Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Arm Strong and Debt Tatie and he Armstrong and Eddy.
This is not just about books. This is about exposure to people of different sexual orientations. And the objection, the sincerely held objection that children shouldn't be exposed to this.
Again, our clients are not raising those and we know that these kinds of objections aren't happening here.
The board is imposing indoctrination on children.
I thought Baxter did very well. I thought the Trump administration Harris, the assistance Solicitor General, also did extraordinarily well. And Baxter kept on shutting down the argument. You know, Jackson said, do you you don't have any affidavits or declarations.
He said, yes, I do.
And when he said when they said, well, you just don't want people to have access to this, and he said that's not true. He said, we have no objection to these books being available. This is very different from that. And then just as so am I er try to portray them as you just don't want people to see the image of a of a same sex couple. There's no real lesson here, and her own colleagues jumped in and said, there is a lesson here.
There's a definite message being sent here.
Which is, don't pay attention to so of my rror, don't even bother. She's she's talking abouttionate justice.
We're talking about the We're talking about the book Pride Puppy and what you're going to hear more about in a second, and other books like that that are in school libraries.
But that well, sorry I got to jump in.
That's specifically what the lawyers were saying is not the case. It's that this is being taught as a curriculum aggressively. There's no you find the book on the shelf, check it out because you're interested. It's being given affirmatively to kids from ages three on and todd is part of a whole curriculum.
Right, good point. I don't think they should even be in the library. I'm sorry why I would agree?
Just why why is it there?
Oh look, here's a dude explaining why Pride Puppy is a perfectly fine book and it's just hate.
This is Pride Puppy by Robin Stephenson and Julian maclachlin.
It doesn't get more innocent than a children's alphabet.
Book see for Car or Old Chevrolet.
But this one about a dog that breaks loose from its family while at a Pride parade. He is now at the center of a censorship case going before the US Supreme Court.
It was pitched as a parental rights religious freedom case, when what I think it's doing is hiding hiding. It's hate really disguised as parental rights. And what people are taking offense at, I believe is the fact that Pride isn't the title, and there are Pride flags in the book.
That absolutely not a censorship case. That is unlank and believable. Play that again, just because that thing at the beginning, I like.
Play that again.
This is Pride Puppy by Robin Stevenson and Jolie McLachlin.
It doesn't get more innocent than a children's alphabet book.
Right.
That.
I love that the news lady coming in. It doesn't get more innocent than a children's alphabet book. How in the world do you present that story like that and pretend you're a journalist. It's a censorship Supreme Court mascar rating is a parent's right case, rights case, as we tell three year olds about drag queens and and and and they can be a little girl. And we've had into every lesson in school. Yeah, yeah, censorship. Here's a
little bit of a response video to that. And then I'll fill in some gaps.
Today we're going to have a reading of Pride Puppy for all the beautiful queerdos and the late mister pants dancing over the rainbow bridge.
Oh, that's it. I don't know what querdos are.
I assume that's another one of her books, because she's some sort of a very popular author of this sort of thing. Quirdo's like, they call us weird because we like, you know, blah blah blah.
So where's weird? Yes?
And then uh, and then he goes through the Pride Puppy book and the the the basic story of the book is it's a a puppy that gets loose from its owners and runs through a pride parade.
And then you see all these and I don't know.
Why, the barking there is the Pride puppy there, and then they're trying to catch the dog, and then you see all these different colorful characters in the parade and all the rainbow flags and the drag queens are trying to chase the dog. And it's just an innocent book
about teaching, you know, phonics to kids. And then in the back of the book they have they go letter by letter like you do in a lot of these sorts of books trying to teach reading through the alphabet, for instance, like I as in infant insulin, inflatable tube, sex flag, and insect.
What of all the eye.
Words that like you come in contact normally in your life, that you could.
Say blue or ice cream inter sex flag.
Instead of igloo or ice cream, you go with intersex flag. I mean, it's transparently hilarious what you're doing to get us through. It's this is for as young as three year old, is Justice Gorsuch kept pointing out, it's just to.
Get your five year older or even your fifteen year.
Old to say what's an intersex flag and get into the whole conversation.
There's other examples under K.
Kites, kiss drag king, knapsack keys, not king drag king.
Under k Well, that way they got to put it under d NK.
Boy the old we put in porn or how to have gay sex manuals in school. Then if you say, whoa, whoa, whoa, this this change you've brought, I don't like it, You're a censor. You're you're this is a censorship banned books.
