Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong, Joe Getty.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3: The world's longest snake has been found thirty two feet long.
Speaker 2: That's a long snake.
Speaker 1: That is a very very long snake. Lfs for sure.
Speaker 1: So great stuff happening on the sorting out progressive policies
Speaker 1: front and one in particular leapt out. It's not made
Speaker 1: any well, not made many national headlines anyway, and I
Speaker 1: became aware of it when our good friend Tim Sandefer
Speaker 1: alerted us to it.
Speaker 2: Tim the lawyer.
Speaker 1: Sanderfer, vice president for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute,
Speaker 1: has written more books than I've read, only a slight exaggeration,
Speaker 1: including Freedom's Furious How Isabel Patterson, Rose Wilder Lane nine
Speaker 1: Rand founded Liberty in Age of Darkness, which is a
Speaker 1: fascinating rate.
Speaker 2: Anyway, Tim, welcome, How are you, sir?
Speaker 4: I'm great, Thanks for having me Bet, of course.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So you guys won a big victory in Arizona, and
Speaker 1: maybe I just missed it, but I think it's a
Speaker 1: little uncomfortable for the mainstream media to report why don't
Speaker 1: you tell us about it?
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: So, you know, in Arizona, like many states, we had
Speaker 5: a serious problem with an explosion in homelessness in recent years,
Speaker 5: thanks in part to a crazy ruling by the Ninth
Speaker 5: Circuit Court of Appeals that tied the hands of police
Speaker 5: officers and local governments when it came to clearing out
Speaker 5: encampments on the sidewalks and things. Well, the Supreme Court
Speaker 5: overruled that, so that case has gone. But nevertheless, a
Speaker 5: lot of city progressive city leaders really just thought that
Speaker 5: the best thing to do was not to enforce laws
Speaker 5: against camping on the sidewalk or on public property or
Speaker 5: in public parks and things. And the result here in
Speaker 5: Phoenix was the largest homeless encampment in the country. They
Speaker 5: called it the Zone, a thousand people living in tents
Speaker 5: in downtown Phoenix during the one hundred and twenty degree
Speaker 5: summers during the COVID pandemic.
Speaker 3: Well, doubt of the great I didn't realize. I didn't
Speaker 3: realize that was the biggest homeless camp in America. Did
Speaker 3: you witness it with your own eyes?
Speaker 4: Oh?
Speaker 5: Yes, and it's pretty. It's really something to see. I mean,
Speaker 5: it's fortunately it is largely cleared away now, but at
Speaker 5: the time, I mean, we're talking about entire blocks where
Speaker 5: people were just living in tents and doing drugs in
Speaker 5: public and defecating and urinating in the streets and things,
Speaker 5: and with the city refusing to do anything about it,
Speaker 5: because that's what progressives consider to be compassionate right, is
Speaker 5: to just let people just wallow in their filth when
Speaker 5: they need help.
Speaker 4: So what we did.
Speaker 5: At the gold Winter Institute is we wrote a ballot
Speaker 5: initiative and we said, look, if local governments are not
Speaker 5: going to enforce the law and protect taxpayers the way
Speaker 5: that they're supposed to x payers have to protect themselves
Speaker 5: by installing bars on their windows or getting security cameras
Speaker 5: or whatever, then they should at least get their tax
Speaker 5: money back. And so voters overwhelmingly approved that at this
Speaker 5: most recent election. And then it's called Prop three one
Speaker 5: two here in Arizona that says, if the city refuses
Speaker 5: to enforce these laws and creates a public nuisance like this,
Speaker 5: they lose the tax money that was supposed to go
Speaker 5: to your police protection that you're not getting and you
Speaker 5: get that to deduct that from your tax.
Speaker 4: Wow, we're going to.
Speaker 5: Push this vallid initiative idea in other states. Now we're
Speaker 5: starting with four states in the coming year and try
Speaker 5: and get some responsibility out of these city officials.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: That sound you hear is millions of Californians turning their
Speaker 1: radios up louder and saying.
Speaker 2: Wait a minute, this is possible.
Speaker 3: Wow, that is that is so awesome and and logically
Speaker 3: makes so much sense. How do you draw the line
Speaker 3: on when they've not lived up to the responsibility and
Speaker 3: it's below the bar where it's just you know, this
Speaker 3: is typical live in a big city.
Speaker 2: There's going to be some homeless people around. Where's the cutoff.
Speaker 5: No, that's a very good question, because we do you
Speaker 5: can't just make them enforce every single law in every
Speaker 5: single circumstance, regardless of you know, equity or individual instances
Speaker 5: of you know, understandables, conduct or whatever. Anyway, the way
Speaker 5: we did that was we said that if it reaches
Speaker 5: the level of a public nuisance, which is a concept
Speaker 5: that exists in state law in every state, and if
Speaker 5: then the city's are liable. And we have said if
Speaker 5: the city has a case by case determination not to
Speaker 5: enforce a law in a particular circumstance, they can do
Speaker 5: that as long as they give a written explanation of
Speaker 5: why they chose not to enforce the law in this
Speaker 5: particular case, then they're allowed to do that. They just
Speaker 5: have to explain why. But what's really happening in these
Speaker 5: cities is just these blanket across the board ideas of well,
Speaker 5: we're just never going to enforce the anti camping laws downtown,
Speaker 5: and that's the thing that we're trying to push back on.
