11-20-25 - *FULL SHOW* Canceled for Acting; Beating SAD; Penny Problems

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Favorite day of the week. Yes, I am wide awake
without an alarm. I don't know why that seems like
such a thing with Gina and Dragon seems so No,
that's insane like that.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
I can't be the only the only person who get
me wrong.

Speaker 3 (00:17):
I wake up before the alarm, but I set that
alarm right.

Speaker 1 (00:22):
All right, Look, we have a lot of news to
talk about today, so let's just ask listeners very very
quickly at five six six nine zero. Is Ross a
moron or a lunatic for not having an alarm set?

Speaker 2 (00:32):
Or do you do it that way too? And just
wake up?

Speaker 1 (00:34):
And even if you do wake up without an alarm,
do you set one for backup just in case inquiring
minds want to know. All right, let's jump into some
news here. Yeah, five six six nine zero is the
text line. And oh, let me just also start by
saying thank you very much for spending some time with
us this morning.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
So lots of Epstein news.

Speaker 1 (00:54):
Still, I don't want to spend a lot of time
on that. I will just say one quick thing on it.
Trump signed the bill. It's law. Now. The thing to
keep in mind is we really don't there are two
key things we don't know. We don't know what's in
these so called files. Actually we don't even really know
what they are. And since we don't know what they are,
we don't know what's in them. But here's the thing

(01:16):
to keep in mind, and why this is going to
kind of stay in the news to some degree, is
the DOJ is going to have to decide what to release.
The bill doesn't say you have to release all the
files unredacted. They're going to redact what they want. They're
going to keep some stuff as a close hold and
not and not release it at all if it ties
into an ongoing investigation. And of course Donald Trump just

(01:38):
insisted that they add more investigations into Democrats. So there's
a whole bunch of stuff then about at least those
Democrats that won't be released because it's part of an
ongoing investigation.

Speaker 2 (01:50):
So we just don't know. And I think part of the.

Speaker 1 (01:52):
Reason this is gonna stay, you know, somewhere in the
public consciousness is because people of all political stripes are
going to make as much as they can out, you know,
political points out of whatever does come out. But I
think an even bigger thing will be all the conspiracy
theorizing about what doesn't come out, so we will we

(02:15):
will keep an eye on that. This next story I
wanted to share with you briefly comes from me, but
I thought.

Speaker 2 (02:21):
Canadians were so nice. Files So this.

Speaker 1 (02:26):
I heard this story somewhere yesterday when I looked it up.
So there's a guy named Ryan Wedding, like, like, you know,
like the wedding that Gina had last year, the year
the year in a year in a couple of months, right, Yeah,
we have the same in Gena and I have the
same anniversary.

Speaker 2 (02:44):
Yeah. So so this.

Speaker 1 (02:45):
Dude, Ryan Wedding, former Canadian Olympic snowboarder, former Canadian Olympic snowboarder,
he has He is now on the FBI's ten most
wanted list. How do you go from being a Canadian

(03:06):
snowboarder to on the ten most wanted list. Here's what
Pam Bondi, Pam Bondi was talking about this dude yesterday.
That's how big a criminal he is now. Mister Wedding
collaborates closely with the Sineloa cartel, a foreign terrorist organization
to flood not only American but also Canadian communities with
cocaine coming from Columbia.

Speaker 2 (03:27):
His organization is responsible.

Speaker 1 (03:29):
For importing approximately six metric tons tons of cocaine each
year into Los Angeles via semi trucks from Mexico. And
the thing that I think really sort of brought this
up to the even more public attention.

Speaker 2 (03:48):
I mean, obviously that's.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
A huge drug dealer, right, But I guess this guy,
the way I heard it on TV is his lawyer.
So there was somebody who's going to testify against him
in court, and the guy's lawyer, Weddings lawyer, said to him, well,
you probably have a better chance in this court case
if that guy didn't testify against you. So apparently mister

(04:09):
Wedding ordered the murder of the witness, and the witness
was murdered.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
And so now.

Speaker 1 (04:16):
This guy is I don't think they have him. They've
just they've indicted him, but I don't think. No, they
definitely don't have him, and they think he's in Mexico
right now, but we'll see. But still, like, how do
you go from Canadian Olympic snowboarder to massive drug kingpin
working with the Sinaloa cartel. It's a pretty insane story.

(04:39):
He competed for Canada in the twenty twenty two Winter Olympics,
before prosecutors say he pivoted into high level organized crime.

Speaker 2 (04:48):
Well, is that the career path? Is that the career
path coming out of the Olympics. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
All right, Here's another thing I want to mention quickly.
And the reason I'm gonna do this quickly, even though
it's a huge story is that we don't have an
immense amount of detail yet here.

Speaker 2 (05:04):
There are just some things that are sort of leaking out.

Speaker 1 (05:06):
By the way, in DC, when things leak out often
what it is it's an intentional.

Speaker 2 (05:13):
What we call a trial balloon.

Speaker 1 (05:16):
Right, It's an effort by the Trump administration or whoever
the administration is at that time to get some idea
out into the public without attaching a name to it,
without saying it's a definitive thing, and just see how
the public reacts to it. And if the public reacts
very badly, then they can try to change it. And

(05:37):
if the public reacts positively or even just doesn't really
react at all, then they can keep going.

Speaker 4 (05:43):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (05:44):
Here's what Axios wrote about this yesterday, and Axios's reporter.

Speaker 2 (05:49):
On foreign affairs stuff, a guy named.

Speaker 1 (05:51):
Barack Ravid is really really good, well connected. But he
said Trump plan asks Ukraine to see we eat additional
territory for security guarantee. Now, again, this guy is very
well connected, and there's a pretty good chance that is
reporting is about right. Well, we'll have to wait until
we see what the details are, but let me just

(06:13):
share a little bit with you. And again this is
from axios dot com. The two thornious issues in the
Ukraine talks up to now have been who will control
what territory once the war is over and how Ukraine
can be assured that Russia won't simply resume the war
at a later date. Those do seem like very good,

(06:34):
very good questions, right, So I guess the same way
that Steve Whitcoff and Jared Kushner put together a twenty
or twenty one point plan between Israel and Gaza. Now
they're looking and I don't know that Kushner is involved
with this, but Witcoff definitely is putting together a twenty
eight point plan for Russia versus Ukraine, and it seems

(06:54):
to include Russia getting full control of a couple areas
of Ukraine called Luhansk and Donnets, which together are called
the Dnbas, despite the fact that Ukraine still controls some
not a lot, like a little less than fifteen percent
of the territory there. So the plan would seem to

(07:15):
include giving Russia control over Ukrainian territory that Ukraine holds
right now.

Speaker 2 (07:24):
So that's you know, that's not great.

Speaker 1 (07:27):
Then they're talking about leaving the current lines of control
in place, so Russia would keep whatever territory it is
captured so far, and then after that there would be
some kind of security guarantees for Russia.

Speaker 2 (07:42):
But it also seems like there might be a.

Speaker 1 (07:47):
Point in the plan where Ukraine has to reduce its
military All in all, I think this is going to
be a difficult sale. That said, in a case where
you've got a war that is something of a stalemate
and both sides think they have a chance of winning eventually, right,
any deal is going to have to be one that
leaves both sides.

Speaker 2 (08:06):
Slightly slightly unhappy.

Speaker 1 (08:08):
All right, tons of other stuff going on in the
world in Denver, in Colorado, and Ginea is gonna tell
us about it.

Speaker 2 (08:15):
Do you wake up? I don't know.

Speaker 5 (08:16):
All the questions, the fact that you don't have an alarm,
and the fact of do you wake up with an
alarm or how many alarms do you set? And Ross
told us today that he does not wake up with
an alarm even set at all.

Speaker 2 (08:28):
So plus, if I.

Speaker 1 (08:29):
Had one, it would it would probably wake up my
wake up my wife, and that would be really bad.

Speaker 2 (08:33):
She does not want to wake up that early. Got it, Dragon.
If we don't have the guests here, just call that
backup number. Because I don't.

Speaker 1 (08:39):
I don't see him on zoom and we're already not
gonna have that much time with him.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
Here's a listener text. Ross.

Speaker 1 (08:45):
I used to use an alarm when I was younger,
but since I turned fifty, I don't need one anymore.
My body clock wakes me up. I'm basically in bed
by eight thirty and up by four without an alarm.

Speaker 2 (08:54):
My wife uses her alarm. See this is the thing.

Speaker 1 (08:56):
Maybe I'm just older now, although I usually go to
bed between nine and ten, and I'm waking up at
three thirty or four, or maybe four thirty if I'm lucky.

Speaker 2 (09:06):
But that's the thing.

Speaker 5 (09:07):
That's why you need to set an alarm, Because you
just said three thirty or four or maybe four thirty.
It's not like you're waking up at a set time
every single morning, right, it varies in the matter of
like an hour, hour and a.

Speaker 2 (09:19):
Half lately it Lately it does.

Speaker 1 (09:21):
But as long as it's not close to, you know,
making me late for work, then.

Speaker 5 (09:26):
Don't you think you would sleep better knowing that something
else is gonna wake you up and you don't have
to stress about not sleeping.

Speaker 2 (09:33):
That's not no. I get it.

Speaker 1 (09:35):
When you're supposed to be up, I get it, Like
if if I have an early flight, I'll wake up
every hour because I'm so worried about not waking up.

Speaker 2 (09:43):
But that's not what's going on right now.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
I'm not worried about not waking up in time for
I'm just not you will be up.

