WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.799 Welcome to the deep dive. Great to be here. So 00:00:02.799 --> 00:00:05.599 today we're looking at that classic political 00:00:05.599 --> 00:00:07.860 milestone. The first 100 days. Right. The 100 00:00:07.860 --> 00:00:10.380 day report card. Exactly. Now you could argue 00:00:10.380 --> 00:00:12.539 maybe it's not quite the powerhouse measure it 00:00:12.539 --> 00:00:16.699 was back in say FDR's time. Yeah. The context 00:00:16.699 --> 00:00:19.140 is definitely different today. The pace is faster. 00:00:19.399 --> 00:00:22.460 Maybe. For sure. But it still gives us a useful, 00:00:22.460 --> 00:00:25.280 well, snapshot, doesn't it? An early look at 00:00:25.280 --> 00:00:27.420 an administration's direction. Absolutely. It's 00:00:27.420 --> 00:00:29.219 that initial burst, you know, where they set 00:00:29.219 --> 00:00:31.600 priorities, make appointments, start showing 00:00:31.600 --> 00:00:33.240 their hand. And that's exactly what we're diving 00:00:33.240 --> 00:00:35.859 into. We've gathered a bunch of news analyses, 00:00:36.000 --> 00:00:39.579 all dated April 30th, 2025. Marking that 100 00:00:39.579 --> 00:00:41.719 day point for the new Trump administration. Right. 00:00:41.759 --> 00:00:44.000 We've got pieces from the New York Times, the 00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:47.219 AP, Politico, U .S. News and World Report, CNN. 00:00:47.689 --> 00:00:50.189 Quite a range. Good cross section. What really 00:00:50.189 --> 00:00:52.869 jumped out was just the sheer amount of ink spilled, 00:00:52.990 --> 00:00:56.009 you know, the volume of analysis around this 00:00:56.009 --> 00:00:58.969 100 day mark. It really does show how much weight 00:00:58.969 --> 00:01:01.170 we still put on these first few months. Kind 00:01:01.170 --> 00:01:04.109 of a benchmark intended or not. OK, let's dig 00:01:04.109 --> 00:01:06.909 in. Starting with the economy, it's worth remembering 00:01:06.909 --> 00:01:10.849 economic anxieties, cost of living trade, especially 00:01:10.849 --> 00:01:13.890 China, were huge factors leading up to the election. 00:01:14.709 --> 00:01:16.750 Definitely front and center for many voters. 00:01:17.430 --> 00:01:19.689 So based on these reports covering the first 00:01:19.689 --> 00:01:22.310 hundred days, what's the verdict on the economic 00:01:22.310 --> 00:01:25.340 impact? Well, interestingly, the consensus in 00:01:25.340 --> 00:01:28.780 these pieces seems to be minimal impact on the 00:01:28.780 --> 00:01:30.700 economy so far. That's the phrase used. Minimal 00:01:30.700 --> 00:01:33.299 so far, OK. Yeah. But were there specific actions 00:01:33.299 --> 00:01:37.019 taken? Oh, yes. A big one was the immediate implementation 00:01:37.019 --> 00:01:40.980 of that promised tariff on Chinese goods. 145 00:01:40.980 --> 00:01:44.599 % tariff. 145 %? Wow. That's aggressive. It certainly 00:01:44.599 --> 00:01:47.269 signals a major shift. protectionist, definitely. 00:01:47.670 --> 00:01:49.730 Something that could really ripple through supply 00:01:49.730 --> 00:01:52.230 chains, possibly trigger retaliation, too. How 00:01:52.230 --> 00:01:54.290 did Wall Street take that news, the financial 00:01:54.290 --> 00:01:56.290 markets? Well, the initial reaction reported 00:01:56.290 --> 00:01:59.650 was negative. The S &P 500 dipped. Markets got 00:01:59.650 --> 00:02:02.349 a bit spooked, seems like. Indicating uncertainty. 