Speaker 5: The real victims of those kinds of policies are both
Speaker 5: the homeless people themselves who need help, even sometimes against
Speaker 5: their will, and the taxpayers, the hardworking taxpayers of these
Speaker 5: communities who pay their money hoping for police protection and then.
Speaker 2: Go get it right. A couple of points.
Speaker 1: Number one, I'm glad you summed it up the way
Speaker 1: you did at the end, because so often these things
Speaker 1: are seen first from the point of view of the
Speaker 1: quote unquote homeless as opposed to everybody else who has
Speaker 1: a specific and undeniable interest in having law and order
Speaker 1: and civilization maintained in their towns.
Speaker 2: And it should be said that a huge.
Speaker 1: Percentage of these people are simply drug addicts, and the
Speaker 1: idea that you can cloak a bunch of drug addicts
Speaker 1: living in filth and breaking the law in the righteous
Speaker 1: garment of the poor, unfortunate who had medical bills they
Speaker 1: couldn't pay. Therefore, society has no power interest in enforcing
Speaker 1: the law.
Speaker 2: That's just wrong. And think about what's been portrayed for
Speaker 2: a long time.
Speaker 5: Think about what these non enforcement policies do. Like here
Speaker 5: in Phoenix, the zone included this one business, a sandwich shop,
Speaker 5: that were owned by this couple named the Falacis. And
Speaker 5: the Falangis were forced to become homelessness counselors, right because
Speaker 5: what happens is these people will wander into the business,
Speaker 5: scare away, the customers, threaten the employees, and so forth
Speaker 5: and so on, and the Falangis are then forced to
Speaker 5: take care of these people or to protect their customers,
Speaker 5: or to you know, call the police or do or
Speaker 5: intervene in some way. They're not trained to help people
Speaker 5: who are either psychotic, which is often the case, or
Speaker 5: who are on drugs and a dangerous threat to others.
Speaker 5: And yet so by refusing to enforce the law, the
Speaker 5: city was basically conscripting the Falacis into protecting themselves and
Speaker 5: protecting their employees and protecting the general public and cleaning
Speaker 5: up and doing all these things that's their.
Speaker 4: Tax dollars are supposed to go for.
Speaker 5: I mentioned the Selachis, by the way, because we just
Speaker 5: this past weekend at the Goldwater Institute held our big
Speaker 5: annual dinner, and we presented them with an award to
Speaker 5: say thank you for standing up for your rights and
Speaker 5: championing this ballot initiative Prop three point twelve that now
Speaker 5: says if the city refuses to enforce these laws, then
Speaker 5: it loses the tax money and people get to get
Speaker 5: their money back.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm glad this is going this direction.
Speaker 3: But like one thing, that's impossible to measure, because I
Speaker 3: have a friend who owns a business in this situation.
Speaker 3: He doesn't have homeless in particular in front of his place,
Speaker 3: but he's downtown where there's lots of homeless people, and
Speaker 3: there's no way to measure how many people have decided
Speaker 3: I don't go downtown anymore because of all the homeless.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's right, And a lot of these communities are
Speaker 5: being destroyed by progressive policies that say, well, until you
Speaker 5: construct enough shelters to house the entire homeless, population, we're
Speaker 5: refusing to do anything to mitigate the problem, and which
Speaker 5: is crazy policy making. It reminds me of a lesson
Speaker 5: I learned from a friend. One to you said, you
Speaker 5: know you are judged by your second best policy option,
Speaker 5: because if everybody had their first best policy option, you
Speaker 5: would have utopia. You just wave your magic wand and
Speaker 5: you'd have perfect society. Well, you have to accept that
Speaker 5: a perfect society is never going to happen, and then
Speaker 5: ask yourself what is second best and the second best option?
Speaker 5: Since we will always have a homelessness problem forever, the
Speaker 5: second best option is how do we help these people?
Speaker 4: Now?
Speaker 5: What steps can we take realistically to help particular cases
Speaker 5: and not just sit back and fold our arms and
Speaker 5: say well, until we have socialist utopia, we refuse to
Speaker 5: lift our fingers, which is the progressive approach to solving
Speaker 5: the homeless problem.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I continue to reject the term homeless because when
Speaker 1: you're talking about the lazy and or the drug addicts,
Speaker 1: the distinguishing characteristic of their lives is not the lack
Speaker 1: of a fixed address. It's that they are junkies and bums.
