Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3: Meantime, the Wall Street Journal reports the Pentagon is considering
Speaker 3: sending an additional ten thousand troops to the region. That's
Speaker 3: in addition to the fifteen hundred paratroopers from the eighty
Speaker 3: second Airborne to be mobilized for the war. It's not
Speaker 3: clear which division the troops would be drawn from.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know what that brings the total number
Speaker 2: two that's being sent there, but we're definitely getting more
Speaker 2: boots that can be on the ground in the area.
Speaker 4: And this conflict certainly has the potential to become the
Speaker 4: biggest story of our lives. Jack and I'm both amazed
Speaker 4: at how little attention is being paid by a lot
Speaker 4: of media. But there's a discussion for another moment. Right now,
Speaker 4: let's talk to military analyst Mike Lyons, who joins us.
Speaker 4: Mike killo, how are you hey?
Speaker 5: Come oney, guys, great to be back.
Speaker 2: As boots get closer to the ground, what are your concerns?
Speaker 6: You know, I still want to keep the air war going,
Speaker 6: the air campaign going.
Speaker 5: I don't think we've hit enough targets.
Speaker 6: I guess over ten thousand, but there's still lots of
Speaker 6: military targets, lots of targets of opportunity to go after
Speaker 6: and continue to use that as.
Speaker 5: A way to degrade and to.
Speaker 6: Put pressure on this regime to try to get them
Speaker 6: to a point where they will agree to something reasonable
Speaker 6: or you could see what they put out so far,
Speaker 6: it's completely unreasonable. I know we're working a seve Wick
Speaker 6: Coops fifteen point plan which resembles like they did in Gaza,
Speaker 6: but there's no such thing as a fifteen point successful
Speaker 6: piece plan anywhere. So again, I have no problem keeping
Speaker 6: the military aspects going, but there will likely be soldiers
Speaker 6: at some point that will have to be deployed for
Speaker 6: a couple different reasons. One to get the half a
Speaker 6: ton of depleted or enrich dream out of there and
Speaker 6: perhaps make it a show of force to make sure
Speaker 6: that you know we have some visible sign of victory.
Speaker 4: Based on what you've read and heard, how likely do
Speaker 4: you think it is we'll take a shot at taking
Speaker 4: carg Island.
Speaker 6: Well, that would be the most easiest way for this
Speaker 6: administration to get a victory, to get a visual, a
Speaker 6: visual on what's going on. But I do think that
Speaker 6: there's RGC units dug in there. It's heavily defended. I
Speaker 6: don't think we'll go there anytime soon. In fact, we
Speaker 6: could continue to vomit for three more weeks or so.
Speaker 6: And I don't see the Marines launching a D Day
Speaker 6: type invasion there.
Speaker 5: I don't see that.
Speaker 6: I think if we do, it's Army Rangers and Delta
Speaker 6: kind of occupying it. If if you remember back Mogadishu
Speaker 6: kind of fast roping. I think that's the air assault
Speaker 6: airborne way to do that from a military perspective. Getting
Speaker 6: a little bit inside baseball here, but I think it
Speaker 6: would be important. And I think, you know, look, we're
Speaker 6: really good at fighting wars, right the United States is
Speaker 6: great at fighting wars, but we've not been really good
Speaker 6: at waging wars. And doing something like that. Taking carg
Speaker 6: Island and taking over Irinians oil refineries would be a
Speaker 6: good way to wage war. That would be the kind
Speaker 6: of thing that would make a real difference.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 6: I know a lot of people would be screaming about
Speaker 6: war crimes and civilians all these other things, but this
Speaker 6: is what waging war is all about. This is what
Speaker 6: close which would say, is how a country has to
Speaker 6: expect if it wants to win. If we just want
Speaker 6: to again while owen ovacaine and not do what we
Speaker 6: did for the past two conflicts, then we'll get nothing done.
Speaker 6: But this administration is dogs didn't doing that.
Speaker 2: So you brought up that whole idea of securing nuclear material.
