The Howie Carr Radio Network
A Mere 20 Years in Prison, Says Biden DOJ: Mark Smith joins the show | 4.16.24 - The Howie Carr Show Hour 3
After another day in the Chump Line's driver's seat, Toby Leary of Cape Gun Works welcomes Mark Smith of Four Boxes Diner to the show to discuss the Supreme Court hearing in Washington today. Mark breaks down the argument from Alito that exposed the hypocrisy of the Leftist Department of Justice.
- Duration:
- 36m
- Broadcast on:
- 16 Apr 2024
- Audio Format:
- mp3
Today's podcast is brought to you by Howie's new book Paperboy. To order today, go to howiecarshow.com and click on store. Better strap yourself in. It's time for the Howie Car Show. And class resentment. She's not bitter! Is a lot what anti-intellectualism and elitism is. Who says I'm not bitter? Is what is driving many of these anti-establishment? Which are Trump voters? Are anti-establishment voters? This may be not as bitter as I'm going to be 10 years from now, but... Live from the Matthews Brothers Studios. As you know, Iran launched an unprecedented aerial attack against Israel, and we mounted an unprecedented military effort to defend Israel. Trump has risen by and considered maybe beefing up the public Iran posture to be more than just one word. You're referring to "don't". We'll say "don't". No! Do it at last! Very well! If you will not assist us voluntarily... Don't. No! Never! No trouble! Rump swabs, hacks, and moon bats beware! It's... Howie Car! All right, it's time for one of my favorite segments on the show, the Chumpline, which is the recorded voicemail messaging service of the Howie Car Show. And global unrest is battering the food supply chain and the energy markets. It's incumbent on you to be prepared. Get ready with ReadyWise. Go to ReadyWise.com and use code Howie20 to get 20% off your next purchase. Let's roll it! You remember, I thought I had switched on the Howie Car Show every minute instead of here at Timothy Leary telling me to tune in? Every minute am I having an acid flashback? Yeah! No comment on that. And no relation to Tim, by the way. Just think, if we're lucky to live long enough, a transgender runner will someday win the Women's Division of the Boston Marathon. Yeah, and I inappropriately accused a transgender runner of being in charge of prison reform, and I apologize, that was supposed to be Kim Kardashian. But yeah, someday I'm sure a male will win the Women's Division of the Boston Marathon. Hey Toby, you're gonna tell people about the time your producer, Jar Jar Jar, visited Cape Gun Works. He showed up in his Batman costume with a black cape and Gatling gun because he took the name literally, Cape Gun Works. What a loser! Oh boy, I can neither confirm nor deny that story. No actually, it didn't happen. All these shams against Trump are starting to lose steam, which has all the Democrats beginning to scream. "We must not fail to put Trump in jail and complete their assault on the American dream." Well said, Limerick Guy. I think that was Limerick Guy, right? Yeah. Couldn't have said it better myself and made it rhyme for sure. Saying Trump fell asleep at his trial today is as believable as saying Biden held an impromptu 30-minute presser and was absolutely articulate, lucid, and profound. Yeah, which is more likely to happen. Trump falling asleep in the middle of the press conference or Joe Biden giving us a 20-minute press conference. I'd be happy with a five-minute press conference. Like if he took five minutes worth of questions from un-preselected reporters, I'd do a victory lap and take that as a win. Boom! I was practically raised in the vegan community. That's why my big name in college was Soy like Joe. I'm the campaign trial presenter. My nickname was Impossible Biden. The legislation I authored was known as "I can't believe it's not sausage" and I'd even convinced Hunter to support nutritional yeast instead of Parmesan. Oh man, you can go so many different directions with that. And then, in a city near you, very soon after. Up in New York, they're burning flags and chanting death to America. Wait, I thought Biden's campaign rally was going to be in Pennsylvania today. Yeah, I think they got the wrong memo. And by the way, I think I heard Grace commenting on this. The person who was burning the flag in New York probably wouldn't be welcome in Gaza if you know what I mean. It might be identified as someone who knows Caitlyn Jenner. And I would say that they know not what they do, right? They're sitting there. Free bows, not free bows. Go to Gazans, see what happens. How do you know that Brandon don't wear Nike? Because their motto is do it. Oh boy. Yep. They should have a new campaign. That sounds like a really good because it was like reverse psychology, right? Don't. And they did. So maybe we could like trick the sneaker company into using that same reverse psychology. That could be their latest swoosh. Don't. And then they show someone like accomplishing great feats. I might be onto something with that or thank you. Jump line call. If you missed Gale King's prime time show, don't worry. You can still miss her every morning too. I missed it. And you know, probably going to miss the next one and the next one and the next one. That was your last jump line message. Thank you for calling Howie Carr. You chump. All right. That was the jump line message service of the Howie Carr show and global unrest is battering