Speaker 1: And then back to my previous point, very briefly, because
Speaker 1: you're the fascinating guest that I'd drawn on for hours
Speaker 1: at a time. Is and this is purely an argument
Speaker 1: in terms of effectiveness. If your first principle or your
Speaker 1: first question is do we maintain law and order and
Speaker 1: civilization and the answer is yes, then you break up
Speaker 1: the camps, you send people away.
Speaker 2: But wait a minute.
Speaker 1: You have this man who's psychotic, it's not his fault,
Speaker 1: or these people who couldn't afford their medical bills. Well,
Speaker 1: having dispatched with the lazy, the bums and the junkies,
Speaker 1: now we can help those people.
Speaker 2: If we default first.
Speaker 6: To compassion for the quote unquote homeless, we'll never get
Speaker 6: to those people. You've got to be not cruel, but
Speaker 6: effective to be kind.
Speaker 2: Am I wrong?
Speaker 4: No, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 5: And I say this as a person who has had
Speaker 5: homelessness in his family. I've had homeless relatives. I think
Speaker 5: most many of your listeners have probably had homeless relatives
Speaker 5: that they can testify that what you said is absolutely true.
Speaker 5: A lot of people need help, even when they don't
Speaker 5: want it and don't see it out. They need intervention
Speaker 5: to protect themselves and to protect them and sometimes they
Speaker 5: will look back afterwards.
Speaker 4: And say thank you.
Speaker 5: But I will tell you this, Joe, if your answer
Speaker 5: to the question is of should we defend ordinary civilization
Speaker 5: and enforced law and order, If your answer to that
Speaker 5: question is yes, apparently you're some kind of extremist, reactionary
Speaker 5: weirdo in today's world.
Speaker 2: That's correct.
Speaker 3: Yes, Well, you know, it's a multifaceted problem. All the
Speaker 3: things we've mentioned, and then the homelessness industrial complex as
Speaker 3: we call it, with the billions and billions of dollars
Speaker 3: that are flying around. There's a lot of organizations getting
Speaker 3: a lot of people making their living off of this,
Speaker 3: and it not being solved gets them more money, not less.
Speaker 5: Yes, and those are primarily government bureaucracies. I mean, when
Speaker 5: the make it sorry welfare state was created in the
Speaker 5: nineteen thirties, the argument for it was, well, private chair
Speaker 5: hasn't solved the problem of poverty.
Speaker 4: So we need to have government.
Speaker 5: Okay, Well, now we've been we had a century now
Speaker 5: where government is taking primary responsibility for the for poverty
Speaker 5: and the poor and so forth.
Speaker 4: Has it solved the problem? No? I don't think so.
Speaker 5: If the homelessness industrial complex as you call it, and
Speaker 5: that's a great terms, absolutely right, if that complex would
Speaker 5: devote its money to actually solving this problem on a
Speaker 5: community basis, going in there and trying to take this
Speaker 5: problem on as a private, charitable matter so that you
Speaker 5: can weed out the deserving from the undeserving poor, they
Speaker 5: would accomplish a lot more than just saying, well, what
Speaker 5: we need is more government bureaucracy and more across the
Speaker 5: board rules about no, we're never going to enforce the
Speaker 5: law in the public park down in Tucson or Phoenix
Speaker 5: or whatever.
Speaker 2: You know, Tim, can we take.
Speaker 1: A quick break and come back and do five more minutes? Yep,
Speaker 1: I'm going to see if I can get some of
Speaker 1: your greatest tits out of you.
Speaker 2: Tim's in Arizona.
Speaker 3: We're in California, where half the homeless people in America live.
Speaker 2: Because of our policies, we got more on the way.
Speaker 2: Stay hear.
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Here here, Tim Sander, for vice president for Legal Affairs
Speaker 1: at Goldwater Institute, is on the line. Tim, I was
Speaker 1: going to prompt you with the followings, coming off of
Speaker 1: our discussion of the billions of dollars spent on the
Speaker 1: quote unquote homeless problem. Government expenditures go to someone or something.
Speaker 1: Can you help us understand the relationship between the taxpayer's money,
Speaker 1: a government bureaucracy, and a problem to be solved.
Speaker 5: Yes, well, when for one thing, remember that government gets
Speaker 5: paid even if it gets the answer wrong. This is
Speaker 5: the most important thing you can know about politics, actually,
Speaker 5: is that that's how it differs, how government differs from
Speaker 5: private business. If private business screws things up, it doesn't
Speaker 5: get money. It doesn't get paid. If I go to
Speaker 5: you know, to Taco Bell, and I order a burrito
Speaker 5: and they give me the wrong burrito, I don't pay
Speaker 5: them until they get it right. If the gun does
Speaker 5: something and it gets it wrong, it still gets paid
Speaker 5: because that money comes from taxpayers against their will. And
Speaker 5: in fact, they might even get paid more because they
Speaker 5: can convince the some government committee. Oh well, the reason
Speaker 5: why we failed is because we didn't have enough funding.