Speaker 2: That seems like a heck of a job to me.
Speaker 2: I mean, and they're going to have to go to
Speaker 2: these areas that we just bombed the but Jesus out
Speaker 2: of and get some dump trucks and some back hos
Speaker 2: and start digging and while protecting it. I mean, what's
Speaker 2: that going to look like?
Speaker 5: Yeah, no, I don't know.
Speaker 6: It's going to take intel first from Israel that will
Speaker 6: likely know where it's stored, to find out where it
Speaker 6: is and then find out how difficult it's going to
Speaker 6: be to extract is it undergrounds it has it been
Speaker 6: in case already entombed in some cases, Whether that mission
Speaker 6: is plausible or not, that would be you know, we
Speaker 6: want to get to IMEA, the the international you know
Speaker 6: community involved with that mission if that's possible. But you're
Speaker 6: not putting that, you know, in the back of a
Speaker 6: Special Forces helicopter and getting in and getting out and
Speaker 6: doing that mission. That's a long, you know, really difficult
Speaker 6: engineering problem set to solve, and I think the you know,
Speaker 6: probably solved after the conflict is officially over on some level.
Speaker 5: But that would be another one of those.
Speaker 6: Signs that the president could point to and say this
Speaker 6: is why we're victorious.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 4: On one more note, I've heard that it is extremely
Speaker 4: dangerous and volatile stuff to deal with, as you might
Speaker 4: expect how you're fined uranium.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 6: I mean the protection alone of the forces would be overwhelming, exactly.
Speaker 4: Hey, Mike, another discussion we've had a number of times
Speaker 4: on the show is that how in the TikTok world
Speaker 4: everybody expects things to be wrapped up within seventy two
Speaker 4: hours or they think, you know, it's gone wrong. Talk
Speaker 4: to us, as a veteran of combat and a student
Speaker 4: of military history, where are we timeline in a very
Speaker 4: significant and I would argue important more.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, yeah, the fallacy of a short war
Speaker 6: is that thing we've seen in this century, in the
Speaker 6: last century, based on Desert Storm, about how fast that happened,
Speaker 6: But that was just the ground aspect of it. What's
Speaker 6: forgotten over the thirty seven or thirty eight days of
Speaker 6: the air pounding that took place, and we still had
Speaker 6: to send ground troops in order to kind of clean
Speaker 6: that up. In this case. You know, we had four
Speaker 6: times the amount of air sorties that will flowed during
Speaker 6: Desert Storm there, and we're still doing a lot here.
Speaker 6: But from the grand scheme of things, I think it
Speaker 6: lulled Latimer Putin, for example, unto a false sense of security,
Speaker 6: thinking he was going to take Ukraine very quickly.
Speaker 5: Just he forgot to.
Speaker 6: Figure out how to wait, to take his forces and
Speaker 6: multiply them and combine them. But that's another thing. But
Speaker 6: in the grand scheme of things, fast wars just don't happen,
Speaker 6: and they're not easily resolved. And Desert Storm was an
Speaker 6: unfortunate example of when it did happen that a lot
Speaker 6: of people point to and say, why, why can't we
Speaker 6: do something similar there? Which is why again this goes
Speaker 6: on for many months and this administration, I'm sure we'll
Speaker 6: protect its forces. I think the number they have on
Speaker 6: their board right now is thirteen. You know how many
Speaker 6: Kia at this point, and the objective is to keep
Speaker 6: that low, which again to me, you think back when
Speaker 6: we were doing Vietnam, we were sending one hundred and
Speaker 6: fifty bodies and body bags back every week and no
Speaker 6: one blinked an eye about it. So again, protection of
Speaker 6: the force is going to be important. But we could
Speaker 6: still see this conflict go for for months.