the food supply chain and the energy markets. It's incumbent on you to be prepared. Get ready with ready wise. Go to readywise.com and use code Howie 20 to get 20% off your next purchase. That was fun. So eight four four five hundred forty two forty two is the number. And I think it's great how the chump line message service brings up so many great points and you know, in a fun way that we can laugh, right? Because unfortunately a lot of this news isn't really funny. It's it's actually infuriating. But I think that good will prevail. I think that a lot of the people who are seeking the destruction of America and now overtly saying it chanting death to America while they burn the flag aren't going to prevail. I don't believe they will. I'm very optimistic and I've always been an optimistic person. So I think that's going to continue. But interesting news that came up. Grace actually handed this to me and it's the court is set to hear arguments over the release of the covenant shooters manifesto. So there's already been some stuff that's leaked through. I know some of the sheriffs that were involved in that leaked it out and whatnot. But it's amazing to me that there's a court that it even has to be in court. Like that should be released before the name of the shooter and the picture of the shooter and what gender the shooter is and everything else. I think all of that should just not be glorified. Like I won't say the name. But the fact that they left the manifesto I think is very telling. And you see into the mindset of this shooter and the fact that we got to have a court battle over it to get it released is ridiculous. It says the Nashville Tennessee court set to hear long awaited arguments over whether or not to release documents that belong to the transgender identifying shooter who murdered six people at the covenant school which have been kept sealed from the public for more than a year. Included is not only the shooter's manifesto but also 14 different home videos, 20 journals, a suicide note and a psych folder with medical information about the shooter. There's three folders of information on school shootings and firearms courses as well as a memoir and notes written by the shooter. On the other side is a group of families from the covenant school that filed a motion to block the release of the documents arguing that their release could further traumatize those who were personally affected by the shooting. Yeah, you know, that is sad and not that they have to continue to go through that trauma. It's every time this is brought up. But I do believe that it's important to release that kind of stuff. And let's put it this way. If it was some Trump follower or something like that, it would be front page news. It would be on every channel throughout the country. So I promised to a talk here in the five o'clock hour we got a guest at the bottom of the hour, Mark Smith from the Four Boxes Diner and let's go to Joe on the phone real quick before the break. Good afternoon, Toby. Good afternoon. Question for you. You got a bad guy coming across the border. Okay, he's just got a rat sheet as long as your arm is. And he comes into the United States. Nobody knows he's here. Now, he's looking for money. He's looking for anything, anything to harm you or any kind of money or whatnot. Now, he doesn't know that you're carrying. Now, if he makes a lunge at you, that's considered, that's considered a move on his end. But you shoot him. Now, is that considered a legitimate killing or is that considered a oh, well, whoops, because nobody knows he's here. I don't know. There's there's no like blanket answer for every scenario, Joe, like you can't say, oh, just because he's an illegal alien. Because frankly, this is something that will come to fruition someday. And it's already happened with one court that our constitution acknowledges that these rights are endowed by our creator. So our rights, our human rights, they're not specific to America, although we're the only country that celebrates them. And so that person, if they, I lost you when you said he made it makes a defensive maneuver as he lung lunges at you and you shoot him, I think that's an offensive maneuver. But if he's coming here to kill me, I don't care if he's from this country or from another country, if he's a citizen or non-citizen, you're going to have to answer for your actions. Let's put it that way. And I think that's universal, no matter what the case is. But so I'm not going to make a blanket statement to a hypothetical scenario. But if someone's here and tries to kill me, whether or not they're illegal or not, you've got to do what you've got to do, right? So that's really the answer is make sure you're in the right no matter what you do in the protection of life and others. All right, we'll be right back. You're listening to the Howie Car Show. I'm Toby Larry. Don't go away. Howie Car. Howie Car is back. Welcome back to the Howie Car Show. And it's time for the poll question. Today's poll question is brought to you by MyPillow. I love MyPillow's products. I sleep with their pillows. I wear their slippers. I dry off with their towels. Now you can enjoy all of their products with great discounts by using the code Howie at MyPillow.com. From Pillows, Towels, Slippers, and even their Giza Dreamcheats, go to MyPillow.com and use code Howie for amazing discounts. Matt, what is the poll question and what are the results so far? What should happen to protesters that shut down bridges and airports? Nothing. Same as GN6s. People should be allowed to remove them. They should be charged with a felony or they should be held financially responsible for damage caused. I'm going to say we should be able to drag them out of the way. 9% agree with you. 12% say you should be held financially responsible for damage caused. 