infrastructure that you're looking to deal with in New Jersey, especially in light of the fact that Republicans have really just completely turned their back on renewable energy being any facet of of, you know, this formula moving forward? Well, certainly it's noteworthy that we were moving forward in all kinds of power generation here in New Jersey and across the country.

33:07Part of the reason our rates are so high is because a lot of the oil and gas companies spent about$250 million on Trump's campaign, and he rewarded them by shutting down a lot of other power generation because, again, he's always focused on lining his own pockets at the expense of the American people and our costs going up. So I am focused on all the above generation, meaning that we are going to expand solar and battery generation immediately. That's the cheapest, easiest way to do it. We have about 40 % of our mix, which is gas generation, but some of them are older. We're modernizing that to drive down carbon emissions and increase efficiency.

33:49And then over the long term, nuclear power generation to build out our power needs. We would love to move into other ways to drive down costs like wind power. But the president has stopped all of the federal wind farms in the land and the leases so we could move into that. So, again, costing New Jersey ratepayers a lot of money as he is picking his friends over the people he should be serving. Were there any projects that New Jersey was involved in that were stopped mid-build when he decided to do that? Yes, we were working. We were still moving ahead on one wind project that because he wouldn't give us the federal leases, we had to we had to stop.

34:35So we have now moved to fixing some of our transmission across the state so we can get more power into the grid, move to solar and battery storage and moving long term to nuclear, as I mentioned, modernizing that gas generation to drive down carbon emissions. And then we are also taking on PJM. That's our grid operator, which is really, again, favored some of the dirtier fuels instead of getting new clean power generation into the grid, driving up costs for everyone. And so I've already been working with Governor Shapiro and Governor Moore on how we are going to better hold them accountable. And is that something that you can that you have oversight over at the state level?

35:16Like, are you able to tell the grid operator the cap that you want dirty energy to be in terms of the formula, you know, in terms of the total combination of different energy sources? So we are able to tell the grid operator our expectations. But again, PJM, the real threat is pulling out of that grid. And so should PJM decide they are not going to run the grid in a way that's going to drive down costs for everyone and drive down carbon emissions, then in concert with other states, we may make some choices about how we're going to manage our grid. And that might not include PJM running it. Okay, got it.

35:55Now, what are broader goals for your administration that, you know, you can look back years from now and say, you know, if this was accomplished, then this administration was a success or vice versa? if i can ensure that we are better holding bpu accountable that's a or we are better holding our utility companies accountable the bpu the bureau of public utilities has been charged by my executive order with looking at the business model of our public utilities we know they've made billions of dollars while the rate payers have paid more and more and more um if we can get a better business model in place if we have our grid operator that is more quickly putting power into our grid, especially the clean, renewable power that we want, if we have already gotten to work on a nuclear plan that is going to add power to our grid, along with, of course, as a baseline, growing out our solar battery storage and other new ways of generating power.

36:53If we are doing that, that is going to be successful. If I can look at third grade reading scores in my state and know that we have phonics education implemented, that we have actually done something, I think, new and meeting children's needs in our school system for the first time in decades here, and that we are competing for that top spot, which New Jersey has traditionally held as the best education system, that will be a big win. If our kids have access to better mental health resources and we take on online safety, in my kids' online safety agenda, and we have the Center of Excellence I'm going to build out at one of our colleges or universities so that we have better data on those algorithms and better data on the mental health, because we know every time big tech studies it, it is so bad they stop the study.

37:41So as a state, we are going to invest in that. That will be a success. And if the people of New Jersey who want to start a small business, want to get a real ID, want to engage in any way with our government, feel really well served, if they feel like the interaction they've had with state government, that in that interaction that they know every single person in my administration is truly there to serve the public, which I believe is a really noble calling. If they feel that kind of service, if they know that in New Jersey, their government cares deeply about them, that'll be a huge win to me as well.

