IRAN ATTACKS US BASE! All Hell Breaks Loose as Trump MAGA Implosion Grows, & The MrBeast AI Problem
PDS Published 06/23/2025
-
The US dropped more than a dozen of its biggest bombs on Iran and there is so much we need to talk about.
Right, how did we get here, was this even legal, and what happens next?
But first off, let’s talk about the attack itself.
Right, to be specific, you had seven B-2 stealth bombers dropping fourteen 30,000-pound “Massive Ordinance Penetrators” – better known as bunker-busters – on the most heavily fortified nuclear site in Iran.
With satellite photos now showing several holes where the massive bombs punched deep holes in the rock.[]
And then, you had Navy ships launching 30 Tomahawk missiles from submarines toward Iran's other two major nuclear facilities.
With Trump revealing that an attack had taken place after the plans were outside of Iranian airspace and on their way home, writing on social media:
“There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!” []
And later, saying this in an address to the nation:
“Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”
“Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all by far—and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed, and skill.” (BYTE: 1:03-1:09, 2:56-3:13)
But of course, peace? It’s nowhere in sight.
Right, Israel isn’t letting up at all, and the US is bracing for a potential retaliation by Iran – which, for now, has only responded with more attacks on Israel.
Plus, despite Trump’s claims, it’s far from clear that these Iranian nuclear sites “have been completely and totally obliterated.”
Right, withDefense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, saying an initial battle-damage assessment showed only “severe damage and destruction.” []
With the Israeli military’s initial analysis also concluding that the site hit with the bunker-busters suffered serious damage but had not been completely destroyed. []
And then, according to two Israeli officials, there was also evidence, that Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days –
Including more than 800 of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity – which is not that far off from the 90 percent that is usually used in nuclear weapons. []
And if that stuff is still in Iran’s possession, then they still have at least one key ingredient for developing nuclear weapons – which is what all this has been about.
And with that, we gotta get into the whole “how did we get here” question.
Right, because while Trump has said the attack was because Iran was just months or even weeks away from getting nuclear weapons, the consensus in the American intelligence community?
It has long been that Iran hasn’t been actively building or trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Right, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said as much when testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee in March.
“The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.” (BYTE: 11:41-12:17)
But Trump told reporters before the US attack that he believed Iran was "very close to having a weapon" and that he “didn’t care” what Gabbard said.
With him saying much the same to reporters last Friday:
"What intelligence do you have that Iran is building a nuclear weapon?"
"Your intelligence community has said they have no evidence that they are at this point."
"Well then, my intelligence community is wrong."
"Who in the intelligence community said that?"
"Your Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard."
"She's wrong." (BYTE: 3:11-3:26)
And with that, we saw Gabbard responding by echoing Trump’s own point of view on social media, writing:
“America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly.”
“President Trump has been clear that can’t happen, and I agree.”
With her also accusing the media of “intentionally taking [her] testimony out of context” and reposting the clip of her testimony as proof. []
Right, which I’ll play now, because it does contain some key information.
“The IC continues to monitor closely if Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program.”
“In the past year, we've seen an erosion of a decades-long taboo in Iran on discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran's decision-making apparatus.”
“Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.” (BYTE: 11:41-12:17)
Right, and so the fact that a regime like Iran’s has been enriching uranium in amounts and to levels far above what is necessary for any civilian use?
It’s worrying because it has actually put them in a position – according to American intelligence – to be able to build a functional weapon maybe in a matter of months, as Trump said, but also maybe in a matter of years.
Right, we don’t know for sure.
But the key thing is that the assessment that Iran hadn’t started building one, as far as we know, that hadn’t changed.
And with all that, you’ve had the Iranian foreign minister accusing the US of violating international law, calling the attack outrageous, and saying it “will have everlasting consequences” – adding:
"In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people." []
With us seeing that Iran followed through on that today, attacking a US air base on Qatari territory holding more than 10,000 military and civilian personnel.
Though, thankfully, you had the DOD confirming that although Iran fired multiple short- and medium-range missiles, there were no reports of U.S. casualties.[]
And actually, with that, Iran reportedly gave advance notice of the attack as a way to minimize casualties.