It doesn't get more innocent than a children's alphabet book. You're the person asking for change. Wait a minute, No, I'm not under l love Lion leopard print leggings, lippering and Ladybug leopard print leggings and lippering for your just random, easy to understand l words, not ladder. Why why are you doing this? There's a reason you're doing this.
Yeah, to indoctrinate the kids into radical gender theory in queer theory.
Yeah under Obviously.
Under Q they had two words quilt and drag queen, not queen drag queen.
What the hell?
And again the dedication in the Beginnings for all the beautiful quirdos and the late mister pants dancing over the rainbow bridge. Shut down all government schools right now. That's the only answer. We'll have church schools, charitable schools, whatever,
add hoc schools put together by groups of parents. They won't be perfect, but they'd be better than being indoctrinated into, you know, the hatred of your country and Western civilization, which the education system of this country is so infected. Good Lord, that book doesn't need to be in the freaking school at all. But as Joe pointed out, the problem is, this is like part of the curriculum they're saying you can't even opt out of for your three
year old. I mean, they're making it that important. There's just no excuse for it being in the schools period, any of these conversations. Leave that to the parents. This is not the point of public school. Just reading, writing, math, science, all right, and then shut up about everything else. Let you know, deal with that in your own home and however you going, you alread, You read that book to your kid, fine, but the idea that that's mandatory for
all kids is insane. Oh and the guy who did that clapback video, he pointed out that, so there are these various groups that give out awards to these books, and they're all each other giving awards to each other, so that you have an award winning children's book that.
You put in your library and then you can make that.
Lord, they're wanting to censor this award winning children's book on reading. Yeah, the awards from the Indoctrinating your Kids into Queer Theory Council.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, it's very clever, like we talked about earlier. I mean, you gotta tip your cat to the to the cleverness of you know, all the little tentacles that are into this whole thing, but the idea that I mean, some of these words are just hilarious.
Oh my god, I intersex flag.
What what if I was gonna list a thousand.
Eyewords, it wouldn't have popped it into my head?
B is for bear and barn and bisexual, right, yeah, that is something. It looks like the Supreme Court agrees.
With most of us on this. Uh. Yes, yeah.
It was a absolute blood bath oral arguments wise, I was really enjoying argent listening to it.
I'll listen to the rest of it today. But the only place where it got a.
Little sketchy was, interestingly enough, Katanji Brown Jackson, who was pointing out that we have opt outs for this and opt outs for that.
Surely government does how have the power to teach certain moral or cultural things are good in schools.
That's part of the reason they exist.
How you quoting a friend, how do you draw the line between saying parents can copt out, can opt out of the trans's fine stuff, but not out of MLK was a good guy stuff. And I'm not saying that line can't be drawn. But the answer really is, there is no answer other than I know it when I see it, or we need to establish certain fundamental values that are taught in schools and.
Not let the other stuff in. Because it's one of the problems with having.
Lawyers run the world, is this sort of thing. Yeah, I'm perfectly fine with the public for your local school. I know it when I see it. We'll pick We'll do it on an individual basis. I'm not writing a law that delineates it because I'd be impossible. And saying the Civil rights movement was a cause for good perfectly fine.
All this crap in this.
Book no, well, right, and that is why school boards or should exist.
Now. Are there woke lunatics on school boards.
Yes, but we on the same side of America are becoming more and more aware of how important it is to be represented there. So yeah, school boards can decide this stuff. The problem is in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is the case that we're talking about. The school board is just it is such a affluent, deep blue limousine liberal Look how enlightened I am.
Nightmare.
And so you've got parents of various religious stripes saying, Hey, our kids are being indoctrinated every single day from the age of three on into a philosophy and sexual stuff that I find repugnant and only rich.
People can escape it.
Yeah.
Somebody, I don't forget who came up with the costs five figures to send your kid to private school? Somebody texted, it's six figures. What are you going to send your kid to a couple of years.
Of private school?
If you're going to send up a private schoo the whole their whole lives, it's easily six figures.
Obviously, Yeah, that was an annual figure they're talking about. But but you know, you're either into it or you're not. Yeah.
Uh. The the advantage they have on that other side is a well, what do you got it? What's wrong with a puppy running through a pride parade.
And depicting that you just hate gays?