00:02:02.629 --> 00:02:04.290 Yeah, uncertainty about the fallout from the 00:02:04.290 --> 00:02:07.930 tariff, other policies. Now, the reports do say 00:02:07.930 --> 00:02:10.430 the market clawed back some ground, but it was 00:02:10.430 --> 00:02:12.689 still apparently below where it started the year. 00:02:12.729 --> 00:02:15.469 OK. And the administration's response to that 00:02:15.469 --> 00:02:19.150 market nervousness. The reporting indicates a 00:02:19.150 --> 00:02:22.789 tendency to blame external forces, foreign countries, 00:02:23.229 --> 00:02:26.389 specifically for the economic situation. Hmm, 00:02:26.710 --> 00:02:29.009 familiar framing. And there's also a specific 00:02:29.009 --> 00:02:32.909 mention quite pointedly of Jeff Bezos. He's quoted 00:02:32.909 --> 00:02:35.650 essentially blaming the administration's policies 00:02:35.650 --> 00:02:38.629 for recent price hikes, saying it's Trump's fault, 00:02:38.830 --> 00:02:42.270 not his. Interesting clash there. OK, let's shift 00:02:42.270 --> 00:02:45.770 gears to immigration, another huge campaign theme, 00:02:46.250 --> 00:02:48.969 the promise of mass deportations. Right. The 00:02:48.969 --> 00:02:51.389 11 million figure was frequently cited. So what 00:02:51.389 --> 00:02:53.210 do the sources say is happening on the ground 00:02:53.210 --> 00:02:56.330 100 days in? The data cited actually shows a 00:02:56.330 --> 00:02:58.389 decrease in border crossings during this period. 00:02:58.870 --> 00:03:01.409 Decrease compared to? Compared to the same period 00:03:01.409 --> 00:03:03.870 or the preceding period under President Biden. 00:03:04.189 --> 00:03:06.110 OK, so fewer people crossing. Does that mean 00:03:06.110 --> 00:03:08.370 the deterrence policies are working as intended? 00:03:08.810 --> 00:03:11.210 Well, that's the complex part. The analysis suggests 00:03:11.210 --> 00:03:13.909 it's not necessarily straightforward. A deterrent 00:03:13.909 --> 00:03:16.710 effect is possible, yes, but it could also be 00:03:16.710 --> 00:03:19.210 that stricter policies are simply leading to 00:03:19.210 --> 00:03:21.449 fewer attempts to cross. They might be seeing 00:03:21.449 --> 00:03:24.550 it as futile, perhaps. Ah, okay. So the reason 00:03:24.550 --> 00:03:27.909 for the decrease is debatable. Exactly. And the 00:03:27.909 --> 00:03:30.069 reports also emphasize that a lot of the enforcement 00:03:30.069 --> 00:03:33.069 focus seems to be shifting inward, deporting 00:03:33.069 --> 00:03:35.550 people already living in the U .S. rather than 00:03:35.550 --> 00:03:37.990 solely focusing on the border itself. Got it. 00:03:38.110 --> 00:03:40.629 Now the next theme is described pretty starkly 00:03:40.629 --> 00:03:43.969 in our notes as gutting the government. That's 00:03:43.969 --> 00:03:46.330 strong language. What's behind that description 00:03:46.330 --> 00:03:49.389 in the sources? It is strong. One key action 00:03:49.389 --> 00:03:51.669 highlighted is appointing Elon Musk. Right, I 00:03:51.669 --> 00:03:53.550 remember reading about that. He's described as 00:03:53.550 --> 00:03:56.270 a kind of czar tasked specifically with cutting 00:03:56.270 --> 00:03:59.000 bureaucracy, streamlining things. And has that 00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:00.979 had results according to these reports? Apparently, 00:04:01.139 --> 00:04:03.479 yes. The reports mentioned significant savings 00:04:03.479 --> 00:04:05.400 and efficiency improvements attributed to his 00:04:05.400 --> 00:04:08.139 efforts already. But gutting implies more than 00:04:08.139 --> 00:04:11.039 just efficiency, right? Right. The broader context 00:04:11.039 --> 00:04:13.659 presented is an ambition to fundamentally shrink 00:04:13.659 --> 00:04:15.539 the federal government through pretty deep budget 00:04:15.539 --> 00:04:18.879 and staff cuts. across the board, or targeted. 00:04:19.180 --> 00:04:21.480 Seems targeted in many ways. The reports list 00:04:21.480 --> 00:04:24.439 specifics. Dismantling USAID, the foreign aid 00:04:24.439 --> 00:04:27.699 agency. OK. Firing around 10 ,000 federal employees 00:04:27.699 --> 00:04:32.160 overall, laying off 1 ,200 NIH researchers. Wow, 00:04:32.540 --> 00:04:35.399 NIH. Thousands cut from the Department of Defense 00:04:35.399 --> 00:04:37.680 too, with some sources apparently raising concerns 00:04:37.680 --> 00:04:39.480 about weakening national security because of 00:04:39.480 --> 00:04:42.680 that. Slashing IRS workforce numbers, another 00:04:42.680 --> 00:04:45.560 8 ,000 federal workers laid off elsewhere. cuts 00:04:45.560 --> 00:04:47.500 to government assistance programs affecting, 00:04:47.519 --> 00:04:50.939 they say, hundreds of thousands of people. That's 00:04:50.939 --> 00:04:53.259 a lot of cuts in a short time. It's presented 00:04:53.259 --> 00:04:56.360 as a very deliberate, widespread effort to streamline, 00:04:56.720 --> 00:04:59.660 yes, but also to dismantle parts of the government 00:04:59.660 --> 00:05:03.889 the administration dislikes or sees as... Wasteful. 