WIth officials saying Iran needed to be seen striking back at the United States, but in a way that allowed all sides an exit ramp.[]
And so we’ll have to see whether Trump takes that exit ramp.
Because, of course, he’s warned previously that "ANY RETALIATION" made "AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" would be met with even greater force than what was unleashed in the initial US attack. []
And if he does that, there are obviously concerns about how much more this could escalate, how involved the US would get, and if there’s some version of events where we have another version of Iraq or Afghanistan on our hands.
Though, of course, even without the US, the situation is extremely volatile.
Right, Iran has also kept up attacks on Israel, though no more have been killed.
And on the flip side, Israeli strikes have killed at least 400 and injured 3,000 according to the government.
With one US-based rights group claiming the true number is closer to 950. []
And beyond the death toll, Israel has continued expanding its campaign beyond obvious nuclear and military targets.
Today, for example, striking the gates of a prison famous for holding political activists and the headquarters of the military force known for cracking down on protests.
With these sort of being seen as symbolic targets of the regime, although Israeli officials have continued to insist that they're not seeking the overthrow of Iran’s government – even as Trump has also hinted at the possibility of regime change. .
Though, notably, Netanyahu said last night that Israel was “very, very close” to realizing its objectives in the conflict with Iran – saying he would not be dragged into a “war of attrition” with Iran.
But we’ll of course have to wait and see what happens.
And in the meantime, there’s obviously a whole debate playing out in the US.
Right, when the news broke that the US had attacked Iran, Bernie Sanders was giving a speech as part of his “Fighting Oligarchy” tour.
“Not only is this news that I've just heard this second alarming, that all of you have just heard—but it is so grossly unconstitutional. All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right.” 00:59 - 1:25
“You know, it might be a good idea if we concentrated on the problems that exist in Oklahoma and Vermont rather than getting involved in another war that the American people do not want." 2:18 - 2:39
And his point there about Trump’s actions being unconstitutional is one that we’ve seen echoed widely by lawmakers and experts across the political spectrum.
Right, the Constitution gives Congress the power to “declare war” and to “raise and support armies.”
But it also makes the president the “commander in chief” of the U.S. military – language which presidents of both parties have cited to justify military action without congressional involvement.
And the long-running debate over presidential war authorities has only been further complicated by the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which says a president can introduce the Armed Forces into hostilities in only three situations:
One: a “declaration of war.”
Two: a “specific statutory authorization” — both of which have to come from Congress.
Or, three: “a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, ” []
But presidents have often disregarded that language or argued for a narrow definition of the “introduction” of forces.
And Congress has done little to enforce the resolution.[]
So, in this specific case, Trump officials are arguing that this was a limited strike aimed at dealing with an imminent threat – but that it isn’t an act of war or anything else requiring congressional approval.
But many experts have pushed back on that, with John B. Bellinger III of the Council on Foreign Relations arguing that it's also necessary to look at legal interpretations from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, explaining:
“if the use of military force would be substantial and prolonged or would pose a substantial risk to U.S. forces or American civilians — such as from attacks by Iran or its proxies against U.S. interests — there is a good argument that it would require congressional approval consistent with Congress’ authority in Article I to ‘declare war.’”[]
And that is an incredibly relevant argument now that Iran has attacked a U.S. military base.
Right, and with all this, we’ve seen a number of high-profile Democrats also pushing back on the Trump administration’s justifications here.
This including Bernie’s "Fighting Oligarchy” partner, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who called Trump’s decision to strike Iran without authorization from Congress “absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment,” adding:
“The President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers,
“He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations.” []
But very notably here, we’ve also seen divisions emerging among Republicans as well.
For example, Thomas Massie appeared to be the first Republican to oppose Trump's decision, simply writing: “This is not Constitutional.” []
With him also telling CBS News that there was no “imminent threat to the United States” from Iran.
Though Massie’s stance here isn’t exactly surprising, because he introduced a bipartisan resolution last week seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran “unless explicitly authorized” by Congress.