No, but why do we have to Well, you'd what would be wrong with a puppy running through a Fourth of July parade.
What's the difference? Eh No, I just don't want to.
It's a celebration of our national identity and birth is a country that's normal. What you're describing is is obvious indoctrination of something that there's no need to have it in schools. Why don't you have a puppy run through a condom factory?
Huh?
Why didn't you have the puppy run through a swinger's party. Look at all the loud. Don't knock over the lube party or puppy. It's a freak off.
Look there's ditty puppy because that would be perverse. The hell shut it all down. Yes, I'll write a book. Didty puppy and he runs through a freak off? Right, there's the woman who's being compelled to have sex against her will. Careful, puppy, did he might shoot you too, allegedly?
Oh please? You people are sick.
I got nothing against people and their choices in life, but stop grooming the children. Why and especially, as we say every single time, and I'll end with this, it'd be bad if they were doing well.
At math and reading.
But they're not oh my god, Okay, more on the way.
From TSA officers now handing out reminder flyers starting May seventh, you'll need a real ID if you're planning to fly at DMB Officers nationwide long lines and long waits for appointments to get a real ID, but nearly twenty percent of current airline passengers don't have a real ID, four hundred thousand passengers a day. TSA is hoping not to turn passengers away if you don't have a real ID and you don't have a passport. That TSA says, plan on an extra thirty minutes for extra.
Screening, okay, Or just say I am an illegal alien and they'll say, okay, get in that line over there, you don't need an ID.
That made me feel bad about myself.
Only twenty percent of current flyers don't have the real ID. I assumed it was the vast majority of us, but no, it's a small minority.
Okay. I was at the airport the other day.
They were handing out that piece of paper to all of us, uh, saying, don't forget your real ID. I started the process yesterday and on the website, and we'll see how this turns.
Out.
I look forward to paying the stupid tax of waiting in line for something that I knew was coming for years and again, as you keep pointing out, Joe, yes, this is to deal with the terrorists on nine to eleven, two thousand and one exactly.
So you're gonna be pulled out a line. No real id on this one, Jim, Oh my goodness, come over here. You do you know, oh, Sama bin Laden, are you part of al Qaeda? You know you're gonna be asking people and they're going to say, what's al Qaida? You know, you're some nineteen year old that happened before I was born.
Why do I hate? Yeah? I know, I know. Yeah.
So A couple of food related stories worth passing along mentioned this briefly earlier, but it's interesting. In recent years, scientists have found that some additives like emulsifiers, dies, artificial sweeteners, and there are a dozen other things, are linked to health problems, but the studies have generally focused on the impact of one substance at a time or a type of additive, which makes sense if you understand the scientific method, but that's not the way people consume them, of course,
and ultra processed foods often contain a cocktail of additives, and I do enjoy a cocktail.
Now again, if I eat a bunch of skittles, I'm gonna get red dye number ten and yellow dye number fifteen and blue dye number one.
On a mulsifier and a preservative. And many people eat more than one ultra processed product in a day, so they're getting multiple cocktails. So a new study conducted by researchers from several French universities and research institutions found that some common combinations of multifiers, colors, and sweeteners was associated with high risk of type two diabetes beyond what could
be explained by the individual substances alone. This suggests that when some of these substances are eaten together, the negative health impacts may be compounded. So they're looking at it in a more real lifey way.
Yeah, this seems fairly obvious. Surprise, we're just getting to it now, but yeah, there you go.
I get the scientific problem with having multiple variables in one experiment, but I mean that's the way it's taken in. So another quick food related story, farm robots or farmbots, if you ever, are getting much closer to reality the way they navigate between rosa crops, for instance, is changing in a way that relies less on GPS and more on just they're looking at the strawberries and they can
see they're two inches from the strawberry. They're supposed to be two inches from the strawberries, and so they can do all the stuff, which reminds me of early on in the illegal immigration discussion. People will say who's going to pick the lettuce, and we would always say somebody or nobody or a machine. Well, the machine is gaining on the outside and coming on.
Fast, Armstrong and getty.
President Trump lashing out at Ukraine's president vladimir's Lensky on social media, writing he can have peace, or he can fight for another three years before losing the whole country. The man with no cards to play should now finally get it done.
Trump angered by.
Zelinsky's refusal to accept a US proposed peace deal that would prohibit NATO membership for Ukraine and would include Ukraine giving up land that Russia has seized since its invasion, in addition to giving up CRIMEA.