Speaker 5 (09:49):
You're just gonna I'll be up five hours earlier.

Speaker 1 (09:51):
Yeah, I'll just I'll be up. I'll be up, you know.
I I'm not sure where the guest is here, and
we probably wouldn't have enough time for him anyway at
this At this point, Dragon, if you get them, maybe
we'll just have to tell them.

Speaker 2 (10:02):
We'll do it again soon.

Speaker 1 (10:04):
But I actually had Gina a story here to talk
about that I heard you talk about on the on
the news this morning. Colorado's Morning News from five to
six with Gina. By the way, if you you know,
really want a massive mainline injection of news and you're
and you get up at six or seven or something
like that, you can go to Kawa Colorado dot com

(10:27):
and listen to the podcast of Gina doing Colorado Morning
News from five to six. And then what we're gonna
do here, what we are doing here from six to
nine is we're trying to give you the the optimal
mix of news, you know, news headlines, what's going on
in the news right now, and talk and mixing in
some other you know, random potential silliness from time to time,

(10:49):
like do you wake up with an alarm?

Speaker 2 (10:51):
But we're just.

Speaker 1 (10:52):
Really trying to give you the best blend of everything.
So anyway, Gina, I had this headline and you talked
about it already, Aurora restaurants to quit automatically serving water
as part of effort to count every single drop. And
I get it, you know, we want to save water,
and as you know, Colorado is a place that probably
doesn't have quite as much water as we would be

(11:13):
comfortable having. Here's here's what I wonder if a wait
in the United States. Okay, because it's different in other places, right,
But in the United States, if you sat down and
they didn't give you water, wouldn't your mind just go
to thinking that's bad service and I'm gonna tip them less.

Speaker 2 (11:30):
Yep.

Speaker 5 (11:31):
As a former server, I can definitely say one hundred
percent that I always made sure.

Speaker 2 (11:37):
That everyone always had cups.

Speaker 5 (11:38):
Of water, yeah, as soon as they sat down, and
then you would order other drinks. And actually it was
a whole server etiquette if you wanted to give them
water and then you give them all of the other
drink specials in hopes that they go, I.

Speaker 2 (11:51):
Don't just want this glass of water.

Speaker 5 (11:53):
I'm going to buy a drink or something fun that
she offered me, you know. So that was kind of
the biggest thing so here, and that is right that
you do stress the fact that in the US, because
obviously you pay for it pretty much everywhere else, but
like here, Yes, I think that is that is a
big thing. And I get the whole conservation of water
and stuff like that, but I'm not sure, and I

(12:13):
remember dumping out a lot of glasses of water as
a server, sure, but I do question if that's really
going to do that much effort, and if it actually
would hurt servers even more, servers that feel like they're
probably already getting hurt with a number of other things. Sure,
now you're adding, just oh, where's my water? She didn't
bring a water?

Speaker 1 (12:29):
If I were a restaurant that we're actually going to
try to go along with this, pardon me, I just saised.
So the interesting one interesting thing what the Aurora City
Council did here is it's just sort of a recommendation.

Speaker 2 (12:43):
It's not a rule, it's not a law.

Speaker 1 (12:45):
They're not saying restaurants, you know, can't serve water until asked,
But they're saying, why don't you consider maybe don't serve
water until asked until a way to save water. And
what I would if I were going to even think
about going down that road in order to have the
server not take the brunt of angry customers, I think
you have to have it like a sign right in
the front of the restaurant saying please ask if you

(13:07):
want water or something like that. Now, of course, if
you give them water and they don't really drink it,
this is the part I need to ask you, because
you're an experienced professional in this area, before you became
a professional in radio. Why didn't you just take that
cup of water and give it to the other guy.

Speaker 2 (13:22):
And then and then then you're not wasting anything. You're
not always see anyone where.

Speaker 5 (13:26):
Should they have to pay for it if they don't
drink it?

Speaker 2 (13:28):
Who whoa, whoa. It's a lot of problem.

Speaker 1 (13:32):
I remember I used to go to a in Chicago.
I went to and all you can eat sushi place,
and I loved it. And it was, you know, at
the time, was the thirty five dollars, which now would
seem really cheap, but back then, like in the nineties,
that was a lot. But here's what they did, and
it reminds me of what we're talking about here. So
it was all you can eat, but any sushi that

(13:54):
was left on your plate when you were done you
had to pay for additionally so that you didn't waste food.

Speaker 2 (14:00):
Smart. Yeah, so that's kind of like paying for the waiter.

Speaker 1 (14:02):
Of course, nobody's going to pay for water in America
would be an absolute, absolute revolution.

Speaker 5 (14:06):
Well, the fact that this is just Aurora talking here,
it's really hard to separate. Okay, you don't get water
in Aurora or you do somewhere else. It's like when
they banned all the plastic wear it take out.

Speaker 2 (14:18):
You know that was statewide.

Speaker 5 (14:20):
It's like, Okay, you don't get plastic war unless you
request it.

Speaker 2 (14:22):
That's just a running thing.

Speaker 5 (14:24):
And now people know if you're getting a takeout order,
you just ask for plasticware if you really need it.
But having it so city specific, it's going to be
messy because people are just going to think they're getting
bad service and Aurora.

Speaker 1 (14:34):
And that's that'll be the thing. That's why the servers
are going to be against it. Okay, we're gonna hit
a little break here. I shouldn't say that. It's not
really a break. We got stuff we got to do.
But here's the thing. The main thing I want you
to know, I am very pleased with something President Trump
said yesterday at this investment forum about H one B VISUS.

(14:57):
I know it's a little nerdy, but it's also so
super important. We'll tell you about it after this. I'm
gonna get back to the Trump thing in a minute.
Because we were able to get Chris Barnowolt to join us.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
Chris as an.

Speaker 1 (15:10):
Attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is a wonderful organization,
and have their guests on the show somewhat frequently. Chris,
I think you might need to unmute yourself before you
start talking, otherwise we probably won't hear you.

Speaker 2 (15:24):
There you go.

Speaker 1 (15:24):
And I saw a very interesting note about a lawsuit
where Chris is one of the attorneys on the case.

Speaker 2 (15:32):
Here's the headline.

Speaker 1 (15:33):
Historian, author and actor wins fight to tell stories of
historical women, regardless of their race, and this is one
of those stories that to me, when I hear what
happened to this woman, I think, how did anyone think
they would get away with that?

Speaker 2 (15:48):
And of course.

Speaker 1 (15:49):
Sometimes they do, but thanks to Chris, whoever they are didn't.
So Chris, first of all, thanks for being up early,
Thanks for joining us, and just give us some of
the bones of this case and then we'll talk about
how you worked through it in a court of law.

Speaker 6 (16:05):
Hi Ross, thanks so much for having me on. So
this case is about a lovely woman named Annette Hubble
who is a San Diego native. She retired from a
career in water management and she decided to pursue her
interest in writing and acting. She wrote a book about
historical characters who she admired and turned it into a

(16:26):
one woman play where she would dress up in historical
costume and do performances. She would read from the diaries
and letters of these individuals. And she was scheduled to
perform her play at a San Diego County Public library,
the Rancho Santa Fe Branch, and they originally asked her
to perform three characters, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harriet Tubman, and

(16:52):
Mary McLeod Beffoune. But just a couple of weeks before
her scheduled performance, the library reached out to her and said,
two of these characters Harriet Tubman, Mary McLeod buffoon or
African American, you're a white woman, and we want you
to change the characters to white characters. Were not comfortable

(17:12):
with a white woman performing an African American person, and
Natt Hubble did not agree with us. She thought that
that kind of race based limitation on the stories that
people can tell wasn't right. So when she wouldn't play
all of them, they just canceled her show entirely.

Speaker 1 (17:28):
And just to be very clear in case anybody is wondering,
Anette was not using any black face or makeup or
anything like that.

Speaker 2 (17:37):
Maybe a very.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
Small costume change put on a different jacket or something
like that. Right, So there's nothing from my perspective, there
was nothing even slightly offensive about this.

Speaker 2 (17:49):
But this is the world we live in.

Speaker 1 (17:50):
I thought your client made a really interesting point, which
is in this sort of video, guys, you guys made
tell me the title of the It can't tell me
the title of the video.

Speaker 2 (18:01):
Again, the storyteller's role, right, is that it the storyteller's role.

Speaker 6 (18:05):
Yes, wonderful video put out by our communications team, portraying
in nets and telling her story in her own words.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
Right, And folks, if you want to.

Speaker 1 (18:13):
See this, it's up on my blog at Rosskominski dot
com today if you go.

Speaker 2 (18:16):
To the Thursday blogcast.

Speaker 1 (18:18):
But one of the comments she made that really kind
of struck a chord with me, Chris, was she said,
would I not be allowed to portray as an actor
a patient with a terminal illness? Since I personally don't
actually have a terminal illness? And you know, if the
answer is, of course you could portray that, then what's

(18:40):
the argument moral, legal, or otherwise for saying you can't
portray a person who happens to have a.

Speaker 2 (18:46):
Slightly different skin tone from you. The whole thing.

Speaker 1 (18:49):
I mean, it seems so, it seems so twenty twenty one,
that level of wokeness or whatever it is.

Speaker 2 (18:56):
So tell me about how you pursued this in court.