38:17So I want to switch gears a little bit here. I spoke with Governor Moore from Maryland just a couple of days ago. He announced the introduction of an eight to nothing map, and that was passed by the GRAC, the Governor's Redistricting Advisory Commission. Similarly, in Virginia, we're speaking about Governor Spanberger in Virginia, they're looking to put forward a 10 to 1 map. That's obviously in the aftermath of California passing its own map. And all of this is in response to what Republicans have done in Texas, in Missouri, in North Carolina, in Ohio, and now in Florida. So in the event that New Jersey, you know, the legislature reconvenes and has the opportunity to redraw maps in New Jersey, Is that something that you've seen any interest in from legislators?

39:01So it would take there are certain ways we we have bipartisan redistricting or nonpartisan redistricting by constitution. So there's certain ways in which we have to go to the people to ask that question. I'm very interested in it because I think we are going to see a lot of malfeasance by Trump. Certainly, I was there on January 6th on the floor of the House as he tried to stay in office. So why anyone thinks, as he's already said he's going to try to stay in office, he won't. That's, I think, wishful thinking. So I'm expecting a great deal of malfeasance, and I want to make sure that New Jersey is as strong and resilient as possible in accordance with the will of the people.

39:38So you can talk a little bit about the mechanics of what that would look like. Virginia, for example, needs two consecutive legislative cycles where where the legislature votes to approve the constitutional amendment that it goes out into the people. California obviously did Prop 50 and got this thing on the ballot in five minutes, basically. What would the process be like in New Jersey? Similar to what you mentioned with Virginia, there needs to be two legislative cycles. the earliest we could get it on the ballot with our process would be in the November 2026 election. So we could get a ballot measure on there.

40:16What I think it would do, though, is alert people to our concerns and to the fact that we think there is going to be a big fight coming. And I think that would make voters really think twice about how important their vote is and how important it is for them to get to the polls and how important it is for them to support their democracy. In the event that we see the Calais decision, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, go the Republicans' way, which is to say that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is gutted, there are no more protections for these Black opportunity districts or minority opportunity districts across the country.

40:52We could see anywhere from 10, 20, 30 seats get redrawn out of these Republican-led maps so that they can, you know, obviously favor Republicans instead of Democrats. Would you preserve the ability for New Jersey to counter some of the map redrawing that we may see in the event that the Supreme Court strikes down the Voting Rights Act? So we will work to do that. As I said, the first time we could get that on the ballot constitutionally would be this November. I also will tell you, as I know you know and your listeners know, we are already seeing in Texas, for example, redistricting with complete disregard for the Voting Rights Act and majority minority districts.

41:36But what we are also seeing is when Republicans take these measures, the American people come out in force to try to register against them. So what I'm very hopeful of is no matter what Trump tries to do, that we are going to see not just a blue wave, but a blue tidal wave. And I say that with some level of hope here, not just wishful thinking. I think there's a good chance that's where we're headed, given what I saw in my election. So there were only two statewide elections in the entire nation, 25. And what we saw were huge swings in New Jersey, huge swings, 22-point swings, for example, for Latin and Latino, heavily Latino populations.

42:20We saw swings. We saw urban black voters coming out to vote in a force that we haven't seen in probably over a decade. We saw I want a generally Republican county. We want it for the first time since Watergate. We saw the traditional white working class men come home a little bit. Not all the way, not what I'd like to see. My grandpa is a union guy. It's a little offensive to me that I work my butt off for union guys, and sometimes they vote the other way. So, you know, trying to get those guys back. But we are seeing the, I would say, the traditional Democratic coalition of working people, which I think is our strongest coalition, coming together.

43:05And then some, some of the new coalition, Suburban Women, for example. We are seeing that coalition really strong. I saw that in 25, and I think that has only the ability to grow that has only increased since then. So in 26, I am anticipating that there is not much Trump can do other than not count votes, which is possible with him to to hold on to the House. All right. Well, we will leave it there. That seems like a good place to leave off. Governor Cheryl, thanks so much for taking the time. Thanks for having me. I really appreciate it. I'm joined now by Congressman Sarah Jacobs. Thanks so much for joining me.