36% say they should be charged with a felony and 43% say same as GN6s. I guess my heart is in that place but I also want the convenience of solving the problem. I'd be in favor of just you falling them off to the side of the road. That was the other thing. I get it on the Golden Gate Bridge. That's a little much to toss them over the rail. I know there's people that would say no it isn't but I believe that that is too much. However, when you look at a lot of the other places that they were jamming up like the road to the airport, drag them off the road. Anyway, let's go to the phone, try and sneak in a few calls here. Bob, you're next on the Howie Car Show. Hi, Toby. You know me as Echo Man as well. Hey, how's it going? That's too bad. Love your store. I have a question about open Kerry and Maine. Is it against the law to conceal Kerry and Maine without a LTC? No, it is not. It is a constitutional Kerry state in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont. There's a bunch of Maine legislation in Maine that just passed in the Senate. I didn't even get to that yet in the stack of stuff we might get to it in the six o'clock hour. But as of right now, they are a constitutional Kerry state so you can carry open or concealed. Okay, do you want me to give you an echo for the listeners? Go for it quickly. All right. Maine, I have, have, have your attention, judge them, please. There you go, buddy. All right. Thanks, Bob. I appreciate it. Do we have time for one more or no? Dave, you're next on the Howie Car Show. Go ahead, Dave. All right. I'll keep it quick. Two things. First of all, that's the Howie t-shirt. If you haven't thought of it already, just say, have the word don't. Maybe a picture of Biden holding his head in his hands. You know what I mean? That's famous picture. Great idea. Perfect. Perfect. And but the other thing is that one thing you'll never see, there should be at the very top of anybody's preparedness list, even before ready wise, is a loaded firearm and ammunition. And you'll never find that on any government publication whatsoever. But we know that that is the very first thing that you should have because it'll protect what you got. And in real desperation, it'll get what you need. Yeah, I would, I would agree that the gun is a very efficient tool for that. And thanks for the call, Dave. However, I will say that mindset trumps the tool. So in other words, you know, you look at what happened in Australia, there were people who actually ran in that mall towards that guy with the knife. So they were putting their safety second for the greater good of trying to stop this threat. And ultimately, it was the tool of a gun that stopped the threat. So I agree with you, the efficiency of that is the best choice. So take Dave's advice. All right, we'll be right back. This is the Howie Car Show. Live from the Matthews Brothers Studios. Welcome back to the Howie Car Show. I'm Toby Leary sitting in for Howie. And I've enjoyed myself these past two days. So hopefully you've enjoyed the show. 844 or 542 42 is the number. And as promised, I'm really happy to have joining us on the line. Professor Mark Smith, he's a constitutional attorney, does a lot of videos in the 2A space with the YouTube channel. And on X, he is the name of it is Four Boxes Diner. I've had him on my show a few times on rapid fire. And I like how he explains the law around the Second Amendment space. But he's also not a one trick pony, are you, Mark? Thanks for joining us, Mark. How are you doing today? Hey, Toby. Thanks for having me on an exciting day in the world of the Supreme Court. It's not a good day for the left. I tell you that after this morning's oral argument in the Trump case. Yes, no kidding. Why don't you bring us up to speed on that? What's your breakdown? What's your feeling on what is going to happen on that? Well, this is quite important, and it hasn't gotten quite the coverage it should. But it will when the decision is issued. So one of the critical pieces of leverage that Jack Smith, the special prosecutor, and the Biden Department of Justice have been deploying against both President Trump in the D.C. obstruction case where he's been indicted and against a whole host of January 6 protesters. In fact, over 300 of them is they have brought in. This is the Biden Department of Justice has tried to deploy a financial fraud statute to claim that delaying the count of the electoral votes in Washington in Congress on January 6 constitute a corrupt obstruction of justice, which is a consequence. If you're convicted of the statute, Toby, guess what? You get to go to prison for a mere 20 years. That's all. So this is a very very scary statute to be convicted under, and this has been a big piece of leverage that Jack Smith, the prosecutor against Trump, and the Biden Department of Justice have been using in this DOJ cases against January 6 protesters. But today the Supreme Court argument as to whether or not this critical statute that DOJ has been using is