DOJ makes DREADED announcement ahead of midterms

The question I get more than any other. is about what this White House will do. to interfere in midterms. And we just. got a preview of exactly that thanks to. an announcement by the Assistant. Attorney General Hermit Dylan. She sat. down for an interview on Bloomberg's. balance of power where she said, quote, "We began our election security work. almost as soon as I was sworn in last. April. This is an ongoing duty and. obligation. The US Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division has sent monitors. to election hotspots, polling places to. increase voter confidence to. troubleshoot problems, and we are doing. that now. We did it in the primary. We're going to do it to the tune of.

approximately a thousand election. monitors in the November election. And. this is just something that DOJ does. Now, let's be clear. This is a voter. suppression tactic. Period. Here's why. Think about who's actually going to be. deployed to act as these election. monitors. It's not bureaucrats. There's. not a thousand bureaucrats sitting. around. It's probably going to be. federal agents from the one agency that. has more money than most militaries on. the planet, ICE. So you've got a rogue. agency answerable to one man, doesn't. show their faces, doesn't use insignia,

whose entire reputation is that they are. not afraid to hit, shoot, or kill. Americans with impunity, who will be at. the very polling places that Americans. are expected to show up at in November, which might shed light on why people. like Caroline Levit outright refuse to. rule it out when asked. >> Thank you, Caroline. Steve Bannon. recently said, quote, "We're going to. have ice around the polls come. November." Is that something that the. president is considering? >> That's not something I've ever heard the. president consider. No.

>> Can you guarantee to the American public. that ICE will not be around polling. locations or voting locations in. November? >> I can't guarantee that uh an ICE agent. won't be around a polling location in. November. I mean, that's frankly a very. silly hypothetical question. U but what. I can tell you is I haven't heard the. president discuss any formal plans to. put ICE outside of polling locations. It's a disingenuous question. >> The fact that they feel they have to do. this is just as big a story. Clearly, the Trump administration and the broader.

GOP have given up on even trying to win. on the merits. They feel that their only. choice at this point is to rig the rules. of the game in their favor. Just look at. the environment they're operating in. You've got 10 Trump endorsed candidates. who've already lost their own primaries. this cycle. The president's approval. ratings are underwater on nearly every. issue that matters to voters. The. economy, healthc care, foreign policy, you name it. Costs are higher across the. board. Health care is less available. Food assistance is less available. Inflation's up. The Epstein files are.

being suppressed. The war that Trump. swore he'd avoid is going on 9 months. now to the tune of $130 billion. And. frankly, there's no way to hide any of. that. There's no like ad buy that erases. inflation or the Iran war or a carrier. full of sailors who've been stuck at sea. for 250 days. When a party knows it. can't win a fair fight over its record, it has two options. It can change the. record or just change the fight. This. administration has made very clear which. one it's willing to do. And look, the.

GOP is going to try and sell this move. as election integrity as they always do, that a thousand federal agents need to. be posted up at polling places because. something is wrong with how Americans. vote. But ask the obvious question, wrong based on what? Where is any. modicum of evidence of widespread voter. fraud that justifies a thousand person. federal deployment? It doesn't exist. It. never existed. Study after study, audit. after audit, court case after court.

case, including, by the way, the ones. this very administration has brought in. front of judges who Trump himself. appointed have failed to turn up. anything remotely close to the scale of. fraud that would warrant this kind of. response. The absence of evidence isn't. like some gap in the story. It is the. story. So, if this isn't about fraud. that exists, what's it about? It's about. creating the appearance that fraud might. be lurking, might be present in order to. justify federal agents standing inside. polling places in the specific.

communities that this administration has. already decided to distrust. Probably. more black than white. Probably in a. swing state, for example. That's not. election security. That is the machinery. of suppression, as I mentioned before, because the most effective way to. suppress a vote isn't always to. physically stop somebody from casting. ballots. Sometimes it's simpler than. that. You just got to make people afraid. enough or uncertain enough or watched. enough that turnout in the wrong. precincts just quietly drops on its way.

down. And here's the tell. Even Dylan, when pressed, couldn't produce the. evidence she was implying existed. She. claimed that states have uh that have. cooperated with DOJ's voter role effort. supposedly show hundreds of thousands of. dead people, tens of thousands of. non-citizens on the rolls. She didn't. name a single state, didn't site a. single source, even admitted in that. same interview that the DOJ still needs. to do further verification before it can. say whether anybody actually voted. illegally. So the justification for a.