But with all that, you had Trump responding by seemingly excommunicating Massie from the church of MAGA, launching a barrage of insults at the congressman, and saying he’ll be out campaigning in Kentucky for Massie’s opponent in the Republican party. []
Additionally, despite the divisions emerging in the Republican party, we also saw Trump claiming there’s “great unity” in the party, “perhaps unity like we have never seen before.”[]
And while that is clearly false, we have still seen many Republicans falling behind Trump here.
With prominent Republicans like Lindsey Graham, Nancy Mace, and Elise Stefanik all praising the decision.
You also had Ted Cruz, who only recently learned a lot about Iran from Tucker Carlson of all people, arguing that the attack was necessary, saying:
“The prospect of the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons represents the most acute immediate threat to America and our allies."
And very notably here, we saw House Speaker Mike Johnson explicitly arguing that the move was constitutional writing:
“The President made the right call, and did what he needed to do. Leaders in Congress were aware of the urgency of this situation and the Commander-in-Chief evaluated that the imminent danger outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act.”
Adding: “The President fully respects the Article I power of Congress, and tonight’s necessary, limited, and targeted strike follows the history and tradition of similar military actions under presidents of both parties.” []
And meanwhile, we’ve also seen at least one Democrat openly backing Trump’s decision — if you can still call John Fetterman a Democrat.
With him saying that Trump’s strikes were the “correct move” and adding:
“Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I’m grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.” []
But, as far as where we go from here, as long as Trump has a majority of Republicans on his side, it seems unlikely that any possible impeachment attempt will be dead on arrival.
And while that option will likely remain on the table as Congress considers how to move forward, we’ve also seen lawmakers from both sides of the aisle demanding that Congress approve any further military action.
But for now, we’ll have to wait and see if Trump listens to those demands or moves forward with his own agenda — an agenda that could potentially escalate this situation to a full-blown war.
So yeah, fun times… or maybe more accurately: fun end times…
-
And this time it’s because he announced that his platform Viewstats is launching an AI thumbnail tool that will allow creators to enter a prompt and receive a “data-backed viral thumbnail.” []
He has since deleted his tweet announcing it, but the Viewstat’s website still has articles and FAQ’s about the tool, and many have also re-shared a previously uploaded video where MrBeast explains some of the functions.
“From creating custom results from any channel to literally being able to put your face on a thumbnail, it literally feels like cheating. This is the home of the AI tool where you can type in any channel on all of Youtube and it will use it as inspiration for the thumbnail its generating.” (0:12-0:26)
Right, in that video he then uses himself as an example and had it generate a thumbnail of him stranded on a volcano.
There are also ways to generate thumbnails without specific channel inspiration, or you can take the URL of a pre-existing video and modify its thumbnail, like in this example:
“To demonstrate, I have this F1 thumbnail with an F1 car and in the prompt I am going to say change f1 car to minivan. That’s all I’m going to type in, and let’s see what it generates. And boom, it’s done!” (1:31-1:44)
And a ton of people were pissed, arguing this tool hurts thumbnails artists and editors and allows people to blatantly copy and rip off other channels, with some writing:
“So the biggest YouTuber is pushing AI while also posting about how he hopes everyone watches his work because of how much creative effort went into it..So you understand the value of work and creativity.. but don't understand that this tech is destroying the concept of both?”[]
“I need every YouTube creator who can afford to take a stand to sue the shit out of this company; they’re literally just stealing every single thumbnail on YouTube to feed to their shitty fucking ai. And fuck you too MrBeast.”][
Some noting that in the past, MrBeast called out channels for copying his thumbs by using faceswapping tools, and writing: []
“So MrBeast gets to complain about channels stealing his thumbnails, then turn around and make a tool that does the same thing but faster and cheaper?...Way to take out the creator in content creator, and the fun that comes from thinking up new ideas. Majorly fuck this. If there’s any class action lawsuit, count me in. I’m so done with this guy.”[]
Major creators like Jacksepticeye also chimed in, because his channel’s logo specifically appeared in MrBeast’s video when he mentioned “taking inspiration” from other channels.