Speaker 6 (19:00):
Yeah, So we reached out to a NET and we
asked if she was willing to be a client for PLF.
We were able to represent our client's pro bono and
we brought a complaint in federal court alleging unconstitutional and
illegal race discrimination against a NET. We would also be

(19:21):
able to argue the First Amendment free speech violations, but
we decided that it was kind of a straightforward case
of discrimination by the government saying, here is something that
you cannot do specifically because of your race, and there
are so many laws and constitutional provisions which forbid the
government from doing that to anybody. The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal

(19:44):
Protection Clause, the California Constitution, which forbids race discrimination in
public contracting, as well as civil rights laws Section nineteen
eighty one forbidding race discrimination and contracting, and Title six
of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids race discrimin a
nation in any program which receives federal funding.

Speaker 1 (20:05):
We are talking with Chris Barnowolf from Pacific Legal Foundation
Pacific Legal dot org. So the headline that I started
this conversation with says actor wins fight.

Speaker 2 (20:17):
So it sounds like you one. I'm just kind of curious.

Speaker 1 (20:20):
Did they give up because they knew they were going
to lose or did this actually go to trial.

Speaker 2 (20:27):
That's a great question.

Speaker 6 (20:28):
It did not go to trial. I'm pretty sure they
knew that they were eventually going to lose on this.
It's pretty straightforward. The government cannot discriminate against individuals and
treat them differently because of their race. The only question
was are they going to lose now dignity voluntarily on
their own terms by offering some sort of settlement or

(20:49):
are they going to drag it out?

Speaker 2 (20:50):
And I think they made the right call. They did
the right.

Speaker 6 (20:53):
Thing and offered in that a settlement in which they
agreed to allow her to perform her play.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
Well, very well done. That's that's the right outcome.

Speaker 1 (21:03):
It should never have come to this, And I do
wonder from time to time how so many folks think
they can get away with these kinds of race based things.

Speaker 2 (21:12):
That we know generally are illegal, and.

Speaker 1 (21:16):
Especially now with this particular federal government, they have no
tolerance for that kind of thing at all, So, you know,
little a little surprising that she that she even faced
this problem, although I guess the problem actually happened during
the prior administration and not not during this one. But
still it's a it's a welcome evolution. Chris Barnowalt is
an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, a really great organization

(21:40):
doing great, great pro bono work, meaning they don't charge
their clients, upholding liberty, upholding the American Constitution. Pacific Legal
dot org. Thanks for being here, Chris, appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (21:53):
Thank you. Ross.

Speaker 1 (21:54):
All right, we're gonna take a Actually, you know, I
just want to make sure you know what we're going
to talk about next, because I owe you this topic
that I had promised you, but we were able to
line up, Chris, so I wanted to get that in
where we can. Yesterday, at this Saudi Arabia investment thing,
President Trump said some stuff that I.

Speaker 2 (22:12):
Really liked for two reasons.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
One, I think he's right on the issue basically, and
the other is he's actually pushing back on his base
a little bit.

Speaker 2 (22:20):
You don't see that all the time.

Speaker 1 (22:22):
Tell you about it after this, I'm Ross, it's my
favorite day of the week. This is Ross on the
News with Gina Hi. Gena, Hi, you look very pensive.
You look like you're deep in thought about something. Oh
what are you working on?

Speaker 2 (22:34):
I don't know as good as mine.

Speaker 1 (22:37):
Producer Dragon behind the glass with his Broncos hoodie on,
even though there's no Broncos game this week.

Speaker 2 (22:43):
I want to get to this Trump thing that I
teased in a second.

Speaker 1 (22:47):
First, I want to just come back to something that
Gina mentioned in the headlines a little bit earlier, and
I thought it was a super interesting story and I
didn't talk about it yesterday, which was this video that
Jason Crowe, congressman from Aurora area the what is.

Speaker 2 (23:02):
That sixth Congressional districts.

Speaker 1 (23:04):
He did this video with several other congressional Democrats who
all had served in the military or intelligence, kind of
warning current members of the military that they don't have
to obey what they believe is an illegal order. And
what was interesting about it, and Gina referenced this, it
was unclear what they were talking about. And for example,

(23:24):
a lot of people wonder whether Trump's orders to the
military to blow up these boats that they say are
carrying drugs are those legal orders and it's I think
it's a borderline call.

Speaker 2 (23:35):
What was interesting, what I want to mention.

Speaker 1 (23:37):
To you, is that Jason Crowe did an interview later
yesterday with Martha McCallum on Fox News and she just
absolutely destroyed him. And she asked him what he was
talking about, what they were talking about, and his answer
was all this hypothetical stuff like at some point during
Trump's first term he had asked about protesters. He asked

(24:00):
whether the you know whoever could just shoot the protesters
in the leg right. Now, Trump didn't order that, and
of course it's a stupid question, but everything that Crow
said was about these hypotheticals.

Speaker 2 (24:12):
Trump said he might want to do this.

Speaker 1 (24:13):
Trump said he was maybe send a military into Chicago,
right and it was and there was no mention of blowing.

Speaker 2 (24:20):
Up the boats.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
And Martha McCallum asked him specifically, well what about blowing
up the boats? And he said, well, we weren't thinking
about that. And it's very very strange. Anyway, if you
want to watch the video, it's up on my blog
at Ross Kaminsky dot com. And I think Jason Crow
kind of made a fool of himself. Now I'm going
to do this other thing very quickly. Probably deserves a
little more time than I'm going to give it. But
President Trump was at this Saudi investment forum yesterday and

(24:47):
I'm just going to share just a few seconds of sound.

Speaker 4 (24:50):
But you're building plans that make things that are very,
very detailed, and you have to have great knowledge, and
you're coming here and you find if we don't have
people that did that before, we are allowing you.

Speaker 2 (25:03):
And I may take a little heat.

Speaker 4 (25:04):
I always take a little heat from my people. The
people that love me and the people that I love,
they happen to be toward the right of center, toward
the right. Sometimes they're are away right. But if you
have to bring people to get those plants opened, we
want you to do that, and we want those people
to teach our people how to make computer chips and

(25:27):
how to make other things. You can't come in, and
I'm explaining, you can't come in open up a massive
computer chip factory for billions and billions of dollars like
is being done in Arizona, and think you're going to
hire people off an unemployment line to run it.

Speaker 1 (25:46):
So that is President Trump explaining his support for h
one B VISUS, and his base is not happy with that.
They don't like H ones at all. And I have
to say Trump is mostly right. The H one B
is definitely abused and it needs massive reform. And some
companies are using it to do things they shouldn't be
using it for, which is simply to lower their payroll

(26:07):
costs by firing Americans and hiring foreigners. You know, as
a libertarian, I got some you know, other issues about that,
but the H one B needs reform. But I'm pretty
impressed that Trump has been willing to come out and
buck his base on this. It's not something he does
very often, but he's absolutely right. We do not have
enough of the highly skilled people here to get all

(26:29):
of this stuff done, with the high tech manufacturing that
he thinks he's bringing into the US. Welcome to Ross
on the News with Gina and producer Dragon as well.
And Gina and I were talking with our program director
Dave yesterday, and he made an interesting point about this
story about the health inspectors in Denver with the pouring

(26:50):
the bleach into the food of this food truck dude
who they were trying to get to shut down. Anyway,
more of those details in a second. But what was
interesting about it, is pointed out, is the story. It
seemed like the story went national before it was even
a big thing locally, like TMZ picked this up and
it was all over the place, and the short version
of the story. And we're getting sort of more of

(27:12):
the details now, but basically, the health Department, City of
Denver Health Department has been kind of after this particular
food truck for a while Tacos Ta, Colorado, and after
this guy for sort of not complying properly with various
food safety violations. And the guy as they came to

(27:33):
tell him, hey, you need to throw that meat away.
It's been stored at too high a temperature. You need
to get rid of this stuff. It's unsafe. What he
would do repeatedly was before they could take the food
or do anything with the food, he would go grab
it and go put it in a locked truck and
lock it and then not let the inspectors in. And
they were and they're like, we can't have this anymore.

(27:54):
So they went and port bleach in it. So, Gina,
very just open ended question for you to start with,
Like what was your gut reaction when you heard that story.

Speaker 5 (28:03):
Well, when you first watched the video, you are kind
of taken aback and being like, oh my goodness, what's happening.

Speaker 2 (28:09):
Can't you donate the food?

Speaker 5 (28:10):
You know, what about proper disposal or animal's going to
get to it and someone going to get sick from
taking it out.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
Of the trash whatever. That was like the main reaction.

Speaker 5 (28:17):
Then I think people started to realize that this is
very common of if they cannot draw a line, if
they cannot get somebody to stop when they were doing
things like washing their hands literally in a trash can
and as there as their sanitation measures or food like
the meat was literally way under the heated proper heated
temperature in order to keep it safe and things like that,

(28:38):
and like you mentioned, they kept running because you're really
able to do that when when you have a food
truck or a food stand or things like that. So
when you watch the video, I get why so many
people TMZ and places picked it up, being like wow,
look at this. But then you realize when we got
a full statement from them saying listen, like we understand
food trucks are working hard. We want to support them

(28:59):
in any way possible, but We're also committed to the
education and the safety of our community and want to
make sure that what they are being served is health
you know, certified everything is Is this good in the
way that it needs to be, because sometimes I feel
like these food vendors think they can get a little
bit you know, relax on their safety protocols because it's

(29:20):
not a restaurant that actually has really really strict safety
protocols in place.