thousand agent deployment is by the. administration's own admission. completely unverified. That's not a. department responding to a a documented. crisis. It's a department manufacturing. the impression of one. Consider too if. there was mass fraud like we're being. told, you know what we'd see? Prosecutions. And you know what we. haven't seen? Prosecutions. That's as. big a tell as you could possibly find, especially for a Department of Justice. that is more than willing to prosecute.

anyone and every everyone. Evidence be. damned. And the DOJ has had every. opportunity to make its case in an. actual courtroom under actual scrutiny. And it's failed spectacularly. They had. 23 separate district court cases where. the DOJ sued states because they were. demanding unredacted voter roles, which. include social security numbers, driver's license data, all of that. stuff. And the DOJ has lost every single. one. Even the Sixth Circuit Court of. Appeals rejected them. And just this. past Friday, the full appeals court on. the Sixth Circuit wouldn't even rehear.

it. 23 losses in front of judges. appointed by presidents of both parties. is about as close the legal system gets. to saying definitively there's nothing. here. And the department's response. wasn't to accept that. It was to start. talking about uh appealing this all the. way up to the Supreme Court instead. Because again, when you can't win on the. merits, you just find the hacks whose. hackery you can appeal to. So follow the. actual sequence of events because it. tells you everything. The DOJ went. looking for evidence of massive voter. fraud. It lost 23 times trying to get.

the data it claimed would prove it. It. still hasn't produced a single verified. case at the scale that it's describing. And now instead of the case for fraud, we get a thousand federal monitors at. polling places. Anyway, announced with. the same unverified claims that already. failed in court and all of which is. aimed at election hotspots that the. department hasn't even named yet. When. you can't win the legal argument and you. can't win the political argument, you. just change the venue to the one place. where the raw presence does the. intimidating for you and that is the.

polling place itself on election day. with your own people standing there. That is the whole strategy in one. sentence. If this White House can't win. elections on the merits, on the economy, on the Iran war, on a president openly. telling grieving military families that. their kids haven't sacrificed enough, they should be deployed longer. The fall. back is to make voting itself feel like. it's being surveiled. Not because fraud. is real, but because this administration. needs voters, especially in certain. communities that it's already decided to. distrust, to hesitate, to wonder if.

showing up is worth the scrutiny. You. don't need to rig a single ballot to. suppress a vote. You just need enough. people to believe someone's watching and. waiting for a reason to make an example. of them. So, my advice, and this is. important, do not give them what they. want. There will be midterm elections. and they will be free and fair and they. will not succeed at suppressing the vote. no matter who they deploy. This tactic. is a sign of weakness and a precursor to. the fact that even the White House is. preparing to lose come November. You're.

watching the No Lie podcast. Next up is. my interview with Dan Feifer. No Lie is. brought to you by Simply Safe. So. obviously security is important for. everybody, but when you've got a home, pets, kids, a family, it becomes. exponentially more important. And as I. was considering home security systems, I. realized that they're all designed for. after the windows break, after. somebody's inside, after you get the. notification after the police come. Simply Safe is the first system designed. for before stopping a break-in before it. even begins. And there's a ton of peace.

of mind in that, especially if I'm. leaving my dog at home or or if I have. all of my gear in my house. I don't want. to have to worry over a long weekend. But knowing that I've got real. protection, that peace of mind is. legitimately priceless. So here's how. Simply Safe makes that happen. It is. designed to help stop intruders before. they get inside. Smart AI powered. outdoor cameras detect suspicious. activity at the perimeter and they alert. live US-based agents to step in. Simply. Safe's agents assess the threat, intervene through the outdoor camera to. scare off trespassers and call for 911.

dispatch. Simplysafe has been protecting. your world for 20 years. Celebrate their. anniversary with us and save 60% on your. new Simplysafe system at. simplysafe.com/btc. That's 60% off at simplysafe.com/btc. Plus, when you order, write in our show. name when you get to the how did you. hear about us survey to let them know. that I sent you. Don't forget, there's. no safe like Simplysafe. No lie is. brought to you by Quint. So, August is. the perfect time to hit reset before the. autumn rush begins. And honestly, I. can't think of a better place to start. than my closet. That's why I love.