even applicable here. And it's pretty clear there's at least six justices that think that the Department of Justice is out to lunch to think a financial fraud statute that arose from the Enron accounting scandals could somehow be used against political protesters on January 6 or President Trump. And this is clearly going to be a six to three, if not more, victory against the Department of Justice. And this is going to take away a lot of leverage from the Biden administration as they go after the January 6 people and President Trump. Because this is the one statute that if Trump's convicted under, he could go to jail for literally years and years. But once you knock this out, the Jack Smith cases look a lot less scary. Yeah. And what does that look like in reality, like as far as being charged with that is like take the J sixers, for example, and this obstruction, what does that look like? The fact that they were halting business from being conducted from regular order of business being conducted in the Capitol, is that the way that works? That's right, Toby. The way it works is the federal statute says that if you obstruct a legal proceeding by destroying documents or tampering with witnesses, then you're violating the statute and you go to prison. Now, the entire statute is about 14 people or deterring people from engaging in shenanigans in criminal cases, grand jury proceedings, and civil matters. And this is about court misbehavior. But what happened is, and this is a very interesting game, the Department of Justice and Biden try to play, is at the end of this statute, Toby, there's a reference there that says, or otherwise obstructs an official proceeding. So what DOJ says, well, this very vague language just is obstructs an official proceeding. The January six protesters delayed the count of the electoral votes on January six. That constitutes in our view an obstruction of an official proceeding, and now they get to go to jail for 20 years. But as Justice Roberts pointed out today, that's not how you read the statute. Because you don't just grab four words at the end of the statute and say, yeah, that applies anything. It points out that he's like, isn't this really about misbehavior in the context of a court case? What does this have to do with delaying a vote in Congress? And then the other judges weighed in, the Supreme Court Justice is also weighed in, Toby, and kind of indicated that, look, isn't it quite interesting that all sorts of people have been dragged out of the legislative chambers protesting this or that. And can you put all these people in prison for 20 years? I mean, just think about it for a second. All those people that were protesting and screaming and getting dragged out of the chambers, when, for example, Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the US Supreme Court, are you going to put them in prison? In fact, one hypothetical that came up, Toby, I thought this quite interesting, is that somebody even raised the question of could a lobbyist who's trying to prevent a statute from getting enacted? Could he potentially be viewed as obstructing an official proceeding? Even if he's doing it legally under the First Amendment, he could still, in theory, be charged. So really, the Supreme Court is clearly looking at the Department of Justice now. You can read the tea leaves, and they're going to shut all this down, which is really quite something, because if you take away the statute from the prosecutors in the January 6 cases, and against President Trump, you really have made the DOJ cases dwindle to not very much. Yeah, and there's also an element of selective prosecution with this regard. Like you just said, they obviously want to be able to prosecute the J-6ers and Trump to the fullest extent that they feel that they can, but yet you also have, you know, we saw in Nashville when they, it was inundated with people who wanted gun control passed, and they, like, squatted on the whole official proceedings. Then you have even people yesterday at the Trump hearing in New York City that were protesting the Palestinians and Israel and whatever, and you know, you're never going to see any of them charged with the same type of obstruction of an official proceeding. So, you know, does the selective enforcement of that weigh into this? Obviously, the Supreme Court is the ultimate word on it, but what about just as a defensive type of defense? Could the defense use the selective prosecution of this as part of their legal defense? Yes, Toby, I think you raised an excellent point, and I think maybe you need to go back and become a lawyer right now, because, in fact, Justice Neil Gorsuch. Today, Justice Neil Gorsuch during the argument literally asked, this is funny, because you know what he was referring, or clearly what he was referring to, he's like, let me ask you this, counsel. Let me ask you, if someone is in the U.S. Capitol and pulls a fire alarm to delay a vote, do they get to go to prison for 20 years under the statute? Now, we understand what he's referring to is because about a month or so ago, a Democratic Congressman, of course, pulled the fire alarm now as to why he did it. You can have that debate, but, you know, deal Gorsuch was very sensitive to the city flag it, just like you pointed out. And, of course, while they're going after the Trump supporters on January 6th, they're not going after others. In fact, this is a