Speaker 5: So the incentive is to keep the problem around, or
Speaker 5: to redefine the problem more broadly. For example, instead of hunger, now,
Speaker 5: instead we're supposed to be concerned about, oh, what is
Speaker 5: the term that po food insecurity, which means you are
Speaker 5: going to eat.
Speaker 4: It's just you're not sure where. I mean.
Speaker 5: I'm food insecure because I don't where I'm going to
Speaker 5: order dinner tonight. So we redefine the problem because there's
Speaker 5: an incentive to keep the problem around so that the
Speaker 5: government can expand Also, there's the problem that if I'm
Speaker 5: spending my own money for my own purposes, I'm going
Speaker 5: to really make sure that I get the best bang
Speaker 5: for my buck. But if I'm spending somebody else's money
Speaker 5: for my purposes, I don't really care so much about that.
Speaker 5: I might spend a lot more than I otherwise would
Speaker 5: because it's not my money. And if I'm spending somebody
Speaker 5: else's money on somebody else's purposes, well, then I'm definitely
Speaker 5: not going to care about whether I get the best
Speaker 5: possible bang for my buck because it's not my money,
Speaker 5: and I don't particularly care about whether I accomplish the purpose.
Speaker 4: So you should.
Speaker 5: The idea that we can trust government to solve these
Speaker 5: problems more than we can trust private industry is frankly crazy.
Speaker 5: I'm not denying that private businesses do stupid and wrong things.
Speaker 4: Of course they do. We know that they do all
Speaker 4: the time.
Speaker 5: The question is why would you trust government even more
Speaker 5: when government even gets paid when it gets the question wrong,
Speaker 5: when it gets the answer wrong. And when government has
Speaker 5: no particular incentive to save money because they're not even
Speaker 5: spending their own money, you should trust government less than
Speaker 5: you trust big business. So if you distrust big business,
Speaker 5: you should really distrust big government.
Speaker 3: If rered lobster has all you can eat shrimp and
Speaker 3: it drives them out of business, they don't get more money, right,
Speaker 3: something new right.
Speaker 5: Whereas if government has all you know, gives away free
Speaker 5: food to everybody, then it turns around and says, well,
Speaker 5: we ran out of food.
Speaker 4: We need more of your tax money. You need to
Speaker 4: feed more people.
Speaker 1: Now you know this is a book length answer, you
Speaker 1: have ninety seconds. How did what should be a presumption
Speaker 1: of deep suspicion that the government's going to solve a
Speaker 1: problem become an incredibly widespread assumption that, well, of course,
Speaker 1: the government is here and will solve our problems.
Speaker 5: Well, it was a long term, gradual process, primarily through
Speaker 5: the New Deal and the Great Society. But remember that
Speaker 5: the New Deal in Great Society, neither of those were
Speaker 5: terribly popular.
Speaker 4: Even at the time.
Speaker 5: There was a backlash against the New Deal, and there
Speaker 5: was a huge backlash against the Great Society. And it
Speaker 5: was just during those few years really just between thirty
Speaker 5: two and thirty five and between sixties three and sixty six. Really,
Speaker 5: those were really the years when you got about half
Speaker 5: of the federal government that we now have today.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 5: So it was a slow process of corruption of the
Speaker 5: public morals where government came along and said, well, you
Speaker 5: don't have to worry so much about compassion in your
Speaker 5: local community because the government will do it better. And
Speaker 5: you know a lot of people said, oh good, then
Speaker 5: I don't have to worry about it and stop taking
Speaker 5: responsibility for themselves. And if you don't take responsibility, you
Speaker 5: can't have freedom, because those two things always go together.
Speaker 1: Tim Sander for Vice president for Legal Affairs at the
Speaker 1: Goldwater Institute Goldwater Institute, Well worthy of your support. You
Speaker 1: can find them online very easily. Indeed, Tim, always enlightening.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the time, Thank you guys man. It's our pleasure.
Speaker 3: Democrats win a couple of big elections where they've got
Speaker 3: big time control of the Senate and the House and
Speaker 3: the Presidency, and you get the New Deal and the
Speaker 3: Great Society ram through, and like Tim said, there's half
Speaker 3: your federal government.
Speaker 2: Now. Then you add to.
Speaker 1: That the principle that if there's a benefit nobody ever
Speaker 1: dreamed of in their lives for a dollar that all
Speaker 1: of a sudden they get. If you try to take
Speaker 1: that dollar away, they'll burn their city down, right, because.
Speaker 2: I was counting on that dollar. Once the stuff gets started,
Speaker 2: it's impossible to end it. Interesting stuff.
Speaker 3: If you miss an hour, get the podcast Armstrong and
Speaker 3: Getty on demand.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 7: Step away from woke, focus less on who is woke
Speaker 7: and more on who is broke.
Speaker 5: Social justice issues, and take a back seat when your
Speaker 5: son is in the basement vaping and playing video games
Speaker 5: and can't find a job.
Speaker 2: I feel like that last guy was really venting more
Speaker 2: about his son.
Speaker 3: Everybody else had sort of a broader point, but.