shopping at Quint. Quint is all about. fewer, better pieces. Their clothes are. made with premium materials, built to. last, and designed to become the ones. you reach for day after day. Quinn. specializes in everyday essentials that. work harder, like their ultra soft. organic cotton tees and premium. Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're. versatile, timeless, and transition. seamlessly from a casual workday to. dinner out. If you're still hanging on. to the same worn out basics, Quint makes. it easy to upgrade. They have premium. denim and tailored chinos from just $60. with the kind of perfect fit, structure,

and high-quality fabrics that you'd. expect from a luxury designer brand. Everything at Quint is priced 50 to 80%. less than similar brands. They work. directly with ethical factories and cut. out the middlemen. So, you're paying for. highquality, not brand markup. I just. bought the organic cotton mesh ditched. button-up sweater polo, which I love, but I have a ton of clothes from Quint, where they curate great styles so that I. have a one-stop shop for everything that. I like. And it's not just clothing. Quint has become my go-to for everything. from hotel quality bedding and bath.

essentials to premium cookware and. travel musthaves. Upgrade your everyday. Download the Quint app for app exclusive. offers or go to quint.com/btc. Get free shipping on your order and. 365day returns. Now available in Canada. and the UK, too. That's quinc.com/btc. It looks like there's something of the. end of an era as far as Trump's grip on. the party is concerned. I'm joined now. by Dan Fefeifer, for former. communications director for Barack Obama. and co-host of Pods Safe America. Dan,

you had posted in the aftermath of Corey. Mills losing his primary in Florida. Um, and I'm going to put this right up on. the screen. Three more Trump endorsed. GOP candidates lost their primaries last. night. Trump's endorsement used to be a. guaranteed win. No more. This is more. evidence that Trump's grip on his base. in American politics is loosening. So, I. want you to talk about that post that. you made and Trump's waning influence in. his own party. >> Sure. Like I will stipulate that the. overwhelming majority of people that. Trump endorses wins, but also the.

overwhelming majority of his. endorsements are in completely safe. seats, >> right? >> It used to be an absolute guarantee that. in the most highprofile of races, a. Trump endorsement would mean would be. akin to victory. We have seen in several. cases in recent weeks, including three. times last night, where Republicans. endorsed by Trump have lost. And what I. think is interesting about it is like if. you are a Republican who crossed the. party like a Thomas Massie or a Bill.

Cassidy, like Trump can still win those. primaries. But when Republicans are. choosing between two different. Republicans. who haven't like, you know, committed. some sort of mortal sin against the. party, Trump's endorsement is it isn't a. guarantee anymore. Like we've seen it. And I think you can it's just if part of. this I can get into data if you want, but part of this is also just vibes. You. can just feel it. Trump's a less. dominant force in the attention economy. What he says, people react to less. It.

carries less weight. People are less. scared of him. And I think it's showing. up in primaries, too. >> Do you think that this is evidence of. his waning influence or is this like a. an affirmative rebuke against Trump? >> I think it's waning influence because. these are not um these are primaries. between two. mostly equally conservative Republican. candidates. And if people think there is. a better candidate that Trump does not. like, they'll vote for that candidate. So it's sort of it's more it's more like. his death grip on the party is. loosening.

>> Yeah. And so what are the implications. then moving forward? Like like how are. you thinking about his influence. especially as it relates to who he. decides to declare as his era parent in. 2028? You know, I think the. people Republican primary voters will. take Trump's endorsement into. consideration. Um, but it may not be. decisive in a primary. What will matter. is whether he deploys his hundreds of. millions of dollars in campaign funds or.

puts his thumb on the scale with the. actual institutional Republican party in. terms of how delegates are counted or. what the primary schedule is to help. that person. But if people are just. walking in, they may, you know, Trump's. endorsement is one piece of data. It's. not the only piece of the data. >> in terms of like what he's doing. I. guess I guess the broader question is. like. >> he still, as you said, has overwhelming. support among his base. He's done. virtually the opposite of everything. that he promised on the campaign trail. And so to what extent does it matter? To. what extent um is his continued refusal.

to abide by his campaign promises uh uh. the the the increased cost, you know, continuing to stay bogged down in this. uh foreign war in the Middle East, his. refusal to release the Epstein files. is. will there come a point where where the. the base is so inelastic because these. are people who stuck with him through. everything that he can he can you know. basically commit any sin and it just. won't matter. >> Well, I think what happens over time is.