Speaker 1 (29:25):
So you're going like right where my brain was going
with this as well, and you know, let me just
throw this out there. I don't know if there's you know,
food truck owner operators listening this early in the morning,
because food trucks tend to operate later. But if you
own and operate a food truck, Gina and I would
love to talk to you about what that's like as
far as dealing with the regulators. So the easiest way
to do this probably would be for you to text

(29:47):
in at five six six nine zero if you maybe
would like to go on the air and talk about
what that's like. Text in at five six six nine zero,
include the name of your food truck, and depending on
how many we get or whatever, producer, Dragon will pick
one or maybe two, and we'll get in touch with you.

Speaker 2 (30:07):
And we'll sort that out.

Speaker 1 (30:08):
And dragon, if we do get anyone, we could have
them right in the very next segment, all right, So
text five six six nine zero. If you own and
operate a food truck and are willing to go on
the air. Here the other thing, actually own and operate
a food truck and you don't want to go on
the air, but you have a comment about this kind
of regulation, we'd love to hear about it. So, Gina,
here's what came to my mind. So it probably doesn't

(30:32):
surprise you that I am not a person who thinks
too much about how clean is the kitchen right when
I'm going And it's it's not just because you know
of the whole like leg washing thing where my legs
are clean anyway, But actually, on a more serious note,
it's like I've been around the world. I've been in
India three times, I've been in all these places, almost
never get sick. And then but separate from that is

(30:54):
when you're in America, you just tend to think like, okay,
things are done right here, and you know, you just
sort of assume things are good.

Speaker 2 (31:01):
But maybe I shouldn't. I mean, do you do?

Speaker 1 (31:05):
You do you actually think about this as an ongoing thing?
And I'll ask listeners to at five six, six nine zero.
Do you think about the cleanliness of restaurants or food
trucks when you eat at them?

Speaker 5 (31:15):
Yes, But here's the thing, I'm like a borderline germophobe
and us even exactly there's my purell hand sabitizer, high sanitizer,
my hand sanbitizer. Honestly, earlier, when we were talking about
the Aurora restaurants possibly not serving water, you said, well,
if they just leave water and they don't drink out
of it, can't you just give it to the next person?
And I was appalled, Yeah, you were appalled. The look

(31:37):
on your face was so to me, I was the way, Yeah,
I know. So to me, it's like I draw a
line on some places.

Speaker 1 (31:44):
Now.

Speaker 5 (31:44):
I have worked in the service industry in the past.
I have seen some things that you see that you
know in the past they're not clean.

Speaker 2 (31:54):
Your restaurants are not help.

Speaker 5 (31:55):
To bar of where they probably should be. But when
it comes to food trucks and things like that, I
think I focus more on like I would take a
food truck over one of the street meat carts if
I did eat meat, because I feel like they might
have a little more proper organization, sanitation, heating protocols, things

(32:16):
like that, do they I don't know.

Speaker 2 (32:17):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (32:18):
And again, and I'm not trying to be sarcastic here
at all. I wonder on the cart stuff, and I
suppose this goes to sort of the nature of potential
meat contamination. But part of me thinks that at least
for like bacteria and viruses, if they're grilling that thing
over a fire right there, then at least at that level,

(32:39):
they probably killed everything. But it's it's also possible that
something was wrong with the meat that left like a
toxin in it, right that cooking it isn't gonna solve,
Like I think botulism might be like that once the toxin.

Speaker 2 (32:51):
Is in it, you know.

Speaker 5 (32:52):
But you're also totally right about traveling to other countries
because I watch this guy who always travels around India
on Instagram.

Speaker 2 (32:59):
He goes to the street that there. Can't you just watch.

Speaker 5 (33:01):
Them elbow deep, just bare hand, serving out with no
utensils and jumping it into a little plate and things
like that, Like it's just it's a different it's a
different world.

Speaker 1 (33:11):
The most sick I've ever been on foreign trip was
in Katmando, Nepal, and I got sick in a restaurant
that was called the American Restaurant where we had pizza
and steak, and I hated the food carts all the time.
Never got sick, Dragon, Any anybody texting in yet?

Speaker 2 (33:27):
All right?

Speaker 1 (33:27):
If we get any any food truck owner operators, please
text in five six six nine zero.

Speaker 2 (33:31):
We'd love to talk to you. We saw plenty of
stuff to.

Speaker 1 (33:34):
Do, including Colorado reaching a huge real estate settlement, tell
you about it. After this, I'm gonna do a little
newsy thing here, and then we have so much more
to say about this whole food safety thing and the
food truck thing, and Gina and Dragon have lots of
experiences and thoughts, and we're getting good stuff from listeners
as well. Dragon I did respond to a couple of them,

(33:56):
so we may end up with somebody wanting to go
on the air. But let me just do a little
bit of news here, because this is after all, mostly
a news and you know, news e show, But gosh,
this food truck and food safety aspect of it has
taken on a life of its own.

Speaker 2 (34:13):
I think so.

Speaker 1 (34:14):
I had talked a little bit in the show some
weeks ago, but before the show moved to move to
this time of day. Actually, it was probably more like
a few months ago about this lawsuit where Attorney General
Phil Wiser and some other states attorneys general were suing

(34:34):
one of America's biggest property owning companies, landlord companies. It's
called gray Star, and they were suing gray Star for
using some particular software.

Speaker 2 (34:48):
And there's a whole.

Speaker 1 (34:49):
Separate question abou whether the software company will be able
to stay in business. But using some particular software called
real Page and it's one word r E A L
capital PAG. And this software is used to set apartment rents.
And the contention about the software is that you get

(35:12):
these multiple property owners that all put their information into
the software and then in the back end the software
without without sharing vacancy data and such directly from one
apartment owner to another. But what apparently it does, what
the claim is is it uses that information to raise

(35:37):
or lower rents. And so the claim there is that
effectively these apartment owners are colluding to raise rents.

Speaker 2 (35:46):
By all using the same.

Speaker 1 (35:48):
Software that uses logic in the back to maximize rents
and effectively diminish what otherwise would be competition among these
apartment owners. Anyway, Colorado and a bunch of other states
reached a seven million dollars settlement with this company, gray Star.
A federal judge that's that's you know, handling the case

(36:09):
still has to.

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Approve it all.

Speaker 1 (36:11):
Colorado itself will get about a million dollars of it.
Other states will you know, share the rest? And what
to me, what's very interesting thing. And this is part
of an another lawsuit actually, so Graystar actually reached a
separate fifty million dollars settlement a month ago on another

(36:31):
price fixing lawsuit, and that was brought by tenants. This
one is brought by the government. So we'll see. I
just wanted you to be aware of it.

Speaker 2 (36:37):
I think it's a.

Speaker 1 (36:38):
Super interesting thing in the sense I understand why the
businesses would do that. Right, you use software, you raise
your rents, and they'll say, oh, we don't know what
the method is, but I think they know.

Speaker 2 (36:49):
I think they know.

Speaker 1 (36:50):
In any case, you know, a little a little benefit
perhaps for tenants where the software won't effectively collude between
apartment owners to raise your rent while the apartment owners
sit back and say, we have no idea. We'll take
Uh oh, you know what, keep your keep your texts
coming at five six six nine zero about all your
thoughts on food safety and especially if you have a

(37:12):
food truck. We'd love to hear from you. Five six
six nine zero. Keep it here on KOA. I want
to just do a few minutes with both of you
on this whole food safety food truck tank because both
of you were in the restaurant business one way or another,
and I and I wasn't.

Speaker 2 (37:26):
And there was a listener text that got Gina's.

Speaker 1 (37:29):
Attention that talked about, uh, here, I'll just read it
restaurants staff are pressured to work when they're sick, and Gina, you.

Speaker 2 (37:37):
Said, yeah, absolutely.

Speaker 5 (37:40):
Now when I was in the restaurant industry, it was
pre pandemic.

Speaker 2 (37:44):
So take take that what you will.

Speaker 5 (37:46):
Yeah, okay, Well, both Dragon and I agreed, and I'm
not I'm not happy to admit this by any means,
but you did have to come.

Speaker 2 (37:51):
Into work when you were sick.

Speaker 5 (37:52):
They didn't care if you were sick or not right,
and if you were serving at a table.

Speaker 2 (37:57):
But you also had a cough or a or a stuff.

Speaker 5 (38:00):
He knows you would literally hold it as long as
you could in front of your in front of your guests,
and then run either to the walk and cooler, to
the back or to outside or wherever you could go
as fast as you could to just get that coffer,
sneeze or sniffle or whatever you needed out.

Speaker 1 (38:15):
Mm hmm. So maybe I should be more concerned about
like restaurant, Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 5 (38:22):
Stop me from going to restaurants. No, it's right, Like,
I don't know about your dragon, but like, just because
I know the inner workings of the back of the
house restaurant.

Speaker 2 (38:31):
We've seen some bad stuff, you see. Yeah, And there
was a listener who texted.

Speaker 1 (38:36):
In with the with the point that I actually think
is right as well. And this listener text, so, where's
the food poisoning epidemic?

Speaker 2 (38:44):
Right? And this is another great point.

Speaker 1 (38:45):
I don't I don't know that I've ever gotten sick
from food in the United States of America.

Speaker 5 (38:51):
Somebody also texted that they think that you're in house
kitchen is probably not as clean as a restaurant.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
As a restaurant kitchen probably.

Speaker 5 (38:59):
Yeah, you clean it every single every time you open
or close a restaurant, you are just cleaning everything about it.