00:05:04.129 --> 00:05:06.449 A fundamental reshaping, it sounds like. That 00:05:06.449 --> 00:05:08.449 seems to be the picture painted by these sources. 00:05:08.870 --> 00:05:10.470 Yeah. A redefinition of the government's role. 00:05:10.709 --> 00:05:13.649 OK. Let's move to another area flagged as particularly 00:05:13.649 --> 00:05:17.129 complex and significant, the rule of law. Yes. 00:05:17.230 --> 00:05:19.649 This is a major focus in the analysis we reviewed. 00:05:19.810 --> 00:05:23.089 What are the key points being raised? Well, there's 00:05:23.089 --> 00:05:25.290 a really striking quote attributed to President 00:05:25.290 --> 00:05:28.829 Trump himself. Oh. It reads, nobody has ever 00:05:28.829 --> 00:05:31.660 done what I've done. I have broken every law 00:05:31.660 --> 00:05:34.879 and then fix it, and nobody has complained. He 00:05:34.879 --> 00:05:36.879 actually said that. According to the source, 00:05:37.019 --> 00:05:40.540 yes. Though the article does quickly add a clarification, 00:05:40.959 --> 00:05:42.740 suggesting he likely meant something different, 00:05:43.100 --> 00:05:45.399 perhaps bending rules rather than literally breaking 00:05:45.399 --> 00:05:48.939 laws. Still, quite a statement. Indeed. But beyond 00:05:48.939 --> 00:05:51.759 the rhetoric, the reports detail specific actions 00:05:51.759 --> 00:05:54.959 raising concerns. Such as... Numerous pardons, 00:05:55.060 --> 00:05:58.660 that's one area, including, reportedly, for individuals 00:05:58.660 --> 00:06:01.379 involved in the January 6th Capitol riot. Pardons 00:06:01.379 --> 00:06:04.439 for January 6th rioters. Yes. And the report 00:06:04.439 --> 00:06:06.959 specify even some who were convicted of injuring 00:06:06.959 --> 00:06:09.959 police officers during the riot. That's highly 00:06:09.959 --> 00:06:12.620 controversial, surely. Extremely. Then there 00:06:12.620 --> 00:06:14.939 are allegations, and these are serious, that 00:06:14.939 --> 00:06:17.560 the Justice Department is being directed to investigate 00:06:17.560 --> 00:06:19.600 political opponents. Directed by the White House. 00:06:19.800 --> 00:06:22.720 That's the allegation reported. And also, Targeting 00:06:22.720 --> 00:06:24.920 judges, including specific mentions of the Supreme 00:06:24.920 --> 00:06:27.139 Court, if they make rulings the administration 00:06:27.139 --> 00:06:29.980 dislikes. Targeting judges? That raises huge 00:06:29.980 --> 00:06:32.899 separation of powers questions. Absolutely. And 00:06:32.899 --> 00:06:35.160 there's more under this rule of law heading. 00:06:35.339 --> 00:06:37.939 Go on. Sources claim orders have been given to 00:06:37.939 --> 00:06:40.800 deport people. Not for committing crimes, but 00:06:40.800 --> 00:06:43.180 for speaking out against administration policies. 00:06:43.660 --> 00:06:46.439 Deporting people for political speech. That's 00:06:46.439 --> 00:06:49.279 the claim reported. and maybe even more alarmingly, 00:06:49.600 --> 00:06:51.600 an assertion that he ordered arrests of people 00:06:51.600 --> 00:06:53.540 who don't pledge allegiance to him personally, 00:06:54.000 --> 00:06:56.579 and also those who support birthright citizenship. 