Speaker 2: So they talked about that clip we played ten thousand
Speaker 2: more troops being sent over there to join up with
Speaker 2: fifteen hundred this or that. Do you expect that number
Speaker 2: to go way up? I mean, the reporting today from
Speaker 2: all the sources I really trust is Trump is hell
Speaker 2: bent on We're going to pound them until they surrender,
Speaker 2: or we're going to take what we want. We're just
Speaker 2: going to take it from them, isn't Is that going
Speaker 2: to take like a really big number of troops. Should
Speaker 2: we be prepared for that?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 6: I think that's where again, not sending large formations, not
Speaker 6: sending the first Armor Division, three hundred main battle tanks,
Speaker 6: t and forty brads, we're not sending the logis six
Speaker 6: that goes with that kind of the tail of that
Speaker 6: kind of operation is just unsustainable and there's really no
Speaker 6: way to get it there. Now at this point, the
Speaker 6: light infantry units will go Tense Mountain Division for example,
Speaker 6: that's not in the Rapid Deployment Force with the eighty
Speaker 6: second the Rangers Delta that those guys that move fast.
Speaker 6: But that's another division that can kind of get in
Speaker 6: there and get out. There's an airborne unit in Alaska
Speaker 6: that could probably go. They're just looking for again, getting
Speaker 6: troops in there, low logistics that can sustain themselves, don't
Speaker 6: need lots of things to go with them, take control
Speaker 6: of something and then hold it for a certain period
Speaker 6: of time. Again, go back to if we decide to
Speaker 6: take the refineries, which I think would be a tremendous
Speaker 6: military target right now, and I think hopefully they're working
Speaker 6: on that. I think that cripples around takes their ability
Speaker 6: to generate revenue and puts the United States to control
Speaker 6: of that oil resource. Now again, the world's going to scream,
Speaker 6: you know, the imperialistic you know Americans are doing it again.
Speaker 6: But that's the way to get this war to stop.
Speaker 6: That's waging war against the country fighting it.
Speaker 2: Mike.
Speaker 4: My final question is when you look at Iran's defense forces,
Speaker 4: have you heard of or seen any signs that there
Speaker 4: might be cracks in the loyalty or serious breakdowns in
Speaker 4: command and control.
Speaker 6: So no, and have seen us go after a beastiege targets,
Speaker 6: which surprised me. I thought that you were going to.
Speaker 5: See it there.
Speaker 6: I'd read previous incidents that the besiege would have somewhat
Speaker 6: turned against the IRGC because they were conflicting each other.
Speaker 5: It's kind of like big brother or little brother within
Speaker 5: the country. But it doesn't look like that's happened.
Speaker 6: It's looked that the besiege is still well aligned with
Speaker 6: the IRGC. The besiege think of the besiege is local
Speaker 6: police DHSS, you know, kind of not true military forces,
Speaker 6: but having control of the security. They're the ones that
Speaker 6: are there. They're killing the civilians right now that are
Speaker 6: protesting and they have become a target, so that that's
Speaker 6: been disappointing. But haven't seen the breakdown yet. I mean again,
Speaker 6: they've been dug in for forty seven years, they've been
Speaker 6: someone planning for this for forty seven years, and the
Speaker 6: IRGC is just not going away anytime yet. We We're
Speaker 6: not at the level where someone finally says enough's enough
Speaker 6: again because we haven't waged war we've just continued to fight.
Speaker 4: Mike, just fantastic, best analysis I've heard anywhere, and we
Speaker 4: sure appreciate the time and the energy you put into it.
Speaker 5: Thanks great, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that whole wage war versus fight war. I'm gonna
Speaker 2: have to spend more time looking into all that. That's
Speaker 2: really interesting.
Speaker 4: Seriously, Mike's analysis is so much better than anything else
Speaker 4: you hear.
Speaker 2: Ough, so good. I have there no military background and
Speaker 2: only what I've read about wars. I do know something
Speaker 2: about the media, though, and so like I'm looking up
Speaker 2: at the headlines on what is that? Good morning America?
Speaker 2: Stocks plunge, oil rises, on Iran war fears, which is
Speaker 2: true enough, but the drum beat of that sort of thing.