Speaker 2: His was just so specific. John Stewart is a master
Speaker 2: of humor.
Speaker 3: His pause was the perfect length to the millisecond to
Speaker 3: maximize the humor.
Speaker 2: That he's really good at that.
Speaker 8: Uh.
Speaker 3: That's pretty good line though, from that guy who's lifting
Speaker 3: weights with what's his name?
Speaker 2: Cuomo?
Speaker 3: Chris Cuomo, your training partner, My training partner. Although he
Speaker 3: took way more selfies than I was taking.
Speaker 2: That was so funny. Uh, I've never seen anybody do
Speaker 2: that before. After every rep.
Speaker 3: He get his pump on it, and he get the
Speaker 3: angle right and smile and take the pictures like who
Speaker 3: he's sending these to?
Speaker 2: Man? That is so foreign to me.
Speaker 3: Was I gonna say, Oh, that's pretty good line. We
Speaker 3: need to focus on more on who is broke and
Speaker 3: not who is woke, which is a pretty good line. Uh,
Speaker 3: before we get to some of the news of the day.
Speaker 3: I keep seeing this headline. And the economy has been
Speaker 3: roaring pretty good since Trump got elected for a variety
Speaker 3: of reasons. Cryptocurrency keeps setting new records. Bitcoin broke another
Speaker 3: record yesterday, eighty seven thousand dollars for one bitcoin.
Speaker 2: It was sixty eight thousand a week ago.
Speaker 3: I mean, if I could have bought a handful of
Speaker 3: bitcoin a week ago and changed my life, there is
Speaker 3: nothing I understand less than this.
Speaker 2: I will not I'm not going to try either.
Speaker 3: It's like I'm putting it in that category like climate change,
Speaker 3: of things I don't read about. I'll just let other
Speaker 3: people handle those topics. I've never looked into climate change.
Speaker 3: I'm not looking into bitcoin.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I just wish i'd thrown a few bucks at
Speaker 2: that myself.
Speaker 3: Oh good lord, And is that gonna last or I mean,
Speaker 3: is there. I know Trump's a big crypto honk. Is
Speaker 3: that enough for it to go up? Of course stocks
Speaker 3: can go up for all kinds of reasons.
Speaker 1: Sure, the amount of speculation in cryptocurrency too, So man,
Speaker 1: crypto just just from my observation from Afar is like
Speaker 1: the all time if you can, if you can ride
Speaker 1: the wave of emotion, you could really make a lot
Speaker 1: of money fast.
Speaker 3: And of course it can go the other direction the
Speaker 3: wave of emotion. Trump has named several people that are
Speaker 3: going to be in his cabinet or close advisors.
Speaker 2: Here's one.
Speaker 3: He's gonna Secretary of State, a job first held by
Speaker 3: Thomas Jefferson, now held by Marco Rubio. Here's him yesterday,
Speaker 3: somebody uh asking him a question in the hallway. The
Speaker 3: clips that I asked for which sounded something like this,
Speaker 3: It was the one I asked for, Remember that one
Speaker 3: twenty eight.
Speaker 2: On the contrary, I want you guys to get this.
Speaker 8: I want them to destroy every element of hamas they
Speaker 8: can get their hands on. These people are vicious animals
Speaker 8: who did horrifying crimes, and I hope you guys post that.
Speaker 2: What about the civilians? Every day?
Speaker 8: Amasa stopped hiding behind civilians, putting civilians in the way.
Speaker 8: Hamas knew that this was going to lead to this.
Speaker 8: Hamas has stopped building their military installations underneath hospital.
Speaker 9: So you don't care the fifteen thousand, you don't care
Speaker 9: about the babies that are every day.
Speaker 8: I think it's terrible, and I think AMAS is one
Speaker 8: hundred percent to blame.
Speaker 4: That's what I think.
Speaker 2: Make sure you post that plane.
Speaker 3: Marco Rubio not going to shrink from that or a
Speaker 3: note of caution.
Speaker 1: Raw Trump is expected to name Marco Rubio Secretary of State.
Speaker 1: Three people familiar with this thinking set on Monday, cautioning
Speaker 1: that he could still change his mind at the last minute.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we've got a new Homeland Security Secretary, Christy Noome
Speaker 3: of South Dakota. So f you are illegals and no
Speaker 3: disobedient dogs be allowed into this country, right, She'll round
Speaker 3: up the illegals and shoot the dogs.
Speaker 2: Next to a pit. Tell you what rover she says, sit,
Speaker 2: I'd go ahead and sit. Fetch means fetch Huh? Did
Speaker 2: I stutter?
Speaker 1: What I know?
Speaker 3: You go?
Speaker 2: I go ahead and fetch sniffing? Can wait that itch
Speaker 2: right behind your ear?
Speaker 3: I'd get to that later. You might want to sit. Wow,
Speaker 3: that's some dark pet humor right there.
Speaker 1: Yes, it is Trump willing to look past that unfortunate
Speaker 1: incident from her autobiography and.