43:45Thanks for having me. So you were part of a CODEL, a congressional delegation that went to Denmark to discuss all of the news happening right now as Donald Trump saber rattles about annexing Greenland. And I want to talk about that in a moment. But first and foremost, I want to get your reaction to some new news. And this is a sense that Donald Trump has, in a way, capitulated. He made some some big pronouncement about concepts of a future framework that may happen at some untold point in the future. So it reads very much like there's not going to be some imminent annexation of Greenland and as a result, no tariffs.

44:21And so that this seems to be quelled for the moment. Can I have your reaction to that news? Look, if this is really an off ramp that he's taking, then I'm very happy for that because the idea of annexing Greenland makes no sense. But from all of the public reporting we've seen about this framework, it doesn't seem like we're getting anything that we wouldn't have already gotten from the existing treaties that we have in place with Denmark. And so all of this saber rattling, all of this lack of trust with our allies. You know, when I was there, I heard from Greenlandic families who told me that their kids couldn't sleep.

44:59And we've seen world leaders start to call out how they no longer trust the United States as an ally. We saw the biggest protest in Danish history against the United States while I was there. All of that appears to be so that we could get something that we already would be able to get under the existing frameworks. And this is classic Trump, right? He sets the fire and then he claims to put it out and wants to get credit for it. Yeah. So what was the reaction like from the folks in Denmark? And to what extent do you think that this has permanently injured our alliances, you know, with folks who we rely on to, you know, do trade deals and protect us?

45:38And, you know, look, when when, you know, in the aftermath of 9-11, the Danes, for example, were one of the countries that lost the highest proportion of their of their citizens in responding to what happened on 9-11. So these are not people that that that haven't offered something, some goodwill or some security to the United States in return for what we give them. Yeah, I'll be honest. And talking with our Danish and Greenlandic counterparts, they were kind of baffled. they kept saying that they asked the United States, like, what more do you want in Arctic security? What more do you want economically?

46:12Like, we are ready to give it to you. Just tell us what you want. And the administration never gave them anything. And, you know, as I mentioned, the biggest protest in Danish history was while we were there. And there was polling that showed that prior to all of this, 80 % of Danes thought that the United States was an important ally. now only single digits level of Danish people think that we are an important ally. And I know anecdotally that that's true across all of Europe. And I think that the damage to our relationships, the damage to our transatlantic relationship, right, to NATO, to these countries believing that if they get attacked, we will come to their rescue.

46:54I think that has been completely eroded. To what extent do you think that, given the fact that there was no response from the Trump team on what else they can do to bolster Arctic security, to what extent do you think that this was then just a vanity project for Trump so that he can look at a map and say, look, we expanded American territory. That's because of me, you know, dear leader. It was 100 percent a vanity project. There is literally nothing that we could will be getting now that we couldn't have gotten under existing treaties. And in fact, like it would have cost a lot of money to get nothing right.

47:31The Danes subsidize Greenland by about a billion dollars a year. That's a billion dollars we would have had to take on. They have Arctic capabilities that we don't have. Not to mention that one of the people I was traveling with was Lisa Murkowski, the senator from Alaska. And she will tell you that we don't even invest enough in the existing U.S. Arctic and the Arctic security that we need in Alaska, let alone adding on Greenland now when we're not already making the Arctic security investments we need. Moving forward, even if there's a Democratic administration that that succeeds this administration and we are able to restore a lot of the alliances that have been that have been frayed or broken.

48:12I mean, doesn't the rest of the world see that as like, OK, so we're just going to bounce back and forth between, you know, this lunatic right wing fringe that wants to, you know, usher in a second era of imperialism. And then, you know, a democratic administration that that understands the importance of NATO and depending on what person wins a presidential election is going to determine whether, you know, China can invade Taiwan and Russia can invade Ukraine and the United States can invade other NATO allies or not. I mean, how does that how does that help us with any long term alliances looking beyond just every four years of a presidential election.