critical question I think it was asked by Justice Thomas. Justice Thomas, and I think Justice Alito both kind of alluded to this, Toby. They said, hey, can you give us another example where this federal statute has been used? In any kind of case, other than someone that's misbehaved, destroyed documents, tampered with witness in a civil legal case or a criminal legal case, can you give us any other circumstance where the Department of Justice has applied this statute with a 20-year prison term to anybody outside of, again, court cases. And DOJ said, well, no. And they said, well, how are you applying to care? And they said, well, January 6th is really a special case. This has never occurred before. Now, of course, that's who we, because there's been countless examples over the years of people have misbehaved and gotten dragged out of the Senate chamber or the House chamber because they were screaming. It happens. I don't want to say it all the time, but it's not unusual to see protesters in the Capitol doing something to get them arrested or dragged out. And none of these people have been charged under the statute, only the January 6th people and President Trump. But again, when you overplay your hand, sometimes bad things happen to you. And this is going to be, I think, another terrible blow to the Biden Department of Justice to their political prosecutions and to their anti-Trump efforts. It's clearly going to happen. And it's pretty clear this is what's going to go down in June when the Supreme Court issues they're ruling on this. And it's really going to make all the prosecutions look sketchy because they really are sketchy. Yeah, I got to tell you one thing that I wake up and think about as we live under this Biden administration and Department of Justice is, thank God the Republicans did the right thing under the Obama administration and did not confirm. I mean, yeah, Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court because he would not be an impartial Supreme Court justice if you ask me. I think it would be a much different court if you were there. Yeah, I think that's right. And we have to give great credit to Chuck Grassley, who is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, and Mitch McConnell, who is the Senate Majority Leader, to come together and say, we're simply not going to confirm or even hold hearings on Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. We're going to let the people decide what they want in November of 2016 and happily the people decided Donald Trump. And when people asked me, Toby, we can talk about the Second Amendment to, of course, people say, well, why do you support Donald Trump, and why did he do anything good for the Second Amendment? And I have many answers to that, but I think the most powerful answer is, well, they're all sitting on the Supreme Court. There's Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and Justice Neil Gorsuch, all of whom were in the majority in NYSERPA versus Bruin, and you don't have Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court. So, if you want to know why Donald Trump is good on the Second Amendment, among other things, you just got to name those three names and refer to the fact that it's not Merrick Garland. So, I agree, that made all the difference in American law and American society 100%, because if Merrick Garland was on the Supreme Court and had he replaced Justice Scalia, we'd have a much different court and not a court that respects the rule of law, and not a court that respects the Constitution, and not a court that respects the Second Amendment, we'd have a political partisan court that is nothing more than a legislature dressing in Black Road. Yeah, well said, and I think, you know, as we look at what's going on in the court system right now, I think that the Supreme Court, those members that you just mentioned, plus the others that make up the majority, ruling of, say, the Bruin decision, have taken it very serious, and I think that they actually do the heavy lifting of trying to get the decisions right, and they're not just there for their own political ambitions or try to, you know, carry the water for the political party that even put them there in the first place. I feel like they really take a really open-eyed approach to ruling on law, whatever it is that I've seen so far, and maybe I'm a little partisan, but I do get that impression that they take their job very serious. There's no doubt that the six originalists on the Supreme Court take their job seriously, and they respect, and this is the key, they understand that when they swear an oath to the United States Constitution, right, you don't swear an oath to the Biden administration or to the Trump administration. You swear an oath to the United States Constitution if you're a soldier, if you're in Congress, if you're a justice, that is the ultimate law, and they take that very seriously, and if there's liberal, if there's judicial precedents or anything that's inconsistent with the text of the Constitution, this court is going to aggressively protect the Constitution because it is our ultimate law, it's the Supreme law, and of course, they swear an oath to uphold it above all else when it comes to their job. Now, the left, of course, they play games because they view in what's known as the living Constitution, which is nothing more than an excuse to ignore the Constitution as