Speaker 2 (39:05):
And I doubt you probably do that your home.

Speaker 3 (39:07):
Well, that's absolutely true. I've got Schmitz on my oven
top right now. The stovetop's rock all over it. Yeah, yeah,
mine too, Mine too, Although I believe it or not,
I try to keep that kind of clean.

Speaker 1 (39:20):
But yeah, and then I wonder also about food trucks
and a listener to another listener texted in saying, look,
the level of cleanliness, whether it's a restaurant or a
food truck or even your.

Speaker 2 (39:29):
Own house, is all about the owner.

Speaker 1 (39:32):
It's not about, you know, is it a truck versus
is it a fixed location.

Speaker 2 (39:36):
It's about what is the what does the owner want
to do.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
But one of the things I wonder about, in regarding
regarding the listener text, we don't have epidemics of people
getting sick from restaurant food or food truck food in
the United States. And what I wonder about that is,
you know, how would you attribute that to government, right,
to people being afraid of regulators or or you know,
just doing what the government tells you to do. Do you

(40:01):
think that people would do the right thing, you know,
keep their restaurants keep their food trucks clean if they
weren't subject to significant penalties from government, would they just
do it the right way because it's the right thing
to do.

Speaker 2 (40:15):
I don't know. As a libertarian, I struggle with this one.

Speaker 1 (40:18):
I generally don't want government doing much much of anything,
but I mean dragging you. Actually, you and your family
owned a subway sandwich shop.

Speaker 2 (40:26):
Do you think you would have behaved.

Speaker 1 (40:29):
Differently when it came to how clean the restaurant was
if you didn't know that there were, you know, health
department people looking over your shoulder.

Speaker 6 (40:39):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (40:39):
I think that the regular employee probably didn't care as
much as I or the rest of my family did.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
For sure.

Speaker 5 (40:46):
I think I cared a lot though, because they put
that fear in you of like you never know when
the health inspector is going to show up.

Speaker 3 (40:52):
It was just a couple of times a year, yeah.

Speaker 5 (40:55):
But they always like, we got rumors there's some around
and they probably just said that to make.

Speaker 2 (40:58):
Sure that exactly in order.

Speaker 3 (41:00):
It's happening, Yeah, sometime this month. So it's like, all right,
let's step up our game just a little bit more
than we usually would.

Speaker 1 (41:06):
Yeah, Well, it's it's been interesting to see how this
Denver health inspection story and pouring bleach on the on
the unset or they claimed it was unsafe food at
this point, how it became so national as probably sparking
these conversations all around the country.

Speaker 2 (41:21):
Let me do a minute on something else.

Speaker 1 (41:23):
So during the Biden administration, they put out this proposal,
and I want to mention this now because we're heading
into this massive Thanksgiving travel season.

Speaker 2 (41:32):
The reason I wanted to mention this right now.

Speaker 1 (41:34):
So they put out this this plan that would have
required airlines to pay travelers up to seven hundred and
seventy five dollars in cash for what for a major
flight disruption if that disruption is deemed to have been
in the airlines control, So seven hundred.

Speaker 2 (41:55):
And seventy five dollars.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
Up to seven hundred and seventy five dollars, and i'll
quote from the Washington An Examiner. The proposal would have
mandated cash payments for long delays and cancellations, along with
guaranteed meals, hotel rooms, some ground transportation, and other essentials
for passengers delayed three hours or more. And the airline said, look,
this is gonna cost billions of dollars.

Speaker 2 (42:17):
It's going to make airfares go up.

Speaker 1 (42:19):
And I don't know if that's true or not, but
it's obvious that the airlines would say that. In any case,
what I wanted to mention to you is that earlier
this week, on Monday, the Transportation Department actually published a
reversal of that rule, saying that they are no longer
going to go along with that rule. They say that
the rule did not align with the Trump administration's broader

(42:44):
deregulatory agenda, and they're also not sure that the Transportation
Department even had the authority to order it. But in
any case, I just want you to be aware that
rule where you would get paid for a long delay
and maybe get free hotel room and YadA, YadA YadA.
Airlines can still do that if they want to, but
they're not gonna have to anymore. And I just wanted

(43:06):
to make sure you knew that as we head into
this massive holiday travel season. All Right, Gina's gonna tell
us a lot more things going on, including an update
on the Gray Store rent fixing story I touched on
a little earlier.

Speaker 2 (43:20):
This is Ross on the News with Gina Hi Gena.

Speaker 1 (43:22):
I always like to make sure to say hygienea just
when you're taking a drink of water, and if you
if you think it's accidental that I say hi right
when you've got your water thing up to your mouth,
it is not and high dragon. So it's it's a
little overcast today. But more importantly, I think many folks
will have noticed, as you will have every year, that

(43:43):
as we go into the winter, the days get shorter
and just you know, it's less sunny and less and
even when the sun is up, it's a little lower
in the sky and the sunlight feels a little bit thin,
and that has some real psychological effects for some people.
And I thought, as we're heading into this time of year,

(44:04):
and as we're heading into the holidays as well, I
thought it would be useful for me and for listeners
to learn a little more about this and maybe a
little more about what to do about seasonal effective disorder SAD.

Speaker 2 (44:18):
Joining us to talk about it Doctor Rebecca Richie.

Speaker 1 (44:21):
She is the co founder of Solstice Psychology and that
is the website Solstice Psychology dot com.

Speaker 2 (44:29):
Doc thanks for joining us here on KOA.

Speaker 7 (44:32):
Hey, thanks for having me.

Speaker 2 (44:33):
Ros glad to do it.

Speaker 1 (44:34):
So just very very briefly, just to just define describe SAD,
and then we'll get to really the nuts and bolts
of the conversation.

Speaker 7 (44:44):
Yeah, that sound good. So SAD sends for seasonal affective disorder,
which is basically a form of depression that follows the
seasonal life cycle. Like you said, for a lot of
people sometimes kind of start showing up this time of year, especially,
you know, the last couple of weeks after we've had
that daylight savings drop, and so when it's dark, you know,
later in the morning, and then especially you know, it
gets dark at this time of year around four point

(45:05):
thirteen afternoon, and so it just it feels a little
bit not heavier for a lot of folks.

Speaker 5 (45:12):
Doctor, what are some of those symptoms, because how are
you really able to like tell them a part of
oh this is seasonal or oh this is something that
I deal with a lot.

Speaker 7 (45:20):
Yeah, that's a good question. So, you know, for a
lot of people this time year, they just feel kind of,
like I said, a little heavier. They feel more tired,
kind of more withdrawn. It almost feels like you want
to hibernate, you want to have more carbs, you want
to sleep some more, You have a harder time focusing,
and just everything feels like it takes a little bit
of extra energy this time of year.

Speaker 2 (45:40):
So I know a little bit. I've read a little
bit about it.

Speaker 1 (45:44):
Some kind of special light you can buy, maybe you
can talk about that a little bit, but generally, what
is to be done since you know, you and I
are probably unlikely to have much influence on how many
hours this sun is going to be in this guy.

Speaker 7 (46:02):
Yeah, it's sad that we don't, isn't it. So you know,
the further we get from the equator, the worst this
gets for folks, and so up here in Denver we
have we have a lot of it, and so nation
wide about one to three one to three percent of
adults will suffer from SAD but it's way worse for
women and worse for people who.

Speaker 2 (46:19):
Are nerded version as well.

Speaker 8 (46:20):
And so.

Speaker 7 (46:22):
Some things you can do, like you said, you mentioned
the light therapy. That's a very effective treatment. It's a
ten thousand looks light boxes is really helpful about twenty
thirty minutes today typically in the morning, is really helpful.
And then for the other strategies that we typically use,
they're going to be the things that you think right.
So we're going to encourage you to get a lot
of exercise. We're gonna encourage you to get a stable

(46:42):
sleep schedule, get up at the same time every morning,
go to bed at the same time every night, even
on the weekends, which is no fun. We're gonna, you know,
encourage you to stay connected. Even if you feel like
staying at home and hibernating, don't do that. Go out,
have barns with your friends, you know, be active. And
then one thing that's really unique for SAD is a
morning light exposure. And so it's not going to be

(47:03):
helpful in a day like today that's kind of you know,
yuckie and overcast. If there's the morning sun, get outside,
no sunglasses and just you know, engage with the sun
for ten minutes in the morning, no sunglasses, no sunglasses,
look like right into your eyeballs.

Speaker 2 (47:19):
Interesting.

Speaker 5 (47:20):
Okay, Well, doctor, you talked a little bit about different states,
and it's funny when I hear people talk about SAD
in Colorado, I'm like, well, you didn't live in Michigan,
because Michigan it feels like all the time it's gray
and dreary and cold, and you never see the sun.

Speaker 2 (47:32):
During the winter months.

Speaker 5 (47:34):
Do people just go about their day to day life
just dealing with this or how many people actually do
address SAD when they're dealing with it.

Speaker 7 (47:42):
Well, not enough is the answer. I hear you about Michigan.
I'm originally from Indiana, and it just you know, the
day after Halloween until after Easter is just so so gray.
And so yeah, if you're the kind of person who's
affected by this, don't wait, you know, just go ahead
and get on somebody's strategy. But I do want to say,
if you're the kind of person that has these these

(48:03):
symptoms for more than two weeks, if they're affecting your
function and you can't get out of bed, just go
ahead and come on in. You know, we have therapy
that will work for these kind of things. If it's
bad enough, there are some pharmacological treatments we can utilize.
And so just don't don't suffer with this and don't
do it alone.