Is it fair to say we're at an inflection point on this whole thing?
This is just not a another little blip in this story.
This seems like this could really be a big deal, which is probably why the Wall Street Journal editorial board, New York Post editorial board both out with pieces today, both you know, Republican leading publications really pretty horrified at Trump continuing to bad mouth and pressure Zelensky while giving putin a complete pass. We'll hear more from jd Vance in a second on that. Well, let's hear a little more from Trump as he explains himself.
I will say that I think Russia is ready. And a lot of people said Russia wanted to go for the whole thing, and they've I think we have a deal with Russia. We have to get a deal with Zelensky, and I hope that Selensky. I thought it might be easier to deal with Selensky. So far it's been harder. But that's okay, It's all right. But I think we have a deal with both.
One more and then we'll discuss if I may this deal that you have with Russia, does it include recognizing Russia's sovereignty over PREMEA.
Well, everything is good. Look, I just want to see the war end. I don't care if they're both happy. They both signed an agreement. I have no favorites. I don't want to have any favorites. I want to have a deal done now.
I don't think Trump is like a puppet of Putin. I don't think Putin has something on him, you know, on that stuff.
But I don't get it.
I don't get the lack of willingness to call Putin a really bad guy, the aggressor, a war criminal. Why why does he not want to say Why does he need to say bad things about Zelensky and refuses to say bad things.
About But what's the point. I think it's just a question of leverage.
He can say anything he wants to Zelensky and Zelynsk, he still needs the US's help. He feels like he cannot alienate Putin or else his scheme of and I don't mean scheme in a negative way, his hope of ending the war will be for naught. So he's got to lure him into the bargaining.
So we have an update on the story just since this morning, because overnight Russia launched the deadliest attack on Kiev since the war began. So how does Trump not take that personally? So you're in the midst yesterday of doing all the things I just mentioned, saying, you know, friendliest things about Putin, bad mouth and Zelenski, and.
How does Putin reward him?
And Trump saying you get to keep Crimea, you get to create, keep all the land.
I'm saying Ukraine can't be part of NATO. I mean, I'm handing you all this stuff. And how does.
Putin reward him With the biggest attack on the capital of Ukraine since the war started, and now it is twelve and one hundreds dead? Are twelve dead, hundreds injured, and they might find more dead people. So Trump wasn't happy about that, and he did respond.
I've got it right in front of me.
I'm not happy with the Russian strikes on Kiev. Not necessary and very bad timing. Five thousand soldiers a week are dying. Let's get the peace deal done. But even that, I mean, I'm not happy with this bad timing and not necessary is pretty tapid. Yes, yeah, And Putin's thinking, well, okay, as tapid as that is, I can continue this on for weeks or months, grab more land, kill more soldiers, weaken the Western leaning regime of Ukraine even more.
Thereby cementing my control over it, and then in six weeks time or six months or whatever, I say to Trump, Yeah, yeah, you're right, we really need to come to a deal, and I will will be welcomed at the bargaining table.
So why would I stop?
Like Trump and his post yesterday said, if Zelenski wants CRIMEO so bad, why didn't they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired? When Russia overwhelming went in with overwhelming force, got no support from Ukraine, had almost no support from anybody at the time. They just militarily talk about not having the cards. They just couldn't stop the
bigger aggressor and their powerful army at the time. So Trump said, if you want CRIMEA so bad, why didn't you fight harder for it?
What?
Well, yeah, crime is complicated just for cultural reasons and the history of it and the rest of it.
Yeah, it's it's ugly. I just I.
What's your theory on this? What is your theory on this? I'm completely just doing let's hear from JD. Vans and then maybe we can have that conversation.
Well, I'm going to echo something Secretary Rubio said, which is luck. We've issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it's time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process. We've engaged in an extraordinary amount of diplomacy of on the ground work. We've really tried to understand things from the perspective of both the Ukrainians and the Russians. What do Ukrainians care the most about?
What do the Russians care the most about? And I think that we've put together a very fair proposal.
I don't see it. I don't see what. I don't see what has no interest in it.
I don't see what Putin has had to give or what Ukraine gets.
Out of this.
We've looked at both sides and their needs and a fair proposal. Yeah, Russia gets everything they want and Ukraine gets nothing that they want.
Is your proposal? Yeah, I don't know it.