Speaker 3: Might actually be the vice president of the United States
Speaker 3: if it weren't for that anecdote that ain't she included
Speaker 3: in her autobiography.
Speaker 2: But shooting the dog right, it's possible anyway.
Speaker 1: Yeah, speaking of his cabinet and specifically in the realm
Speaker 1: of immigration, we will be getting into that again next hour.
Speaker 1: If you don't get next hour, you got to do
Speaker 1: something whatever, that's fine, just grab it later via podcast
Speaker 1: Armstrong you're getting on demand.
Speaker 2: In fact, you probably ought to just subscribe. Makes it easy.
Speaker 3: Roll over now do the dishes thumbs figure it out? Wow,
Speaker 3: too much now, West, She's.
Speaker 2: Not messing around.
Speaker 3: There's one other Oh I wanted to get to some
Speaker 3: of these. Actually I haven't heard him yet because this
Speaker 3: has been breaking while we're on the air today, some
Speaker 3: of this stuff around the Trump legal cases trying to
Speaker 3: do him in. Here's Andy McCarthy on Fox explaining some
Speaker 3: of the latest developments.
Speaker 2: Fifty one there, Michael. What's going to.
Speaker 7: Happen is the Biden Harris administration is going to dismiss
Speaker 7: the Trump cases. They've already sort of laid the groundwork
Speaker 7: for that. Judge shuck In has said, I think December
Speaker 7: second as a date for Smith's to get Jack Smith
Speaker 7: to get back to her on how he sees the
Speaker 7: case proceeding in the future. I think what he'll come
Speaker 7: back with his emotion to dismiss the case.
Speaker 3: Okay, that's interesting. Now, which cases are those? Because I
Speaker 3: don't have them all memorized. Which one's Chuckkin?
Speaker 1: The federal ones, I think she's on documents classificat document
Speaker 1: that's the one he was probably guilt for the election
Speaker 1: interference and stuff like that.
Speaker 2: But the federal stuff is over over over.
Speaker 3: And the documents one was the one he was in
Speaker 3: serious trouble on if he lost, probably arguably Yeah. And
Speaker 3: then the whole Stormy Daniel thing. That was the one
Speaker 3: where he had what was it forty felonies charged to
Speaker 3: him or someone, yeah, convicted of thirty four felonies. Is
Speaker 3: they reminded us over and over again in the final
Speaker 3: days of the campaign, utterly phony, according to even the
Speaker 3: most moderate of lefties, trumping up note pun intended of
Speaker 3: local paperwork charges into somehow being felonies.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court was going to smack that. I'm not
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, the appeals court. He's going to smack
Speaker 1: that down like that fella playing for the San Jose
Speaker 1: State women's volleyball team. Just whack it out of the air.
Speaker 1: And so the judge burchon on that is now looking
Speaker 1: to say, maybe never mind on that case, avoiding the
Speaker 1: humiliation of being overturned.
Speaker 3: Yeah, treat that like the Secretary of Homeland Security. Treat
Speaker 3: to dogheat's chickens. That's what you do again with that.
Speaker 1: Wow, barboy, Speaking of the volleyball player, you know, I've
Speaker 1: been avoiding using this person.
Speaker 2: One more Andy McCarthy on and then we'll be done
Speaker 2: with this. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 3: So the other thing Andy McCarty he weighed in on
Speaker 3: is the legal guy for National Review is on whether
Speaker 3: or not Biden is going to pardon Hunter.
Speaker 7: My sense of this is that, and I continue to
Speaker 7: think this, even though the White House pushes back the
Speaker 7: other way. I think that President Biden is going to
Speaker 7: pardon his son, and that he will get a lot
Speaker 7: of criticism if that's done in a vacuum because it's
Speaker 7: a former self dealing. And he also said he wouldn't
Speaker 7: do it, so he'll look terrible. But I think if
Speaker 7: it's pitched to the country is kind of a clemency
Speaker 7: package where we're turning the page from the Trump prosecutions
Speaker 7: and turning the pati from the hunts of the country
Speaker 7: will take it a lot better.
Speaker 3: Wow, that's interesting, just emotionally. And yeah, you put those
Speaker 3: all together. It's time to move on. All that stuff
Speaker 3: about Trump and everything. Bygone's begun, end Hunter, and bygones
Speaker 3: be bygones.
Speaker 2: We got a new administration.
Speaker 3: So the Trump cases, I'm going to end that, end Hunter,
Speaker 3: and we'll just.
Speaker 1: Million the millions of dollars that filtered into my family
Speaker 1: through dozens of LC's from the communist Chinese and the
Speaker 1: previous Ukrainian regime.
Speaker 2: Let's let's not get hung up on that otherwise, can't
Speaker 2: move on with the country's future. Okay, you're a loser.
Speaker 2: What does what would Biden care?
Speaker 3: What is this thirty seven percent approval rating going to
Speaker 3: go down to twenty seven on his final month of
Speaker 3: being president?