48:51No, that's exactly right. I don't think anyone in the world will agree to make a deal with the United States that's longer than four years because they just don't believe that any deal will actually be implemented longer than four years. And that's true now. And it was true in Trump's first administration when he pulled us out of the Iran deal that had been painstakingly negotiated, not just with Iran, but in partnership with our European partners and allies who were part of that deal. And so I am very worried about what this means in terms of how our allies will trust us, how much hedging they will do.

49:24And I also think it's important for us to recognize for a long time, I think there was this bipartisan consensus that the U.S. was the indispensable nation, that, you know, we were so important. We called all the shots. Everyone else followed us. And that's just not the world we're living in. It's not the world we're going to be living in. Frankly, like this era of U.S. hegemony is no longer here. And I think it's incumbent on us also as Democrats to recognize that we're going to be operating in a different world and to not just, you know, as Mark Carney said in his speech yesterday, nostalgia is not a strategy.

50:00And we need to have a real concrete kind of introspective conversation with ourselves about what our foreign policy really needs to look like going forward in this new world. You had mentioned the point of bipartisanship and the CODEL, the congressional delegation, was bipartisan. You did have some Republican members. How important is that aspect of it? Or are these Republicans just some tiny minority, you know, to give kind of a veneer of bipartisanship when the reality is that the rest of the Republican Party is perfectly content to sacrifice their firstborns if that's what Donald Trump demands of them?

50:36You know, it's a good question. And I've been having a lot of conversations with my Republican colleagues here in the House. And, you know, there's a lot of them who thought this Greenland thing was a terrible idea. I think, you know, Tom Tillis, Senator Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, has been the most outspoken, calling it stupid. But, you know, I've had a lot of those private conversations with my colleagues. The problem is, for my colleagues here in the House, it takes quite a lot to get those private conversations they'll have with us into actual real concrete action. And a lot of what we heard was, well, after he invades, we'll do something.

51:12And, you know, my point to them was, after he invades, it's too late. We need to be working now to prevent that from happening. And even the idea that we will or will not be invading an ally based on the whims of a single person is deeply problematic. Right. The Constitution, Article one of the Constitution gives the power to declare war and peace to Congress because the founders knew that this was too important of a role for one person to be responsible for. And the idea that like tariffs, yes or no, will he, won't he, invasion, yes or no, will he, won't he, is the world we're all living in is actually the fault of Congress for not standing up and reclaiming our power to be the ones to make these decisions.

51:55Right. But that would suggest that Mike Johnson would actually assert his own autonomy. And as an extension of Donald Trump, that's never going to happen. You know, you had also spoken about Mark Carney. Obviously, his speech at Davos was the big showstopper on day one. You know, Mark Carney and Canada had announced that they're dropping those tariffs on Chinese EVs. And there's so much there's so much jingoism and saber rattling from the U.S., especially Republicans against China. But is there no acknowledgement of the dichotomy of this position where you have these Republicans who claim that they're going to do everything they can to stop an ascendant China?

52:38But by alienating ourselves on the global stage, all we're doing is creating openings that China is perfectly content to fill. We saw Canada fill that void with China just a few days ago, and we've seen other countries get closer to China to strike trade deals because they know that they're a more reliable and less erratic trade partner, less volatile trade partner than the United States is going to be. And so is there no reconciling those two things that are in blatant conflict with each other among at least your Republican colleagues? And you're exactly right. And for a long time, China has said that we are an unreliable ally, an unreliable partner that has been their main line of attack against us.

53:25And we are feeding right into that idea. And I can't blame our allies for hedging and for thinking that, you know, they need to cover their bases because they can't count on us. I don't think my Republican colleagues, like, have really thought that second order effect. And I think part of what's hard is that within the Republican Party right now, there is this sort of factionalism of like the isolationists versus the hawks and the neocons. And I think some of it is that like this is getting caught in that sort of internal fight. Yeah. But yeah, like if what you care about is making sure that China doesn't rise, which I actually would argue that this whole frame of strategic competition actually leads us to do things that make us less safe.