Hell you this, I don't I don't see a deal taking shape. Honestly. Well, let's unless Trump were to exhort enormous pressure, including military pressure, on Russia, which I just don't see in the cards.
Well, I know some of you are pretty hardcore. We shouldn't be involved in this, and you agree with jd Vance. Obviously, the Wall Street Journal does not agree with that standpoint. Neither does the New York Post, and neither does Brit Hume, the senior political an analyzer on Fox. Here he is yesterday.
He keeps pounding Zielenski and saying it's harder to deal with him than it is with Putin. Putin, so far as I can tell, hasn't agreed to much of anything except yes, he'd love to ann action CRIMEA, which was part of the proposal that's before him. Now, that's no concession, that's just that's just that, all that is is taking a gain. Zielenski resists that because crime up until the Russian invaded it ten years or so ago, was part
of Ukraine. So I'm not exactly sure what the President is talking about when he says that Zelensky has been more difficult to deal with than Putin. You know, they have been a series of ceased fire proposals. Putin either hasn't agreed to them or has immediately broken them. I'm not sure you know what concessions Putin will ever be willing to make. But he's surely hadn't many made very many so far.
Oh yeah, yeah, I just I don't know how deep we want to get into this. From Putin's perspective, Crimea is like what would be a good analogy there really isn't a good one for the United States.
But it's like.
The discussion about Greenland, except much much closer and much much more important. It's his only access to open water to the south there. And when it was part of the Soviet Union, which was the Russian Empire. And interestingly enough, Tom Cotton is starting to refer to the Soviet Union as Communist Russia, which I think is smart because he's bringing younger voters along they understand, you know, I think
it's clever anyway. But when it was Communist Russia, they had twenty four to seven access to their ports through Crimea, obviously because it was part of the Soviet Union. And then post Soviet Union, the Ukraine and its government was still pretty closely tired tied to the former Communists and the oligarchs that took power in the rest of it, and so Russia had twenty four to seven access to Crimea.
And then when the Ukrainian government started leaning strongly to the West, they started to lose access to this critical military asset, and that's why they invaded. So and I say that not to argue therefore Putin's a good guy and in the right. No, just explained to me the bargain that struck on Crimea that doesn't include something close to total Russian control that Putin would agree to.
I don't see it. Well, that's my opinion.
That's why we and NATO needed to arm Ukraine to the point that they militarily defeat Russia and drive them out of there, starting three years ago, actually starting ten years ago.
But obviously that did not happen.
Wall Street Journal, Mister Trump's current offer looks more like an ultimatum than grounds for a durable piece. Mister Trump is angry that Ukraine won't accept the deal that legitimizes Russia's occupation of Crimea, as if this is a minor map revision. Mister Trump likes to say that Ukraine doesn't have the cards, but it does have one. The President won't be able to abandon Ukraine without paying a heavy political price.
I don't know if I agree with that.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board I think Trump will pay a political price for letting Russia get its way here.
I'm not sure. No, I don't think it'll be heavy. I'd be curious. I haven't seen polling on this recently.
Well, the polling shows, and I saw it yesterday. The polling is Americans are still overwhelmingly like two to one in favor of Ukraine either winning or US supporting them or however ask the question, but I just I don't think it ranks as very high as an issue. Is my thing, yes, even if it goes against the majority, I just don't think most people care enough.
Sure, every question like that is two tiered what would you like to happen? Then the follow up question is at what cost? How much would you be willing to pay for it? And I think the answer is not enough to get it done.
The final word from the Wall Street Journal editorial board, mister Trump can still salvage a deal in Ukraine, but the current final settlement offer looks like it would set up mister Putin to win the war. An hour or later, the world's rogues will notice and mister Trump's had a will have only begun, which is my belief. I mean, if that isn't beyond a signal. It's like stating the president, she you can take Taiwan and we ain't gonna do nothing about it.
Good luck U.
Yes, correct, which again Trump and jad Vance might say that was true before.
Russia invaded Ukraine, and it's true now.
If China wants to take Taiwan, they're going to and we ain't gonna stop them.
The world ain't gonna be able to stop them. Yeah.
And I don't mean to come off as cynical or having given up, although I have to some extent on certainly Crimea. You can't always go in reverse in life. Anybody with a little life experience can tell you that when you've concluded your stupid affair, for instance, with some waitress and realize you adore your wife and it's the single most moronic thing you will ever do in you life, well that's fine, but you're already there.