Speaker 1 (48:18):
We're talking with doctor Rebecca Ritchie from Solstice Psychology, and
you mentioned that SAD tends to affect women. I think
you said quite a bit more than men. Is there
an understanding as to why that's the case, You know,
it's a.

Speaker 7 (48:36):
It's a biological mechanism, and so you know this time
of year it affects our serotonin and our dope and
linergic strategies and things like that. And so you know,
women have a lot going on, and a lot of parents,
especially moms. Winter piles on extra stress. There's less daylight,
more logistics like holidays, everybody's stuck in door. It's kind
of the perfect storm. And so there's a lot of

(48:58):
reasons for it. But especially woman out there, if you're struggling,
you know, come on in. Like I said, there's a
lot of things we can do to help out.

Speaker 1 (49:05):
Doctor Rebecca Ritchie from Solstice Psychology. That's the website Solstice
Psychology dot com. And as always, just so listeners know,
if you go to my blog at Rosskominsky dot com,
we have a list right there in each day's blog
cast I call it of all the guests and the
links to them. So if you forget doctor Richie's website

(49:26):
you want to get some help with this, if you
just go to Rosskiminsky dot com.

Speaker 2 (49:29):
You can easily find it.

Speaker 1 (49:30):
Doc, thanks for making time for us, really appreciate it's
great an important topic.

Speaker 7 (49:35):
Anytime guys have a great day.

Speaker 2 (49:37):
Okay, all right, awesome. Let me just mention a quick thing.
Gene has been.

Speaker 1 (49:40):
Giving us stock market updates, and I'm.

Speaker 2 (49:43):
Just gonna do one as well.

Speaker 1 (49:44):
Although it hasn't changed much since the last time Gina
told you, but the S and P is up about
one and three quarter percent, the Nasdaq is up about
two and a quarter percent. And I just wanted to touch
on this briefly because the stock market, especially the NASDAC,
has been really ugly for the past week or so,
and cryptocurrencies have been following it down. Cryptocurrencies are almost

(50:07):
like a leveraged bed on the Nasdaq. But the Nasdaq's
up five hundred points today. And this is as Gena
already mentioned, But this is about the fact that in
Nvidia came out with earnings yesterday and revenue projections that
were a little bit better than the market forecast. And
much of the recent selloff in the market had been

(50:29):
based on this.

Speaker 2 (50:30):
Very specific question.

Speaker 1 (50:31):
Of have AI stocks gotten ahead of themselves? Has too
much money come into AI stocks too fast? Is it
a bubble? And with Nvidia's earnings yesterday, it's given the
market a little bit of confidence.

Speaker 2 (50:45):
Hey, maybe it's not a bubble.

Speaker 1 (50:47):
That's a big part of what is going on in
the market today. Coming up next on the show, I
want to go back to this topic of pennies, and
we're going to talk with a dude from the National
Association of Convenience Stores, and they are absolutely fine that
pennies are going away, but not very fine with just

(51:08):
how it's being done. We'll talk about it after this,
after Gina tells us what's going on in the world,
after your traffic and weather reports. Gena and I and
Dragon all appreciate your spending a little time with us.
So the penny thing has been going on for what
the better part of a week now, with the US
Treasury or the US Mint no longer making any pennies

(51:31):
and a lot of stores freaking out about it and
trying to hoard pennies, which maybe we'll work for a
little while. But I've been reading in multiple places some
very interesting comments on all this by my next guest,
Jeff Leonard, is the vice president for Strategic Communications for
the National Association of Convenience Stores. And Jeff, if I

(51:55):
understand your position correctly, and I definitely don't want to
put words in your mouth. So you tell me what
I got right and what I got wrong. Although I'm
going to keep it simple. You guys are fine with
getting rid of the penny, but not particularly fine with
just how it was done. Is that about right? And
then let's elaborate on a little bit, especially on the
second part of that.

Speaker 2 (52:17):
Yeah, you captured it right now.

Speaker 9 (52:18):
First off, our industry is pro customer, and you know,
for years the customer has said, yeah, the penny, we
don't really care too much about it slows down transactions.
We're about fast transactions. But right now, because there is
no congressional congress needs to make these decisions. And with

(52:39):
a shutdown, you know there was delay and all that,
but they need to say that it is okay to
round up and round down. Without that, you know, retailers
are faced with you know a lot of bad decisions,
and you know that complicates things for customers.

Speaker 1 (52:53):
I hadn't thought about that aspect. So are you saying
that somebody could potentially bring some kind of lost suit,
like a class action lawsuit for all the rounding up
or something.

Speaker 2 (53:04):
What's the fear here?

Speaker 1 (53:05):
And doesn't rounding up and rounding down If we're talking
about rounding down if with prices ending with six or
seven and rounding up with prices ending with eight or nine,
wouldn't you think that just in terms of the aggregate
impact on consumers, shouldn't it be a wash?

Speaker 2 (53:22):
It should be a wash.

Speaker 9 (53:23):
And that's what has happened in Canada. Canada has been
doing this for more than a decade. Australia some other countries,
but it was a longer time frame. It was like
a year where they kind of had communications campaigns they
went out with that. This was a lot more sudden.
So yes, with potential lawsuits. As my lawyer friends say,

(53:44):
anybody can sue anybody. The question is, you know, will
it actually work? But there's complications that our industry faces
with things like gas prices. How do you set gas
prices if the price might be dropped, rounded up, rounded down?
Is that legal debates based on weights and measures? How

(54:07):
does this affect snaps? Snap spending the news a lot,
But with snap that is electronic payments and they are
supposed to be those prices are supposed to be the
same for them as everybody else. But if just rounding
up and rounding down, there's not so there's a lot
of uncertainty and a federal standard that says, this is

(54:33):
what's happening, this is when it's happening, this is what
you're allowed to do. Can't sue somebody for this. That's
what our association is looking for and what our industry
is looking for. But then I'm sure customers have all
kinds of questions. What do I do with pennies?

Speaker 2 (54:47):
What do I do with this? How will it work?

Speaker 9 (54:49):
So yeah, a lot of questions to be answered, but
you know we're on the right path, I hope, Jeff.

Speaker 5 (54:54):
I want to look at this from the customer standpoint
real quick, because you brought up gas prices, and to
be honest, I didn't even consider when we think about
the couple pennies short of gas prices because I'm always
putting gas on a card. And this might be like
a millennial mindset here, but I feel like we're in
a time where we're just becoming more and more of
a cash list society. So is the penny going away

(55:14):
really impacting businesses that much?

Speaker 2 (55:16):
Do we still see.

Speaker 5 (55:17):
That many people paying with cash specific coins and the
exact dollars or are we seeing more and more people
just using cards and more and more business almost not.

Speaker 2 (55:26):
Even accepting cash at times.

Speaker 9 (55:30):
Well, you have to accept cash, there's certain certain states,
certain statues you have to accept it. But about four
percent of the population of households out there are what's
called unbanked they don't have any means of anything besides cash,
and fourteen percent total or what's called underbanked, which means

(55:52):
they don't really have proper credits. So you're looking at
about one out of seven households that really rely on
cash all the time. Certain payments, certain industries, you'll see
a much higher percentage of people paying by debit. At
the pump, it's a little bit more than eighty percent.
Inside the store, for us, it's about fifty percent is

(56:13):
still cash because they're smaller ticket items about eight dollars
or something like that, so a little easier to pay
by cash than say, if you go to a grocery
store where it's going to be say one hundred dollars.
So you're right, we are moving to a cash list society,
but we're not there yet, and for certain people, we're
not there at all.

Speaker 1 (56:33):
So it occurs to me that there's probably two major
ways of doing this with rounding. One is as we
were talking about before, round up or roundown, depending on
if it's six seven or eight nine.

Speaker 2 (56:44):
Am I allowed to say sixty seven? Gina? No, you've
said it so many times.

Speaker 5 (56:47):
I guarantee all Jen Alpha is doing that little hand gesture.

Speaker 1 (56:50):
Oh man, Okay, So if it's six seven or eight nine,
you can round down, round up and it should be
a wash. There may be people, and I'll give you
an example here from the just like a psychology thing.
If you're if you're driving home and most of the
lights tend to be green, you probably won't notice. If
you're driving home and you hit red light after red
light after red light, you're gonna notice, and you're gonna

(57:12):
be cranky about it, even though statistically are the good
version of that happens just as much. So I'm wondering
if customers maybe will be more annoyed by the round
up from eight to nine then they will be pleased
by the round down from six and seven. And if so,
is that a factor for you guys, because the uh,

(57:33):
the other option would be just simply round everything down,
but maybe raise the price of everything by a penny
or two.

Speaker 2 (57:41):
What are your thoughts?

Speaker 9 (57:44):
Yeah, so I think you describe human beings perfectly, and
that's that's not a negative, but when they're when you're
faced with a positive and a negative, usually you know,
you're more bothered by the negative than you are pleased
by the positive. I'm describing at least, but probably a
lot of people listening too. So that's that's why it's

(58:05):
important that that nationally we communicate this. So somebody that
is not reading the news, not listening to your show
walks in and it's like, wait, you just charged me
two cents more. I don't get this, and uh so
you know, it'll take time for people to get used
to this, and that's why we need national communications, you know.