it's written, they want to decide what the Constitution means, they don't want the Founding Fathers or the text of the Constitution to mean what it means, and you'd have a much different outcome, because at the end of the day, the left views courts as just another extension of the progressive movement, and when we the people don't do what they want, think about gay marriage, where Americans overwhelmingly rejected gay marriage all across the country over and over and over again, when we the people don't do what they the liberals want, yes, what happens, they used to lateral the ball to the court, and then the court would do what the left wing wants, and we saw that when the Supreme Court issued a decision in favor of gay marriage instead of the Constitution, all right, and of course, they're very upset that they've lost their ball, and they cannot control the courts like they used to, that's why they're talking about things like court backing. Yes, exactly. All right, we'll be right back with Professor Mark Smith. Don't go away. It's fascinating discussion. This is the Howie Car Show. The Howie Car Show returns after this. He's Howie Car. Welcome back. Toby Leary here, sitting in for Howie Car, having a fascinating discussion with Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney who has a YouTube channel, Four Boxes Diner, so you want to check that out. And Mark, I wanted to get your take real quick if we could on a bunch of stuff happen yesterday. I believe it was in Oregon under ballot initiative 114, if our listeners don't know what that is, it was basically a ballot initiative that passed that was an assault weapons ban, magazine capacity ban, and it got struck down, and it seems to be for good, right, if I'm reading that correctly? Well, so far, so good. So what happened is Oregon, in a very, very close thought it was something like, you know, it was really like 51% to 49%, it was I think even closer than that, it'll be in a referendum, enacted a crazy gun control law that included essentially bans on semiautomatic rifles, AR 15 style rifles, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds that are political propaganda references to large capacity magazines, and all sorts of other insanity. Now, since that, there have been federal lawsuits and state lawsuits. The federal lawsuits have been in front of really liberal federal judges who've done terrible. They misconstrued the law, it got it all wrong, and they've upheld the referendum as being constitutional. But the good news is there's a very strong state court judge out there that said that this is clearly unconstitutional under the federal constitution and the state's constitution for the right to keep the bar. And so far, the Oregon Supreme Court is basically deferring to the lower court's decision. So far, that this statute that was enacted by referendum is unconstitutional under the second amendment and of the Oregon's provision for the right to keep in bear arms. So in Oregon, that referendum in terms of the gun ban has not gone into effect, but it's still conceivable that the Oregon Supreme Court could change its mind. It has an opportunity to do so, but so far, it's all the indications it's given are, yeah, if it's commonly on firearm or commonly on magazine, you can ban it just because somebody doesn't like it. So, so far, so good in Oregon. And of course, you know, other states, these blue states, are trying to do more and more gun control law. Because I think what's happened, Toby, is that the, and we've talked about this before on your excellent show, the anti-gun movement is really consolidating their efforts in those states where they control the Democrats control, the governor's office, they control both houses and the court system. So they're really just spending most of their resources in a handful of deep, deep, blue states to try to enact gun control law there. And that's why you're seeing all these cases coming up to the Supreme Court from these deep, blue states that California, New Jersey, New York, and so on. And, you know, that's where the effort is. That's where the push is. The good news is in the red states, we are having advancing after advancement of permalous carry. And that's a good thing that the enemy is on the run and they're consolidating their efforts in a handful of terrible anti-gun deep, blue states. Yeah, it seems like it has migrated a bit and it spreads like a disease, though, like we're seeing legislation in Maine now as a knee jerk response to the Lewiston shooter. And, you know, see it in Colorado, which used to be a very red state, then when purple, and now I'd say it's a blue state. And unfortunately, they're a very organized, well-funded group. And, Mark, why don't you tell everyone how they can follow you and where they can, you know, get your books and whatnot and follow up on some of your great content. Sure. Well, I have the Four Boxes Diner YouTube channel that has about 150,000 subscribers. We've been track all the details of the Second Amendment litigation, what's going on in the courts in great detail. People can also follow me on X at Four Boxes Diner. And, yeah, that's where they can get a home to me best. And, of course, I have another book coming out very soon. I couldn't be announced. That'd be my age book. So, we keep on working for freedom. All right. This is The Howie Car Show. Thanks so much. We'll be right back after this.