Speaker 2: Who cares? He's going to be dead next year.
Speaker 1: Probably, And any guy who can convince himself hete you
Speaker 1: do another term, can convince himself that this.
Speaker 2: Is the right move, right, sure, yeah, please.
Speaker 1: Anyway, I want to congratulate this transgender You know what,
Speaker 1: oh man, don't have time for this tangent.
Speaker 2: Be disciplined, joke, be disciplined.
Speaker 1: The fellow that's playing on the San Jose State women's
Speaker 1: volleyball team. And if you're new to this issue, you
Speaker 1: might be thinking, wait a minute, there's a there's a
Speaker 1: man playing on the team. Yeah, that's that's permitted in
Speaker 1: some places these days.
Speaker 2: I know it sounds crazy.
Speaker 1: And they're underfellow, the Spartans, that's right, Blair. Is this
Speaker 1: fellow's name? Congratulations Blair steadily breaking women's volleyball records at
Speaker 1: San Jose State in spite of all of those games
Speaker 1: that they've forfeited because the other teams don't want to
Speaker 1: play against a women's team with a dude. For instance,
Speaker 1: despite San Jose State's lost to San Diego State on Saturday,
Speaker 1: San Diego State, you should not have played the game,
Speaker 1: Blair achieved his two hundred and fiftieth kill shot, a
Speaker 1: record that puts him in the upper reaches of women's volleyball.
Speaker 2: I didn't realize they lost.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he achieved that mark. In twenty twenty two, as
Speaker 1: well as the first team year with the team. So
Speaker 1: I mean, really, that's an incredible woman's volleyball player considering
Speaker 1: they've had seven games canceled this season.
Speaker 2: Will there be because of the forfeits?
Speaker 3: Will there'll be an asterisk in the record book and
Speaker 3: then you look down to the bottom page and next
Speaker 3: to the asterisk it says has a penis?
Speaker 2: Dude?
Speaker 1: It'll just say is a dude? Yeah, yeah, that's just great,
Speaker 1: I tell you what, ladies.
Speaker 2: And the fact that the.
Speaker 1: Vast majority of quote unquote progressive women don't see this
Speaker 1: as a women's right issue has just further deepened my
Speaker 1: cynicism about mankind. But look at that men are better
Speaker 1: at everything, including being women.
Speaker 2: Oh you don't like the way that you don't like
Speaker 2: the way that sits. We'll get on the right side
Speaker 2: of this issue.
Speaker 3: A great gift under your Christmas tree would be a
Speaker 3: T shirt that says hot dogs are dogs from the
Speaker 3: Armstrong ngetdy dot com website. That's right, part of our
Speaker 3: fall collection, right with fall colors like whatever fall colors
Speaker 3: are green and pumpkin spice.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: San Jose State bravely also forcing aside the player and
Speaker 1: assistant coach who joined in the Title nine lawsuit against
Speaker 1: the Biden administrations. Really anyway, Yeah, this this fight is
Speaker 1: nowhere near over for a return to sanity, but it's
Speaker 1: starting to go pretty well.
Speaker 3: Hey Hanson, is that clip from The Lady that runs NPR?
Speaker 3: Is that new or was that old that Elon grabbed
Speaker 3: and retweeted today?
Speaker 2: It's old?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's old but good, That's what Hanson says.
Speaker 2: That and other stuff on the way. Stay here, armstrong.
Speaker 9: And in the wake of Donald Trump's historic win, there's
Speaker 9: a new movement sweeping America. Disappointed women are actually swearing
Speaker 9: off men.
Speaker 5: There's no way I am letting any man near me
Speaker 5: for the next few years.
Speaker 9: They're saying no to dating, no to marriage, no to.
Speaker 2: Sex celibacy at least to me, isn't that hard?
Speaker 9: And no to having children like so many other women
Speaker 9: in America who have been considering trying to get pregnant.
Speaker 2: I woke up today and said, Nope, not anymore.
Speaker 9: This woman is actually shaving her head in protest.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I'm thinking some of you chicks didn't exactly have
Speaker 3: a line outside your door before the election.
Speaker 1: Oh wow, I was going to talk about the sociological
Speaker 1: implications and electoral consequences. But Jack, we're going to personal shots.
Speaker 1: That's disappointing U Roland Michael.
Speaker 9: It's being called the four B movement, and women are
Speaker 9: taking to social media declaring their allegiance. The four B
Speaker 9: movement was actually started by women in South Korea back
Speaker 9: in twenty nineteen as part of their version of the
Speaker 9: Meet Too movement. The number four refers to dating, marriage, sex,
Speaker 9: and children.
Speaker 7: This movement is way more important now than ever.
Speaker 9: Twenty six year old Alexa Argus joined the movement two
Speaker 9: years ago and expects a surge of interest in the
Speaker 9: wake of the Trump victory. So you in twenty twenty
Speaker 9: two swore off dating forever.
Speaker 4: Not forever.