00:06:57.019 --> 00:07:00.759 Arrests. That sounds unconstitutional on its 00:07:00.759 --> 00:07:03.120 face. 14th Amendment issues right there. Big 00:07:03.120 --> 00:07:04.600 constitutional questions are definitely being 00:07:04.600 --> 00:07:07.259 raised by these reports. Finally, there's a claim 00:07:07.259 --> 00:07:09.620 that the country's 10 biggest law firms have 00:07:09.620 --> 00:07:12.319 been put on retainer. For what purpose? The stated 00:07:12.319 --> 00:07:15.230 purpose, according to the sources. pursuing political 00:07:15.230 --> 00:07:18.110 adversaries. Using top law firms against opponents. 00:07:18.410 --> 00:07:20.410 If true, these reports paint a picture of the 00:07:20.410 --> 00:07:23.790 legal system being used in unprecedented ways. 00:07:24.129 --> 00:07:26.370 A significant departure from traditional norms 00:07:26.370 --> 00:07:28.810 is how it's characterized, yes. Okay, let's talk 00:07:28.810 --> 00:07:31.050 about the use of executive orders. That often 00:07:31.050 --> 00:07:33.670 comes up early in presidencies. It does, but 00:07:33.670 --> 00:07:35.449 the scale here seems different. The reporting 00:07:35.449 --> 00:07:37.750 suggests that the number of EOs signed in these 00:07:37.750 --> 00:07:42.480 400 days is, well... Huge. How huge? More than 00:07:42.480 --> 00:07:44.899 the total signed by all presidents in the past 00:07:44.899 --> 00:07:47.800 hundred years combined. Wait, combined? That 00:07:47.800 --> 00:07:50.079 can't be right. That's the statistic presented 00:07:50.079 --> 00:07:53.019 in one of the analyses. It's an astonishing claim, 00:07:53.519 --> 00:07:55.800 needs verification, but that's what's reported. 00:07:56.040 --> 00:07:59.180 Assuming it's even close to accurate. Why so 00:07:59.180 --> 00:08:01.139 many? What's the strategy? The analysis points 00:08:01.139 --> 00:08:04.139 to it being a tactic to bypass Congress, to enact 00:08:04.139 --> 00:08:06.420 policy directly, without needing legislative 00:08:06.420 --> 00:08:08.779 approval. A power grab, essentially. That's one 00:08:08.779 --> 00:08:10.920 interpretation. What's also noted as interesting 00:08:10.920 --> 00:08:13.220 is the apparent support for this approach from 00:08:13.220 --> 00:08:15.639 within the Republican Party. Despite historically 00:08:15.639 --> 00:08:18.620 opposing overuse of executive orders. Precisely. 00:08:18.839 --> 00:08:20.819 The irony is highlighted in the reporting. The 00:08:20.819 --> 00:08:23.439 briefing also mentions a theme of retribution. 00:08:23.759 --> 00:08:25.759 What does that refer to? It refers to reports 00:08:25.759 --> 00:08:28.160 of actions taken against people or groups seen 00:08:28.160 --> 00:08:31.740 as critics or disloyal. Like who? Republican 00:08:31.740 --> 00:08:33.399 leaders who've criticized the president, for 00:08:33.399 --> 00:08:36.539 example. Specific media outlets. Even cutting 00:08:36.539 --> 00:08:38.580 federal funding to colleges and universities 00:08:38.580 --> 00:08:42.019 perceived as critical. So using the power of 00:08:42.019 --> 00:08:44.700 the office to settle scores, essentially. That's 00:08:44.700 --> 00:08:46.460 the pattern the sources seem to be describing. 00:08:46.840 --> 00:08:48.879 All right, let's turn to the world stage. Foreign 00:08:48.879 --> 00:08:51.620 policy. How's the approach characterized in these 00:08:51.620 --> 00:08:55.879 first hundred days? Transactional and unpredictable 00:08:55.879 --> 00:08:58.299 are words that come up a lot in the analyses. 00:08:58.480 --> 00:09:01.389 Meaning? meaning deals seem prioritized over 00:09:01.389 --> 00:09:03.769 long term alliances and allies aren't quite sure 00:09:03.769 --> 00:09:06.090 what to expect. Foreign trips apparently had 00:09:06.090 --> 00:09:08.289 limited diplomatic impact. And the overarching 00:09:08.289 --> 00:09:11.909 principle. American interests first stated very 00:09:11.909 --> 00:09:15.330 clearly, but often interpreted, the sources suggest, 00:09:15.710 --> 00:09:17.789 in a kind of zero sum way. What does that look 00:09:17.789 --> 00:09:20.230 like in practice? Reports mention cuts to foreign 00:09:20.230 --> 00:09:23.129 aid, a withdrawal from cooperation on global 00:09:23.129 --> 00:09:25.629 issues, climate change, pandemics, that sort 00:09:25.629 --> 00:09:27.289 of thing. And relationships with other countries. 