You've already done it.
And I think, to a large extent, the hesitation, the effeckless response to the Biden administration Russia's extremely strong interest in Crimea. At this point, there's no hit and rewind, there's no getting CRIMEA back. Russia owns it and will until the day I die. How about a bigger picture?
The world order? Is that just over? Is that cake baked?
Is it just the US led world order is over and it's coming apart?
And that's just a fact?
Yes, some ten percent or seventy percent, I don't know. I think it's more like probably twenty five percent.
Man.
I think once it starts, I think it goes from ten to seventy in a couple of years.
I don't think so.
I think because we're still the strongest military on earth, although how strong like in the navy naval realm remains to be seen with China's incredible build up. I think remember, people react and countries react to that twenty percent going away. We don't just continue doing the same things. I think we rise up and say h oh as a nation.
Call it the uh oh doctrine? Right?
Any thoughts on that text line four one five two kftc.
Arstaetti.
We're in a waimo. It was going the wrong way. We called customer support. It stopped us right here and wouldn't let us out of the car, and we kept saying, hey, run, we're on a highway please. Cars kept honking at us and it would not move, it would not let us out, no one from customer support, but actually move the Waymo. So now we're walking on Mopack and our Waimo is still there. This is insane waybo.
Ha ha ha.
So that's a good story right there.
So Waimo is the driverless taxis, which I know a number of people that have ridden in.
I can't believe. I haven't tried yet. They have.
They make them in Phoenix, and so Phoenix is covered in Waymo's and San Francisco I think is the only other city in America. I think it's just Phoenix in San Francisco right now that has Waymo's driving around. And I've seen them took place in Austin. Oh Okay, But I haven't ridden in one yet, and I've got to. But a buddy.
He's not a buddy of mine. He's my insurance agent. He's a nice guy. I wish we were friends, but I don't think he likes me anyway.
He was sitting in my cyberbeast the other day because I got rear ended, So you got to see your insurance agent anyway, and we were talking about automated driving and all that sort of stuff. And I was asking him, you know, what are the insurance companies gonna do, because the claim is from Tesla that in twenty six they're going full Waimo. They're gonna go full automated driving where you don't have to pay attention autonomous driving like Waimo is, so you know, you can read or sleep or do
whatever you want. And I said, are the insurance company is going to allow that? And he said, well, first it'll be the state allowing it legally. And remember Weimo came into like San Francisco. Originally they had the rights to drive them around. Then the city shut them down for a while where a couple of wrecks that I don't know how they earned their way back, but they drive all over the place and the city allowed it.
So it's possible the state of California allows. Of course, wouldn't that be something if they don't allow Tesla autonomous vehicles because they hate elon right a political thing. So here's what happened to these people.
They came to a merge where two lanes became one and the car just stopped. This is on a major highway and as the lady described, the cars were honking and they were stuck for over five minutes, and they just requested to be let out of the car to walk the rest of the way. They were on the phone with a Waymo person, and the representative kept insisting I need a specific address before unlocking the vehicle, and the group told them over and over again.
We're at the merge lane. There's nothing an address for a merged lane. How do you write a letter to a mergelne one two three where two lanes meets boulevard anyway, So.
The car suddenly unlocked.
As they walked away, the car remained in the same spot at a further distance.
The car suddenly roared back to life and drove past them. Now it wants to go, she said on her video. The uh go in the wrong directions one thing, you know, you don't want to be late to where over your head or something. But the on a freeway stopped and I can't get out, I would be seriously one worried and two angry with the product. I'm on a freeway where I could get hit and I can't get out of this damn thing.
That's nuts.
Yeah, way Moss spokesman said passengers can always pause the ride and exit the vehicle by pulling the handle.
Twice during the ride.
The passengers in the video pressed the pullover button in the vehicle pulled to the side of a thirty mile per hour road with a sidewalk so quick, bitch, could.
Be operator error, That's not impossible. Yeah, I suppose. I don't know. She sounds pretty sincere.
Do you think this, well, they already have them, you know, way most Do you think this is gonna happen like in a couple of years where there's gonna be lots of cars driving around you can sleep in and drink or whatever.
I don't know what the laws are going to be, uh that, whether legally you can or just effectively you can wink nod.
Yeah, probably Wow. We do another hour.
If you don't get it, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand. Otherwise I'm Strong and Getty.