So you had him writing:
“What the actual fuck... and he used my logo in the promotion for it too. I hate what this platform is turning into. Fuck AI.”[]
And it seems MrBeast was open to all the pushback, with one creator saying he had a conversation with MrBeast to make these complaints clear, and MrBeast responding by saying:[]
“I appreciate all the feedback! I love the YouTube community more than anyone can even remotely comprehend. Already working on changes like Faceswap should only be used to swap your face on YOUR thumbnail, obviously not others. And overall I’ll build this more in a way to be inspiration for artists/a tool they use and not replace them. Very good feedback. My goal with viewstats is to build tools to level the playing field between people like me with 300 employees and new creators that can’t afford a small army.”[]
With him also saying he is open to adding a tool that would allow creators to connect with thumbnail artists directly so that he can boost that community.[]
But I would love to know your thoughts on this, whether it be about the tool itself or AI use in the content creation space in general, or the backlash and MrBeast’s response to it, I would love to know your thoughts.
-
Churchgoers in Michigan were saved from a potential mass shooting yesterday.
This scary story comes from a suburb of Detroit, where over 100 people were gathered for mass at CrossPointe Community Church.
According to the AP, children part of the church’s Vacation Bible School were leading the mass yesterday. []
And a gunman arrived outside the church driving erratically, which caught the attention of staff as well as a churchgoer who was arriving late.[]
Reports say that the man then got out of his car in a tactical vest, armed with a rifle and handgun.
And he began firing while heading to the church, hitting one person in the leg, but according to local authorities, a parishioner then struck the man with a vehicle, and then two staff members fatally shot the man.
With Wayne Police Chief Ryan Strong telling reporters yesterday:
“We are grateful for the heroic actions of the church’s staff members who undoubtedly saved many lives and prevented a large-scale mass shooting.” (2:02-2:11)
With other footage showing that the people inside the church did hear what was going down and figured out what was happening, with a livestream showing many ducking and running as gunshots were heard outside before a woman instructed them to head to the back of the building.
Which is just an utterly terrifying moment.
As far as the person who was shot in the leg, they sustained a non-life-threatening injury and underwent a successful surgery.[]
And this morning, we got more details about the shooter.
He is a 31-year-old whose mother was a member of the church, and he had been to a couple of masses with her over the last year or so.
With officers saying he “may have been suffering a mental health crisis" and had no prior contact with law enforcement.
Right now we do not know the motive, with some outlets noting that he had mentioned the Church in two Facebook posts, but it is unclear what prompted this.
With police also finding more weapons and ammunition in the suspect’s home.
But so far, officers have only said that there is no evidence suggesting it is tied to the conflict in the Middle East. []
The Church’s pastor told the AP that the suspect’s mother was not present at the Church during the shooting, but the pastor had met him before, telling the outlet:[]
“He seemed to really have some thoughts that were not threatening or anything like that, but he definitely had some thoughts as far as hearing from God.”
With him also just applauding those who stopped him from getting inside the building.
So that is where we are on this one, thank god nothing worse happened.
Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “PDS” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes!
-
The Trump administration just lost ground in its battles with two of the most high profile deportation cases.
Kilmar Abrego García, and Mahmoud Khalil [Kah-leel]. [Image and Image]
So starting with Abrego García, just a quick recap.
This is the Maryland father who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador’s megaprison in March despite an order not to deport him. [B roll, 01:05]
With the White House then apparently resisting orders from federal judges and the Supreme Court to facilitate his return. [Same B roll]
But earlier this month, after much delay, he was returned, though only for the Justice Department to charge him with smuggling illegal immigrants across the country for nearly a decade. [B roll, 00:27]
Something to which he has pleaded not guilty, so now he’s preparing for trial. [Image]
But already, before that’s even begun, the federal judge in his case just took a big ‘ol deuce on the government’s allegations.