00:09:27.789 --> 00:09:31.509 Traditional allies. described as strained. Meanwhile, 00:09:32.129 --> 00:09:34.230 perhaps warming ties with some authoritarian 00:09:34.230 --> 00:09:38.289 leaders. The world view seems to prioritize personal 00:09:38.289 --> 00:09:41.350 leader -to -leader deals over established diplomatic 00:09:41.350 --> 00:09:44.190 structures. Any specific doctrines being revived? 00:09:44.570 --> 00:09:47.330 Yes, the Monroe Doctrine is mentioned. That old 00:09:47.330 --> 00:09:50.049 U .S. policy basically asserting dominance in 00:09:50.049 --> 00:09:52.649 the Western Hemisphere. Reviving the Monroe Doctrine, 00:09:52.669 --> 00:09:56.440 what could that mean for, say, Canada? or the 00:09:56.440 --> 00:09:59.100 Panama Canal. Exactly. Big implications for the 00:09:59.100 --> 00:10:01.100 region. The reports even mention Greenland in 00:10:01.100 --> 00:10:03.440 that context, potentially. It signals a very 00:10:03.440 --> 00:10:05.519 different view of regional relationships. Okay, 00:10:05.700 --> 00:10:07.179 how is all this playing out with the American 00:10:07.179 --> 00:10:09.720 public? What do the polls say after 100 days? 00:10:10.220 --> 00:10:12.200 Well, approval ratings reportedly started near 00:10:12.200 --> 00:10:14.840 historic lows. They've ticked up slightly, according 00:10:14.840 --> 00:10:17.080 to the poll site. A slight increase. But any 00:10:17.080 --> 00:10:20.179 other key findings? Yes, a pretty stark one. 00:10:20.539 --> 00:10:22.720 A majority of Americans surveyed apparently considered 00:10:22.720 --> 00:10:25.639 the president a dangerous dictator. A majority, 00:10:25.700 --> 00:10:29.139 wow. That's the poll finding reported. It's crucial 00:10:29.139 --> 00:10:31.659 to add, though, that this view isn't uniform. 00:10:32.799 --> 00:10:35.220 Republicans and white individuals polled generally 00:10:35.220 --> 00:10:38.700 see it differently. Important context. Now, let's 00:10:38.700 --> 00:10:41.870 talk campaign promises versus reality. Always 00:10:41.870 --> 00:10:44.690 a key check. What promises do the sources say 00:10:44.690 --> 00:10:47.529 have been kept in these 100 days? Okay, the list 00:10:47.529 --> 00:10:51.450 provided includes enacting those tariffs we discussed 00:10:51.450 --> 00:10:54.009 right ending federal funding for gender transition 00:10:54.009 --> 00:10:57.029 services Instructing agencies to stop promoting 00:10:57.029 --> 00:11:00.129 gender transition. Okay firing generals described 00:11:00.129 --> 00:11:03.269 as woke signing an executive order related to 00:11:03.269 --> 00:11:05.899 birthright citizenship the the legality might 00:11:05.899 --> 00:11:08.080 be challenged. Got it. Increasing funding for 00:11:08.080 --> 00:11:10.700 military deportations, terminating some programs 00:11:10.700 --> 00:11:13.440 from the Inflation Reduction Act, and repealing 00:11:13.440 --> 00:11:15.860 certain AI -related rights established previously. 00:11:16.100 --> 00:11:18.799 So a fair number of specific actions aligning 00:11:18.799 --> 00:11:20.940 with promises. What about promises that are still 00:11:20.940 --> 00:11:23.220 pending or haven't happened yet? Still on the 00:11:23.220 --> 00:11:25.799 to -do list, according to these reports. Disclosing 00:11:25.799 --> 00:11:27.860 the presidential transition planning documents. 