54:13But if that is your position, which is the stated position of Republicans, then I think, yeah, you should be seeing everything that Donald Trump is doing through that lens and saying like this is actually not making us more competitive at all. I mean, even Trump himself invokes China and Russia as the whole rationale for doing this, this whole, you know, purported Greenland annexation. We can't be neighbors with China and Russia. And yet all he's doing by virtue of alienating ourselves and hurting NATO, dismantling it. I mean, this would be effectively a death knell for NATO if one NATO country invaded and annexed another.

54:47That's it for NATO. That's a wrap. But NATO is the only thing actually preventing some incursion on Greenland by China or Russia. And so he's like the only thing that's preventing what Trump claims to want to prevent is is the very institution that he's trying to destroy at this very moment. Well, and I think that goes to the point that Donald Trump doesn't care about, believe in or understand NATO because he, I think, truly believes that the only way the U.S. would protect Greenland is if we owned Greenland, not recognizing that the whole point of NATO is that if Greenland were to be attacked or invaded by Russia or China, the entire NATO alliance would come to its defense.

55:31That's the entire point of NATO. And so I actually think the idea that he's questioning whether or not NATO is enough to protect Greenland is itself throwing cold water onto NATO and then like proving his own point that we need to own it. Right. It's this very circular logic. But, you know, even with all of the harm that Trump has been doing to these institutions, I think we also need to be clear that, you know, this is not just a partisan problem. Right. I would argue that living up to our values is how we are able to build these coalitions and coalitions are what make us powerful. And, you know, we saw with the Biden administration, with Gaza, with what's happening in Sudan, that a lot of partners around the world feel like we don't hold our friends to the same standards that we hold them to.

56:16And it makes them less likely to want to be in coalition with us and to pick our side when there are big international fights. And last question here on that point of coalitions, is there some understanding, at least among the folks in Denmark that you'd gotten the opportunity to speak to, is there some understanding that like Trump does not represent the vast majority of Americans, that there is a huge faction of us in this country who are as opposed to him as I'm sure they are over there? And in fact, the polling would reflect on this issue in particular. There was polling from Reuters that showed like 4 % support for a military invasion onto Greenland.

57:02Like you can't get 96 % of Americans to agree on what day it is. Like you could you could hold a banana in your hand and ask them to identify it and you would not get 96 percent consensus on that. But for 96 percent of Americans to come out and disagree with with this idea of invading or using military force to go into Greenland, that makes it pretty clear where we stand. And so and so is there some understanding by the Danes that we are not a reflection of, you know, this one guy in the Oval Office whose entire foreign policy is just that some errant synapse fires in his brain and then words fall out of his face?

57:38You know, I was expecting to go to Denmark and to have them be like really angry and yelling at us. And instead, every, you know, Danish person I spoke to on the street just like felt bad for us. Yeah, that sounds about right. It's happening. like they weren't mad at us. They were just like concerned. And so I do think there is an understanding that this is not representative of the American people, right? The Americans do not want to invade Greenland. They do not want to spend reportedly$700 billion to buy Greenland, right? We would rather have affordable housing, universal childcare, all of these other things for that money.

58:13And I think they do understand that. And, you know, they want to make sure that we are then doing what we need to do to make sure that that doesn't happen. All right. Well, we will leave it there. Thank you for thanks for your leadership on this issue, for going out there and representing the United States so that the only representation isn't, you know, whatever word vomit Donald Trump does on stage at Davos. And thank you for your time today. Of course. Thank you. Thanks again to Tommy Vitor, Mikey Sherrill and Sarah Jacobs. That's it for this episode. Talk to you on Wednesday. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen Produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesley and interviews edited for YouTube by Nicholas Nicotera If you want to support the show, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app and leave a 5-star rating and a review And as always, you can find me at Brian Tyler Cohen on all of my other channels or you can go to briantylercohen.com to learn more