not that the base abandons Trump the. base becomes smaller is that more and. more Republicans identify stop. identifying as MAGA Republicans. Yeah. Because, you know, I think in the way a. lot of political analysts think about. it, they think a MAGA Republican is. someone who is, you know, anti-immigration, anti-trade, the real MAGA Republican really just. means you like Trump. And so you're. seeing, you know, so Trump's always. going to have high approval among MAGA. Republicans. That's not the most. important question. The important. question is how many Republicans.

identify as MAGA Republicans? And that's. the number we should sort of watch. The. other thing that I've been paying a lot. of attention to and you do see is that. Trump's strong approval among. Republicans has been dropping steadily. since he was sworn in. And so you have. people who still say they like him, they. still approve of him. But strong. approval is a proxy for enthusiasm in. elections. It's a proxy for how much. they care about him. And so yeah, of. course they're if you know. >> like in Republican politics, approving. of Trump is an it's part of your. personal identity. But do you strongly. approve of him or you just kind of.

approve of and the number of Republic. Republicans who just kind of approve of. them is going way up. >> So, in terms of kind of the end of an. era, I'm going to put another post on. the screen of something else that you. said from the other side of the aisle. and this is in the aftermath of. Alexander Vinman who had boatloads of. money, losing to a DSA backed candidate. in Florida for the Senate race. So, that. that post says, "Alex Vinman losing. despite raking in a metric ton of. money based on being a resistance hero. does feel like the end of a certain. era." And I know there's probably a.

degree to which that was tongue andcheek. especially given the fact that that you. know that was the caveat it was caveed. by or qualified as being the resistance. her era but do you feel like we are. coming up upon a moment um because. there's such a glut of money in this. ecosystem that. >> having boatloads of money having metric. tons of money isn't isn't a. guarantee of victory in maybe the same. way it used to be. >> Yeah. So my tweet was referring to two. things here. The first is, and it's kind.

of related to your first set of. questions about Trump's death grip on. the Republican party. It also feels like. he's losing a bit of his death grip on. the Democratic party. Like there was a. time in which the thing that mattered. most was for a Democrat was does this. Democrat stand up to Trump? And in this. election cycle alone, we have seen Dan. Goldman, who was the counsel for the. Democrats during their first impeachment. trial of Trump and then rode the fame. from that job into Congress, lose a. primary. We saw George Conway, uh, a. very famous Trump apostate who has.

basically lived on MS Now over the. years. Yeah. >> Only get 6% of the vote in a primary in. the upper west side of Manhattan. And. then you have Alex Vinman who to who was. the, you know, he was a he was a very. very brave person who stood up and. testified against Trump in that. impeachment and he lost. And so I do. think that this is that we're I kind of. think Democrats can see the light at the. end of the Trump tunnel here and are and. so fighting Trump is necessary to. succeed in Democratic politics but it's.

insufficient on its own. But the second. point is we are seeing in a number of. races where the candidate who was. spending significant less money notably. uh Angie Nixon here in Florida and Abdul. say in Michigan win despite that. And. there are a couple things going on here. One there are ways if you are very very. talented to get your money out get your. message out much cheaper. You can do do. it organically. You can go viral. You. can have a real social presence. You can. be someone who is always communicating.

in every platform. Abdul was excellent. at that in his case. But also the bulk. of money is spent on linear television. ads. And linear television ads now reach. a. vastly diminishing group of people. They. still matter. And I think one of the. reasons why Franchesca Hong lost is. because she ran no ads down the stretch. But it's not the victory does not go the. person who can raise the most money. anymore. And there are ways in which I. think this is going to matter in the. 2028 primary where candidates who are.

understand the attention economy who are. clever about getting their name ID up. and their message out will be able to. succeed without raising the most money. >> So in the event where Trump has this. what 400450. million just sitting there as his war. chest and and this is you know compared. to uh a DNC that has an anemic I mean. they have like negative funding. I think. they're in the whole $3 million. Like I understand why Trump is sitting. on that because he wants to be able to. deploy it when it's going to be most.

effective for him, but will will he like. could we be in a situation where he's. held on to it so long and we've entered. an attention economy where simply being. able to perform well organically and. authentically is going to be enough that. you don't even need these boatloads of. money. and and he will have kind of like. held on to it too long because now we've. entered an era where you can pretty much. do it for free if you're good enough. If. you've got, you know, the the RZ that. AOC has, that Abdul has, and and so on. >> I think that he has sat on it much.