00:11:28.500 --> 00:11:31.259 Implementing mass deportations on day one that 00:11:31.259 --> 00:11:33.899 obviously didn't happen at that scale. A strange 00:11:33.899 --> 00:11:37.080 one about making prisons self -sorting. Self 00:11:37.080 --> 00:11:39.559 -sorting prisons? Yeah, unclear what that means 00:11:39.559 --> 00:11:42.419 exactly. And creating some kind of external revenue 00:11:42.419 --> 00:11:45.779 service separate from the IRS. Interesting. Lots 00:11:45.779 --> 00:11:48.000 still in the works, potentially. What about the 00:11:48.000 --> 00:11:49.919 budget? That's always critical early on. How's 00:11:49.919 --> 00:11:53.379 the budget bill looking? Described as a mess. 00:11:53.980 --> 00:11:56.100 Significant disagreement, especially over spending 00:11:56.100 --> 00:11:59.159 levels. Standard budget fights or worse. Seems 00:11:59.159 --> 00:12:01.480 potentially worse. The deadline passed without 00:12:01.480 --> 00:12:03.860 a Senate vote. The House is reportedly facing 00:12:03.860 --> 00:12:06.440 major challenges, getting agreement internally. 00:12:06.700 --> 00:12:09.340 So risk of a government shutdown. That concern 00:12:09.340 --> 00:12:12.000 is definitely raised. A shutdown is flagged as 00:12:12.000 --> 00:12:14.440 a real possibility. The Senate seems focused 00:12:14.440 --> 00:12:17.279 on pushing for big cuts, around $1 .5 trillion 00:12:17.279 --> 00:12:19.080 dollars mentioned. And the debt limit looming 00:12:19.080 --> 00:12:21.750 in the background too, presumably? Always. The 00:12:21.750 --> 00:12:24.029 reports remind us of the basic mechanics there 00:12:24.029 --> 00:12:27.110 and the severe economic consequences if it's 00:12:27.110 --> 00:12:29.289 not raised. It adds another layer of pressure. 00:12:29.769 --> 00:12:33.690 Right. One last specific item. David Perdue confirmed 00:12:33.690 --> 00:12:37.070 as ambassador to China. Why is this appointment 00:12:37.070 --> 00:12:40.070 flagged as potentially controversial? It's mainly 00:12:40.070 --> 00:12:43.279 two things. First, His extensive past business 00:12:43.279 --> 00:12:46.100 dealings in China. That raises conflict of interest 00:12:46.100 --> 00:12:47.860 questions, representing the U .S. there now. 00:12:48.240 --> 00:12:50.980 OK, understandable concern. Second, his lack 00:12:50.980 --> 00:12:53.879 of traditional diplomatic experience, especially 00:12:53.879 --> 00:12:56.519 for such a critical, sensitive post like Beijing. 00:12:56.820 --> 00:12:59.379 Compared to previous ambassadors. Exactly. The 00:12:59.379 --> 00:13:01.600 sources describe the appointment as completely 00:13:01.600 --> 00:13:03.879 unprecedented in terms of the usual background 00:13:03.879 --> 00:13:06.799 for that role. Experienced diplomats have typically 00:13:06.799 --> 00:13:09.679 held that position. OK, so quite a whirlwind 00:13:09.679 --> 00:13:12.789 first 100 days. based on this snapshot from April 00:13:12.789 --> 00:13:16.210 30th, 2025. We've covered economics, immigration, 00:13:16.509 --> 00:13:18.309 the structure of government, rule of law issues, 00:13:18.570 --> 00:13:20.649 foreign policy shifts, public opinion. Campaign 00:13:20.649 --> 00:13:22.850 promises, the budget, key appointments. Yeah, 00:13:23.110 --> 00:13:25.090 a lot of ground covered. And it's clear from 00:13:25.090 --> 00:13:27.549 these news reports that it's been a period marked 00:13:27.549 --> 00:13:30.769 by, well, significant action and, according to 00:13:30.769 --> 00:13:32.929 many of these sources, a real break from past 00:13:32.929 --> 00:13:35.549 norms. Definitely a sense of disruption conveyed 00:13:35.549 --> 00:13:38.259 in the analysis. And for you, listening, it's 00:13:38.259 --> 00:13:41.200 worth remembering, this is based on reports from 00:13:41.200 --> 00:13:42.980 that specific date. Things are always evolving. 00:13:43.279 --> 00:13:45.779 Absolutely. Which leads us to a final thought 00:13:45.779 --> 00:13:48.379 for you to ponder. Considering everything we've 00:13:48.379 --> 00:13:51.860 discussed, the sheer volume, the nature of the 00:13:51.860 --> 00:13:54.820 actions reported in just these first 100 days, 00:13:55.440 --> 00:13:57.740 what do you think is the overarching strategic 00:13:57.740 --> 00:14:00.779 vision here? Is there one coherent strategy guiding 00:14:00.779 --> 00:14:02.820 all this? Or is it something else? Definitely 00:14:02.820 --> 00:14:04.519 something to keep watching and thinking about.