Speaker 9: We're not going to settle for low value men that
Speaker 9: don't respect us anymore.
Speaker 3: Boy, and are we men will just have to live
Speaker 3: without you. I guess somehow her I mean, I don't
Speaker 3: mean women kind as a whole, I mean her right, Yeah?
Speaker 1: So the uh I'm picturing historians looking back and saying.
Speaker 1: And then the United States endured a huge drop in
Speaker 1: the birth rate after three quarters of young women lost
Speaker 1: their fing minds over a man called Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, we need a woman's opinion.
Speaker 10: Yes, if anybody could just hear me shaking my head. Uh,
Speaker 10: low value men will go for those women, you know.
Speaker 10: The feminist guys will be like, you're right, and then
Speaker 10: they'll stick together and the rest of us alone.
Speaker 2: The Tim Walls is of the world.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, no kidding, mind your own business.
Speaker 1: Here's here's Katie's cistern represented in the next clip.
Speaker 9: But lots of women are mocking then no marriage, no
Speaker 9: sex movement?
Speaker 3: Why that woman was cutting her hair off?
Speaker 4: Oh bold wild.
Speaker 2: The fact of these crazes are out here.
Speaker 4: They're like, we're not touching men.
Speaker 2: I hope that means the more for me.
Speaker 10: Yeah exactly, yeah, yeah, and hey, if they're refusing to
Speaker 10: have sex, they won't make more of.
Speaker 2: Them the whole.
Speaker 1: Any descent from my whole list of issues means you're
Speaker 1: evil and I hate you. Totalitarian lefty movement. Right now,
Speaker 1: How that gets unraveled and how quickly it is such
Speaker 1: an interesting question to me, because it is, I mean,
Speaker 1: it's really it's it's counterproductive. It's counter happiness, it's counter sanity,
Speaker 1: it's counter the way human beings have behaved for for
Speaker 1: years and years outside of a cult environment.
Speaker 3: And I'm more more than partly serious about that first
Speaker 3: comment that no one think there's a line of guys
Speaker 3: outside your door anyway. It is a sad version of
Speaker 3: that crowd. It's like the in cell dudes on the
Speaker 3: other side. You're doing the whole I don't like women
Speaker 3: for these reasons because they weren't. They're not popular with
Speaker 3: girls for whatever reasons of looks or personality or whatever,
Speaker 3: and so they go with you can't fire me. I
Speaker 3: quit sort of attitude that these women are doing, and
Speaker 3: I think it gives you a shield against, you know,
Speaker 3: the hurt that you're experiencing from for whatever reason not
Speaker 3: being that desirable in.
Speaker 2: Your current life.
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, I'm less likely to buy it, just
Speaker 1: having seen the statistics on the percentage of Democrats, and
Speaker 1: in particular women who will not be friends with dot
Speaker 1: dot dot, will not date dot dot dot, won't even
Speaker 1: patronize a business dot dot dot. That is a pretty
Speaker 1: crazy way to live your life.
Speaker 3: Yeah, i'd say, what did that one person say about
Speaker 3: shaving off your hair?
Speaker 2: Oh? Bold, bold, all right? What is women have gone
Speaker 2: full blown? Britney two thousand and seven.
Speaker 1: Yeah, good for you, But we played the audio from
Speaker 1: a young black man who's active with helping young boys
Speaker 1: mentoring young boys in this community posted the two videos,
Speaker 1: one in which he said, I've decided to vote for
Speaker 1: Trump and the other I decided to vote for Kamala,
Speaker 1: And the reactions to the two videos were completely different.
Speaker 1: And then you've got the Nate Silver's screed who he said, look,
Speaker 1: during a very easy even campaign, we put out newsletters
Speaker 1: that say, hey, Trump is doing well, and some that
Speaker 1: said hey Harris is doing well. And the vitriol and
Speaker 1: hate they got it. They got anytime they said Trump
Speaker 1: was doing pretty well compared to when Harris was doing well,
Speaker 1: it was like, oh, that's interesting, y'all. Are are It's
Speaker 1: like the classic description of holding a grudge. You take
Speaker 1: poison and wait for the other person to die. You're
Speaker 1: gonna make yourselves nuts. Don't make yourself nuts. Listen to
Speaker 1: the Armstrong in Getty show. We do four hours every
Speaker 1: single day. If you miss an hour or segment, or
Speaker 1: you want to replay it for your friends and family,
Speaker 1: you can find it in podcast form at Armstrong in
Speaker 1: Geeddy dot com. No, you can't Armstrong in Getty on demand.
Speaker 1: That's refine it or you can probably find it in
Speaker 1: our website. I don't know where you find him. I
Speaker 1: don't ever look forward. I'm here, I don't need to
Speaker 1: listen to it.
Speaker 2: This is one of the worst promos I've ever heard.
Speaker 2: What is the whovil knows?
Speaker 1: It's very controversial and placks to scourge of plastic surgery.
Speaker 2: That and more next hour if you get Armstrong and
Speaker 2: Getty