longer than he should have because. investing the money in the campaigns. earlier has exponential benefits. If you. wait to the end, all you're doing is. buying television ads at the most. expensive rate possible. If you buy your. ads early, they're cheaper. But if you. invest in technology, organizing, staffing, those sorts of things, you can. will use for the bulk of the campaign. And so he has not been I don't think. he's been particularly strategic about. this. That money is going to matter. Like it definitely will matter and it'll.

be a help to Republicans, particularly. in more Republican states or in some of. the stretch districts where Democrats. could catch Republicans sleeping. Uh you. know, like a Trump plus 12, Trump plus. 13 district. They'll now have money to. be everywhere. But it's still once again. not as does not matter as much as it. used to before. And I would be much more. worried if Trump started the year with. $500 million. It only had $200 million. in his account now because it meant he. was deploying it strategically. throughout the course of the year. Instead, he's sort of he's basically. keeping it in an account that doesn't. really gain interest for a year and a.

half now. >> Okay. So like a couple things on that. First of all, that is basically the. theory of the case with Ben Wickler and. Wisdoms. Like they had a longterm. strategy to continue building up the. party. So, it wasn't just throwing money. at ads that go in one ear and out the. other, you know, in October or November. of an election year. This is what it. looks like when you organize year round. And that's what turned Wisconsin into, you know, the state that had often been. a thorn in the side of Democrats into a. pretty reliably um bluish state when it.

came to a lot of these uh you know, statewide elections, state supreme court. elections. A lot of those went went our. way. And that's because we had uh. somebody like Ben Ben Wickler running. that show. Uh, another point is like, you know, I can't remember how many. years ago it was, but but there was an. election cycle where Stephanie Valencia. basically watched and and she noted this. and that's why she uh that was one of. your your colleagues in the Obama White. House, but watched as. >> in in some South Florida district, Democrats poured millions and millions.

and millions of dollars into ads that. again went in one ear, out the other. that ran for eight weeks. And meanwhile, Republicans bought a radio station for. $350,000. So, pocket change compared to what the. Democrats were spending. And now they. have infrastructure that they can rely. on all year long to basically proitize. people who are listening. And all the. Democrats had to show for it was like. again making making a bunch of TV. stations. rich, filthy rich in the leadup to an. election. And then the last part is.

like, you know, in in large part like. the the importance of the work that you. and the guys at Crooked do is like. creating that infrastructure so that. it's not just throwing money at ads that. are not going to impact people. Like we. are in a different kind of economy where. people are are building up their. worldviews based on their trusted voices. that they listen to 365 days out of the. year. People aren't just tuning in to. you like in November to figure out what. to do. They're they're in large part. reading message box all year round. They're listening to Pod Safe America. all year round and that's how you have.

to operate in this ecosystem. And yeah, to your point, like just throwing money. at these ads is not going to be it in. 2026 or beyond. >> Yeah, that's exactly right. Like there. if I there's one thing that I could wave. a wand and do would be to convince the. donors who have been giving these super. PACs millions of dollars a year for. decades now just to run these TV ads to. invest in something that has more. lasting value which is it's so ironic. because all these people who have these.

millions of dollars to give got it for. making really smart investments in. things that have long-term value. If. they could bring that mentality to. politics we'd be in a better spot. Last. topic I want to touch on, and this is. something that's kind of consumed the. news cycle in the last few days, and. that was John Oaf's pretty benol remark. about Natalie Harp, his his I don't. know, body body woman, I guess you would. you would call her. um where you know. Osaf said that basically that Trump. would was more interested not in helping. regular people bringing cost down but.

instead on uh you know golfing building. his ballroom and traveling with Natalie. on a jet that we apparently needed for. national security implications that he. wouldn't even ride on when when hit. the fan. Um and uh and so I'm just. curious what your take was. I saw a post. from David Axel saying that while he is. a big fan of John Oaf that he missed the. mark. Meanwhile, other people are. saying, you know, this is what it looks. like when dem when Democrats actually. exercise the this this idea that, you.