(58:26):
And I've done nobody needs to hear math that people
don't like math, but I've gone through all the calculations,
and you know, people were asking like, will this require
more nickels? Will this require more dimes? Oddly, it will
not require more nickels. It will not require more dimes.
It will require more quarters, and obviously it takes out
some pennies. So, like I said, people don't like math,

(58:47):
I'm not going to go further than that. But then
there's also people I said, well, if we're getting rid
of the penny and nobody likes likes the nickel too,
can we do that as well? And that that's like,
let's set that aside for another day. Let's just deal
with a penny right now and get that right and
then people can talk about the nicol. Is the next
less love today?

Speaker 1 (59:09):
Yeah, and that'll be coming because Nichols costs something like
thirteen cents to make, so that'll be the next conversation.

Speaker 2 (59:15):
Jeff Leonard is vice president for.

Speaker 1 (59:16):
Media and Strategic Communications for the National Association of Convenience Stores.
And if you are a math nerd, the math thing
he was talking about is up on my blog at
Rosskominski dot com, so you can go check it out.

Speaker 2 (59:28):
It's actually super interesting if you're a math nerd. Thanks
for your time, Jeff, I appreciate it. Thank you guys.

Speaker 1 (59:34):
All Right, so, Gina, I wanted to ask you if
you mentioned earlier in the show something I've been thinking
about for a couple of days, Denver home prices, Colorado
real estate prices. I'd love to hear more from you
about that, along with whatever else you got for us
in the news. Gina sent me the story. Here's the headline,
from Newsweek video app that allows Dead to live on

(59:57):
compared to Dystopian show.

Speaker 2 (01:00:00):
And by the way, the video.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
Associated with this, if you want to see what we're
going to talk about here for a minute, is up
on the blog at Rosskiminsky dot com, which just redirects
to my Koa page. If you see Koa showing up
after you go to Rosskiminsky dot com, that's what's supposed
to happen. You go to today's blogcast and you can
go in there and find this video that we're talking about.
But Gina, I mean, you looked at it. You saw
this thing, wanting to describe it a little bit, and

(01:00:24):
I'm I'm I'm torn on this.

Speaker 2 (01:00:26):
I don't I don't know.

Speaker 5 (01:00:27):
I mean, it is it is truly a Black Mirror episode.
If you've ever watched that show, it is literally exactly
what they're talking about. And you correct me if I
if I understood this, if I'm looking at it the
right way, this is almost a way where you can
have a loved one record a video before they pass
and then they're able to use that to then translate

(01:00:49):
it into AI.

Speaker 2 (01:00:50):
The video literally.

Speaker 5 (01:00:51):
Shows oh mom, can you play the piano? And she's
pretending to play the piano. She's live at the time
and you know, tell me.

Speaker 2 (01:00:57):
Tell me. Oh, and then the whole video is then.

Speaker 5 (01:00:59):
Her having a child and hearing her mom talk about
her being pregnant and oh, you you used to love
when I hummed to you as a kid and stuff like.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
That when you were you know.

Speaker 5 (01:01:10):
And so it's truly the way of people trying to
connect with their deceased loved ones through AI, but also
using their actual time when they were alive to kind
of create it for sure.

Speaker 2 (01:01:26):
I mean, that's definitely what it is. I mean, it's
almost it's a feeling.

Speaker 1 (01:01:29):
Is almost like you're having a face time with someone, yeah, right,
except that person's not there.

Speaker 2 (01:01:33):
That person is just.

Speaker 5 (01:01:34):
Like the version where it's like, okay, we take a
picture of Ross, we upload it to AI, we make
a talk. It is like we took a two minute
video of you talking about whatever I want you to
talk about when you're no longer here, and then they're
able to create it and even build off of it
more and it is like a FaceTime video of your
just communicating with a dead loved one.

Speaker 1 (01:01:54):
It seems ultra realistic. I will say so. I think
I think you described it right. I guess I'd probably
modify one thing just a little. These days, you would
not believe how little information they need at the beginning
to create this person. So so you probably don't need
to have your loved one intentionally make the video when
they're alive or whatever. Like if you caught your loved

(01:02:15):
one just as part of a family video and you
got eleven seconds of her talking as probably enough. It
is unbelievable how these programs can you know, can interpolate.
But I mean, my parents are both alive, my grandparents.
I don't think there's any video of them anywhere. But

(01:02:38):
would I want that? Or if eventually, you know, my
parents will pass away, would I want to do?

Speaker 2 (01:02:46):
Would you want?

Speaker 1 (01:02:47):
Well, it's like it's partly appealing and partly creepy.

Speaker 5 (01:02:50):
I think it's the fact that obviously we tie anything
to AI nowadays people are a little skeptical, but you
think about it, and a lot of people have saved
voice memos of you know, phone calls of loved ones
who have passed, or I've seen people that do almost
like the build a bear thing where it's like then
you have the stuffed animal with a recording of your
you know, past loved ones saying I love you or

(01:03:12):
whatever whatever you could do with things like that. People
memorialize in different ways, just not through a video standpoint.
I've had a couple of funerals literally this year, and
I can tell you right now that I don't think
I would like to see a video of a past
loved one telling me, Wow, it's so great that you're
now on Roskominsky on the News with Gina Gandik.

Speaker 2 (01:03:30):
This is awesome. I love it. I think that would
really just be odd.

Speaker 5 (01:03:34):
I don't think that's I think you want to have
memories in the past as good memories and not try
to like resurrect them in a way of like continuing
the connection after life.

Speaker 1 (01:03:45):
I don't know, so going down the same road that
you're going down, I think what would concern me about it.
You know a lot of people, and you hear most
of our kids these days, AI is becoming their friend, right,
and sometimes their friend is telling them very dangerous stuff.
And you have these lawsuits about kids killing themselves and
all this. But but you don't have to get you know,
that dark about it. But what I wonder about is

(01:04:09):
what if you've got AI mom, right, and your your
mom's passed away. Now you've got AI mom, and your
mom was always a close friend and confidante, And now
you ask AI mom for advice about something.

Speaker 2 (01:04:24):
Oh right.

Speaker 1 (01:04:25):
Yeah, And even if you gave the AI a bunch
of let's say, old voicemails from your mom that you
never deleted from your phone, still that's not really gonna
tell AI how your mom would think about it. And
that's a thing I wonder about, Like you, it looks.

Speaker 2 (01:04:41):
Like your mom. Yeah, that's a good point.

Speaker 1 (01:04:43):
And are you gonna take that advice like it's your mom,
Because it's one thing.

Speaker 5 (01:04:47):
To like hear your mom say, wow, I'm so happy
you're getting married. Like if that was something that you
really knew you were gonna miss on your wedding day.

Speaker 2 (01:04:53):
I get that.

Speaker 5 (01:04:54):
But if it it truly is like, hey, I'm in
this situation.

Speaker 2 (01:04:57):
Can you help me out? That's AI at that point.

Speaker 5 (01:05:01):
That's truly just AI helping to formulate in the version
of your mom to give you the advice. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:05:06):
And you know, if AI had enough information about a person,
like if AI listened to our show for a long time,
it actually probably would be able to answer a question
or give advice the way you or I might actually
do it, but not Mom who they It.

Speaker 2 (01:05:24):
Just doesn't have that information.

Speaker 1 (01:05:25):
So it's going to be making it up as it
goes along, which you know, as you said, AI does
that already.

Speaker 2 (01:05:30):
Yeah, so I don't. I don't know. I don't. I'm
torn about it. I'm really torn.

Speaker 5 (01:05:35):
It is what this app is called.

Speaker 2 (01:05:38):
It's too too WAI. Yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:05:43):
Maybe it's supposed to be two way or trying to
be like yeah, two way, but.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Yeah, I don't know once you watch the video. So
when I'm like, all right, this is this is pretty weird.
So let me ask you.

Speaker 1 (01:05:56):
Listeners text us at five six six nine zero and
I'll ask you a very simple question. If you could
create an AI of a deceased loved one and not
just a voice but video so you could talk to
the AI as if it were a FaceTime conversation with someone,
would you do it and who.

Speaker 2 (01:06:13):
Would you do it with? Or four? When we come back,
I want to share with you.

Speaker 1 (01:06:20):
A very upset voicemail that we got from a listener
about something I talked about earlier in the show This
AI you know, dead parent AI thing Gina and the
answers are actually all over the place. I'll give you
a couple from the text line. Absolutely not. It would
be artificial by definition, and expect it would alter the

(01:06:43):
fond memories I have. Here's another one. Hell no, that's
creepier than a sex bot. I think it would be
cool for historical figures like Nicola Tesla or Henry Ford.

Speaker 2 (01:06:54):
Dragon. I really liked your take. Can you just reiterate
that I thought it was right on point.

Speaker 3 (01:06:59):
I just worry that it would mess with the natural
of order things that things are supposed to die. Pets, friends,
family members, grandparents, They're supposed to die. So if you're
as much as I would love to have another conversation
with my grandfather and my grandmother, I know it's I
just it just can't.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
So it helps you get over things and move on.
Things need to die. I'm sorry.

Speaker 1 (01:07:22):
Yeah, I'm kind of with producer Dragon on that, but
I also think I'll share one more and then, you know,
I want to get more of more of your take
on this, but check this one out.

Speaker 2 (01:07:31):
I'm this listener text. I'm already building my own local.

Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
AI model that will allow me to make a video
of my dad who passed away of als a couple
of years ago. Not sure what I'm going to do
with it, but I recorded a conversation we had while
he was in hospice as a vocal reference. Yeah, it's
kind of creepy for some but I'll see how I
feel about it when it's done. Wow. H I think

(01:07:58):
there's a lot of that out there, just in the world,
and not necessarily on our text line, but out in
the world. I think there are a lot of people
and I get this right, and I'm probably actually in
this place too most of the time, saying with regarding AI,
let's try it and see how it goes, and we'll
see how it feels, and I can I can imagine
it with this, because it could be both comforting and

(01:08:20):
creepy at the same time. I very much like Dragon's point,
though you want to you got more on your brain
on this.

Speaker 5 (01:08:25):
I think the last takeaway from me is the fact
that in a sense, it isn't nothing new in the
way that, like I remember, there used to be an
app where you could take old photos and like I'm
talking before video, you could do great great great great
grandparents old photos and then make them walk around, make
them move and things like that, and that was pretty
much the same thing. Or I've seen people who are

(01:08:46):
at weddings and their dad has passed and then all
of a sudden people take a recording that they were
able to make of the dad and then use it
to alter it to talk about the husband and things
like that. There's definitely ways where people are doing this now.
I think it's the way that this app is really
platformed in saying, uh, you can continue the conversation. Literally,

(01:09:09):
the dead mom is reading a story, a bedtime story
to the new sun that she has never met.

Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
That's the part that starts to get a little a
little creepy. Yeah, I agree.

Speaker 1 (01:09:21):
Anyway, think thanks to everybody who texted in really really
interesting responses and people on on both sides of this thing.

Speaker 2 (01:09:29):
I want to I want to take a couple of
minutes with you.

Speaker 1 (01:09:32):
First.

Speaker 2 (01:09:32):
Let me start with a with a macro concept.

Speaker 1 (01:09:35):
One of the great enjoyments of this job is interacting
with listeners, debating with listeners, whether it's you know, a
brief thing by text, or maybe sometimes listener will send
an email. By the way, you can email me at
Ross at Koadnver dot com.

Speaker 7 (01:09:54):
R O. S.

Speaker 2 (01:09:54):
S at koadnver dot com if you want to shoot
me a note, and I especially like it.

Speaker 1 (01:10:00):
Actually when folks disagree, I think I think everybody learns
more from conversations about disagreement. You know, I don't think
you're going to learn a heck of a lot if
everybody around you, or almost everybody around you, is going
to just agree with what you say. And earlier on
the show, so sometimes we get in these disagreements regarding

(01:10:23):
a topic that came up, and sometimes it really makes
me think, you know, did I have this wrong? Did
I miss something important? Should I rethink my position? I mean,
in a more extreme case, should I apologize to listeners
for saying something that wrong? That that last doesn't happen often,
but it's happened. And if I get something wrong, I
make sure to say so. Earlier this morning, we spoke

(01:10:49):
with an attorney as two hours ago, we spoke with
an attorney from Pacific Legal Foundation who represented an actress
who is one woman show was supposed to put on
a play at a public library where she portrays historical figures.
I think they're all women who she portrays of whatever race.

(01:11:11):
And she was going to do a one woman play
where two of the historical figures she was going to
represent were African American. Now, just to be very clear,
there's no black face, no makeup, nothing like that. You know,
maybe when she goes from one character to another, she
puts on a different jacket or a different hat, so
you know she's a different person. The library said we

(01:11:34):
feel uncomfortable with you portraying a black woman and Pacific
legal and canceled the show, and she didn't agree. The
actress didn't agree to change to only do white women.
She said, this isn't about race, this is about historical figures.
And you know, if I would, I not be allowed

(01:11:54):
to portray, let's say, a person with a terminal illness
because I don't have one.

Speaker 2 (01:11:58):
So that and she refused to go along with it.
The lawyer represented her.

Speaker 1 (01:12:02):
The library eventually back down because they knew they were
going to lose in court, and they allowed her to
do the show.

Speaker 2 (01:12:08):
And my take on that is pretty simple.

Speaker 1 (01:12:12):
The library was wrong, and a gentleman named Robert called
in to somewhere here at the station and it showed
up in somebody's voicemail. Didn't call the studio line, but
called somewhere it showed up in voicemail. The voicemail was
forwarded to me, and this guy, Robert was very upset

(01:12:32):
with me, and he said that here, let me, let
me just find this here.

Speaker 2 (01:12:39):
He said that some people I think he means me now,
don't even know how.

Speaker 1 (01:12:47):
Racist they are if they can't understand why that is offensive.
And again, and I promise you, I'm not being sarcastic here.
I don't understand why it's a fan. I really don't.
And I'm not trying to be defensive. I'm very open
minded to thinking I may have something wrong when you
tell me, maybe I have something wrong. But on this one, no, no,

(01:13:10):
there's absolutely no reason to take offense at an actress
or actor of some particular race doing a portrayal, and
especially one that is very honoring of that other person,
of a historical figure, treating that historical figure with honor

(01:13:31):
and respect and injecting some depth and bringing that person
out to the audience.

Speaker 2 (01:13:37):
There is nothing offensive about that.

Speaker 1 (01:13:40):
There is nothing offensive about a white person portraying a
black person, for example. And by the way, were you
offended by Hamilton? Were you offended with one of the
most successful musicals of all time? With people of color
representing the white American founders. I wasn't offended by that.

(01:14:01):
If you weren't offended by that, then you probably shouldn't
be offended by this. I really love having these kinds
of conversations, and I really am super open minded about
maybe I have something wrong.

Speaker 2 (01:14:14):
But in this case, despite.

Speaker 1 (01:14:15):
How angry Robert was and the names that he called
me that I can't read on the air, I'm confident
I had it right.

Speaker 2 (01:14:22):
Robert. I do hope you'll keep listening.

Speaker 1 (01:14:24):
By the way, Welcome to Ross on the News with
Gina with Bruser Dragon behind the glass. I have this
thing that's called a show sheet. It's a Google document,
and I put stuff in it, like what I plan
to talk about, and Dragon usually looks at it and
chooses music. Often will choose music related to what I
put in the show sheet that I'm about to talk
about next. But because I am who I am, which

(01:14:45):
means squirrel, it means I am easily distracted and don't
follow my own show sheet. He'll play music about something
that I really wasn't planning to talk about next, and
then I have to decide whether I'm actually going to
talk about it.

Speaker 8 (01:14:57):
So in this case, fast Cars. I'm going to put
it off till tomorrow, but also can we mention that
that's all it says on the show? She yes, no
other information, just fast cars.

Speaker 2 (01:15:08):
Yeah, I'll do it. So Dragon did pick the perfect song?

Speaker 1 (01:15:10):
All right, I'll give you a little teas and then
i'll tell you more about it tomorrow.

Speaker 2 (01:15:13):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:15:14):
Day before yesterday, for the first time ever in my life,
I got to drive a Ferrari.

Speaker 2 (01:15:18):
It was insane.

Speaker 1 (01:15:20):
I'll tell you more about it tomorrow because I just
want to do ninety seconds here on still the biggest
news story of the day, and I feel like I
haven't given it quite enough attention. Gina has talked about it,
the Epstein thing and the you know where we are
right now, and I just want to give you a
little bit of insight on the on the Epstein situation,

(01:15:40):
just like literally for one minute. So President Trump signed
the bill and so it's it's now law, and I
just want to make sure folks understand what the bill
really means, and what the bill really means is why
the politics around this are not going to go away
as much as you and I might hope. So, first

(01:16:01):
of all, it means they've got thirty days to the
Department of Justice has thirty days to release files from
the investigation. But the other thing that is really important
to keep in mind is they still have quite a
bit of leeway in two particular areas what to redact,
meaning the stuff that gets blacked out, and so then

(01:16:22):
you get the piece of paper, but there's a bunch
of stuff blacked out, so you don't know who they're
talking about, or maybe even what they're talking about.

Speaker 2 (01:16:28):
It depends how much they redact. Sometimes with some stuff
that's somewhat highly classified but gets.

Speaker 1 (01:16:34):
Released anyway, you will see most or even all of
entire pages redacted. I don't know that that'll happen here,
but stuff will come out with redactions that will frustrate
some people there, and there'll be some people who honestly
want the information. There'll be other people who just complain
about it for political reasons.

Speaker 2 (01:16:52):
The other thing is that the Department of.

Speaker 1 (01:16:54):
Justice can and should refuse to release documents that relate
to any ongoing investigation. And so to the extent that
President Trump just insisted on expanding the ongoing investigations around
the Epstein thing to include more Democrats and to include JP, Morgan.

Speaker 2 (01:17:11):
Chase, and other stuff.

Speaker 1 (01:17:12):
So now DJ is still looking and they're going to
say we can't release this stuff.

Speaker 2 (01:17:16):
We're still looking at this.

Speaker 1 (01:17:18):
So what you're gonna have is you're gonna have some
information come out that will get some play, that will
get some political shenanigans around it.

Speaker 2 (01:17:26):
But then I think the bigger thing.

Speaker 1 (01:17:28):
Is people are gonna come up with all kinds of
conspiracy theories about what isn't coming out.

Speaker 2 (01:17:34):
So now that President Trump signed the bill into law,
don't think.

Speaker 1 (01:17:37):
That that means it's the end of the story. It
definitely definitely isn't. Have a wonderful rest of your Thursday.
I'll see tomorrow, Gina, all right, and I'll see you tomorrow.

Speaker 2 (01:17:48):
Dragon. Have a great day.