With judge Barbara Holmes saying they failed to provide evidence that Abrego García would pose a threat if he was released, and ruling that he must be released from federal custody. [Image]
Though that doesn’t mean he’s actually free, since that ruling only pertains to this case, so the DoJ can just hand him over to ICE instead, as it said it would.
Meaning that if the government can persuade a court to lift the 2019 order staying his deportation, Abrego García could be deported again before even gets the chance to go to trial.
But that’s a threat he would’ve faced anyway, and this ruling by judge Holmes is still seen as a victory because it casts serious doubt on the evidence that’ll come up during the trial.
With her writing, “The government alleges that Abrego is a longtime, well-known member of MS-13, which the Court would expect to be reflected in a criminal history, perhaps even of the kind of violent crimes and other criminal activity the government describes as typically associated with MS-13 gang membership. But Abrego has no reported criminal history of any kind.” [Quote]
And then adding that much of the evidence he is a gang member consists of “double hearsay.” [Quote same link]
Not to mention that some of the witnesses reportedly have serious criminal histories and are hoping to dodge deportation or avoid prison sentences for helping with the case. [Quote same link, find “dodge”]
So fore example, she says one is “a two-time, previously deported felon, and acknowledged ringleader of a human smuggling operation, who has now obtained for himself an early release from federal prison and delay of a sixth deportation by providing information to the government.” [Quote same link]
But even putting that aside, Holmes noted that their claims, and I quote: “defy common sense.” [Quote same link]
So for example, while they alleged that Abrego García often brought his children on smuggling trips between Maryland and Houston three or four times a week, [Quote same link, find “four times”]
According to Holmes, “The sheer number of hours that would be required to maintain this schedule, which would consistently be more than 120 hours per week of driving time, approach physical impossibility.” [Quote same link]
So for all those reasons, plus the fact that his union has offered to help him return to work if he’s released, Holmes sided with Abrego García.
But the White House remains defiant, with DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin [Mick-lock-linn] writing on X:
“Kilmar Abrego Garcia is a dangerous criminal illegal alien. We have said it for months and it remains true to this day: he will never go free on American soil.” [Post]
But they said similar things about another high-profile detainee who’s now free, and that’s Mahmoud Khalil. [Image]
Right, to recap, he was the first student protester arrested for deportation by the Trump administration back in March.
This even though he was a legal U.S. permanent resident, married to his pregnant American wife, and a Columbia University graduate. [Image]
But as a Palestinian and an outspoken activist opposing what he calls the genocide in Gaza, he put himself firmly within the White House’s crosshairs.
So plainclothes agents arrested him in the lobby of his Manhattan apartment building, and since then he’s been locked up a thousand miles away in Louisiana. [B roll, 00:11]
With State Secretary Marco Rubio invoking an obscure law to deport him on the grounds that he had undermined American foreign policy and spread anti-Semitism. [Quote, find “rarely cited”]
But on Friday, after three and a half months of detention, during which time he missed the birth of his first child, a judge finally released him on bail.
And over the weekend he immediately toured the press circuit, speaking publically for the first time since his arrest.
With him describing that initial moment to Good Morning America:
[Clip, 02:23 - 02:41] Caption: “I felt like I was literally kidnapped. All the ‘know your rights’ that I indulged myself in felt like nothing, because at that moment ICE made it clear that you have no rights whatsoever.”
Then telling the New York Times that in Louisiana, he shared a room with more than 70 other men. [Quote, find “70 other”]
Adding that he had no privacy and no knowledge of what would happen next, as he was racked with concern for his wife and then unborn child. [Same quote]
But explaining that he tried his best to make meaning out of his suffering there, he says he began helping other inmates.
Spending a few hours each day translating questions into proper English about things like what had happened to the money in someone’s commissary account, or why they hadn’t received their medications. [Quote same link, find “proper English”]
Meanwhile, saying he gathered strength by reading “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl, the Holocaust survivor, among other books. [Quote same link]
Though adding that there was “nothing in this world that would compensate me for the time I lost with my family and witnessing the birth of my child.” [Image and Quote same link]
And he’s still not out of the woods yet, because his case is still going through the courts, and the White House still wants to deport him.