know, we are done with the era of when. when they go low, we go high. And so, what do you think about the. effectiveness of the uh the John Oaf. comment? Look, I've never gone very far. in my life disagreeing with David. Axelrod, but I will do it here. Um, look, I think a couple things. One, Assaf understood what he was doing, which is he was trying to find a way to. both strike a chord with people who are. trying to pay who are paying attention. and get a reaction from the White House. and in doing this was very smart. Everyone in the White House is reacting.

as if John Oaf was alleging that they. that Trump and Natalie Harper were. having an affair. That's not what he was. doing. I don't think Democrats think. that Trump is physically is Trump at his. advanced age and poor health is in the. having an affair part of his life and. that she's not his girlfriend, she's his. nursemaid. And I think that's why they. reacted the way they did. >> Yeah. >> Um. >> but it's like there is a lot to learn. from Oaf because he has found a way to. go viral without doing things that. sacrifice his electability in a very.

purple state. Right? He's not and it's. authentic to him. He's not doing it. works for some candidates, but he's not. doing Tik Tok dance. He's not doing. other things. He's finding a way to. >> It's really impressive to go viral. delivering his message in a speech. Yeah. >> Which almost no one. >> really in Democratic politics has done. since Barack Obama. And he's pulling it. off and he's finding ways to do it. And. by adding the adding the word Natalie in. there, he has created a 4-day news cycle. over it. And it's very it's very clever.

and very well done. I wonder too, like I. look, I'm not going to ask you to get in. the heads of these these right-wingers. But is there no shame in the fact that. this is an entire party falling over. themselves to to present themselves as. these champions for women, these great. defenders of women when they're talking. about somebody, you know, on on the. Trump end of things who has like two. dozen credible allegations of sexual. assault against him, who was just forced. to pay five and then $83 million for. sexually abusing and defaming Eugene.

Carol, who um is right now in the. process of of suppressing the Epstein. files. I mean, is this is like is there. no regard for the other end of the of. the person on this argument that from. these people? >> Yeah, I don't I don't think that all of. a sudden they're going to start caring. about their own hypocrisy. What is. happening here is this is a very. uncomfortable subject. There is. reporting that the first lady and others. within the White House are uncomfortable. with her relationship with Trump. Just.

how the fact that she slept in a locker. room for an entire summer so she could. be near him. >> Yeah. that she wrote in the trunk of a. car wants to be near him that she wrote. in these letters. And I imagine I don't. know. I imagine that Trump's fear here. is that the um first lady is going to be. mad about this. And so there is this. performative nature going on from Trump. and all the aids down to show Melania. that they are pushing back on this. Like. it this is as much about um domestic.

tranquility as is domestic politics for. Trump. >> Yeah. I just think like this guy every. day has a moment where he goes out and. tells some female reporter, "Quiet Piggy. and then you have these and and it's. just crickets from, you know, the Scott. Jennings of the world." But. >> yeah, he did it to the reporter who. asked the question. Yeah. Right. >> Right. Right. Exactly. Like like if. that's not if that's not a perfect. encapsulation of the fact that Trump is. not interested in being the virtuous one. in this argument, I don't know what is. >> Yeah. No one no one's no one's buying. this from Scotch Jennings or the White. House or Donald Trump or anyone else.

>> on on the point of her sleeping in the. locker room in Mara Lago for an entire. summer. That that that is crazy. And I I. presume that you did not even half of. that when you were vying to be Obama's. communications director. >> No, I I I often was given a hotel room. if I was staying with him. >> and if I was not supposed to be on the. trip, you know what I did? I didn't go. And that in Obama's White House. >> Yeah. that would have been seen as that. sort of behavior would have gotten you. uh kicked out pretty fast. >> Yeah. Well, you know what? Uh that. that's the difference between somebody.

like Obama and a megalomaniacal. narcissist like Donald Trump. >> Uh with that said, Dan, where can people. see and hear more from you? >> Uh they can listen to me on PD Save. America. They can subscribe to my. newsletter to the message box uh on. Substack, messagebox.substack.com where. I break down what's happening in. politics and the midterms. If you if you. like POS America, you like Brian Tyler. Cohen, think you like the message box, too. I'm going to put a link to the. message box and link to POS Save. America's YouTube channel in the post. description. If you're listening on the. podcast, I'm going to throw it on the. show notes. Dan, as always, thanks for. the time. >> Awesome. Thanks, Brian.

>> To listen to the audio version of this. episode, click the link right here on. the screen. And please make sure to. subscribe. And of course, to see more. video content, that subscribe button's. on the screen as well.