With a spokesperson saying this is not about free speech, but rather:
“This is about individuals who don’t have a right to be in the United States siding with Hamas terrorists and organizing group protests that made college campuses unsafe and harassed Jewish students.” [Quote]
Adding, “The Trump administration won’t hesitate to hold Khalil, and others who mimic his tactics, accountable.” [Quote same link]
But of course there’s not much evidence outside a couple of vague slogans like “from the river to the sea” that Khalil is anti-Semitic or supports Hamas.
And he has insisted that he’s certainly not.
[Clip, 03:27 - 03:35] Caption: “There is no place for any form of racism, including anti-blackness, anti-Semitism, in the Palestine movement.”
His particular case aside, however, he says the struggle for Palestinian justice still goes on.
With him telling the Times, “I’m free,” he said, “but those who made me go through hell are still free outside and actually emboldened.” [Quote]
So he says that far from suppressing the pro-Palestine movement, Trump has actually inflamed it, and that he’s going to continue doing his activism despite the crackdown on dissent. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:29 - 00:55; Clip, 26:31 - 26:41] Caption: “Mahmoud Khalil is a human rights defender. Mahmoud Khalil is a freedom fighter. Mahmoud Khalil is a refugee. Mahmoud Khalil is a father and husband. And above all, Mahmoud Khalil is Palestinian.” [Crowd: *Cheering* … [Mahmoud Khalil:] “Free free Palestine!” [Crowd:] “Free free Palestine!” [Mahmoud Khalil:] “Viva viva Palestina!” [Crowd:] “Viva viva Palestina!”
-
Nothing is going to stop this little girl from reaching the finish line.
Right, this is 8-year-old Gabi Brilbrey and there are two things you need to know about her. [B Roll 2:03-2:07]
One, she absolutely loves racing and two, she was born with a birth defect that prevented her legs from developing below her knees. [B Roll 0:35-0:41]
Gabi got her first taste of competition last year during the local Soap Box Derby where she was allowed to ride as a second in a 2-manned vehicle contest.
But that didn’t scratch the racing itch for her - in fact, it only made her want to drive a car on her own.
[“I’ve done it last year and I felt I did pretty good. I’d like to maybe do it on my own. Last year, somebody drove it for me, so I didn’t drive it.” 0:41-0:53]
And so her family and the local club that puts on the derby worked together to design and build a car that Gabi could drive on her own.
Traditionally, soap box derby cars have a foot pedal brake system but since that obviously wasn’t an option here, they had to try a couple of different alternatives. []
First, they tried a handbrake system but that didn’t work out - with David Holland, the club member who custom-built the parts for Gabi’s car saying,
[“Rather than pushing a pedal with your legs, you pull back on the handle and actually use the brake. What we found after installing that was Gabi, 46 pounds - very difficult to hold and maintain that pressure. She went down four times, she crashed four times.” 1:10-1:31]
And so they tried something else - pneumatic brakes.
With David saying that the brakes are made from a paintball gun compression cylinder and all Gabi has to do is flip a switch to stop the car. [B Roll 1:33-1:43]
With her dad saying,
[“It’s a great thing because it puts Gabi on the same level playing field as other kids her age, so we can compete at the same activities and at the same level that they do. It’s really great to see her take the initiative to want to do things on her own and have that drive to overcome those obstacles.” 1:44-2:02]
And for David, it’s been a great experience working to make this happen for Gabi - telling a local news outlet,
[“It’s the biggest reward of the whole thing. If you’re just paired with a child, it can be Gabi. It can be any child. It’s what makes it worthwhile, because it does get hectic. And there’s a lot of parents, they get involved. But the kids are truly innocent and they’re dreaming and they’re focusing on having a good time.” 1:58-2:18]
As for Gabi, she’s really excited to race this year - telling a local outlet that her favorite part is either the actual driving or winning the trophies. [B Roll 0:54-1:06]
So we’ll wish her the best of luck and give the title of BAMF of the Day to Gabi’s family as well as David Holland for making a little girl’s dream come true.