Speaker 2: Has there ever been in the history of the world
Speaker 2: a country go to war and your media, or maybe
Speaker 2: even the pre media era, I don't even know who
Speaker 2: you'd be talking about the I don't know, village elders
Speaker 2: or whatever, bad mouthing, bad mouthing their own efforts and exaggerating,
Speaker 2: making you know, positive things look like a failure. I mean,
Speaker 2: has that ever happened? I don't know if it has
Speaker 2: ever happened. Honest to god, you know history of the world,
Speaker 2: including like if you've got an Indian tribe going over
Speaker 2: to fight the next tribe on the other side of
Speaker 2: the hill, and everybody's standing around saying, aye, I heard,
Speaker 2: it's going horrible and as you can see, food is
Speaker 2: getting scared. So it's a disaster. When when all the
Speaker 2: facts on the ground are it's going fairly.
Speaker 4: Well, everything is clickbait and or narrative reinforcement, which is clickbait.
Speaker 4: Everything is clickbait in media. We really try to avoid that.
Speaker 4: It's probably a strategic mistake, but we're too stubborn to change.
Speaker 2: But sure interesting culturally, yeah, you know, and sometimes it
Speaker 2: probably was isn't good. What the Brits were doing in
Speaker 2: the Boer War wasn't wasn't the greatest thing in order,
Speaker 2: you know, God help you, who was it.
Speaker 4: I didn't pay attention to the Boer War, you know,
Speaker 4: I too boring Belgium and what they did to King Leopold.
Speaker 4: I mean, look into that sometime, but their own media
Speaker 4: wouldn't have been reporting that because they weren't allowed to
Speaker 4: s which is probably isn't good. But regardless, I don't
Speaker 4: know if it's ever happened where a country's gone to war,
Speaker 4: and you have media at home giving you the worst
Speaker 4: case scenario as a drum beat. So I'm looking at
Speaker 4: the markets right now, and the S and P was
Speaker 4: down about one and a quarter percent, it's now bounced
Speaker 4: back to desk and being down three quarters of a percent,
Speaker 4: and the Nasdaq is down about one percent, having also
Speaker 4: bounced back. So the idea that you would go with
Speaker 4: as a responsible news organization which plunge right exactly, that
Speaker 4: you would use that verbiage is hilarious. It's clickbait, period,
Speaker 4: although it does affect people's minds and their hearts and attitudes.
Speaker 2: About what were up to as a country. Well, if
Speaker 2: you had a really good media and you know you
Speaker 2: can't expect this, but they would give you some context.
Speaker 2: A point a percentage and a half drop in the
Speaker 2: stock market in one day doesn't mean a freaking thing.
Speaker 2: It means zero. There's so many factors that go into
Speaker 2: a percentage jumper down for one day. To draw any
Speaker 2: analysis from madis.
Speaker 4: Insane unless you just had on your calendar, I'm going
Speaker 4: to cash out all of my investments to retire on
Speaker 4: this day. Well, number one, you need a better financial advisor, right, right,
Speaker 4: better media.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's something anyway, Any thoughts on any of that
Speaker 2: text line four one five two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 7: Major League Baseball, the Dodgers hosted the Diamondbacks at Dodgers Stadium.
Speaker 2: The Dogs LA is trying to win their third straight
Speaker 2: World Series.
Speaker 7: Dodgers right now are kind of like the Chicago Bulls
Speaker 7: from the nineties, except they have three Michael Jordan's and
Speaker 7: they're all Japanese.
Speaker 2: Mmm. I don't know if you signed the clips of
Speaker 2: Savannah Guthrie did an interview for the first time. The
Speaker 2: interesting thing to me was she's going to return to
Speaker 2: the Today Show April sixth, so next Friday. I didn't.
Speaker 2: I didn't think she'd ever come back after that. I
Speaker 2: don't know if I could.
Speaker 8: She's blaming she's blaming herself for her mom's Yeah that's
Speaker 8: too bad.
Speaker 4: Well, her fame. I guess that's too bad. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 4: I can't. I have no idea how I would process
Speaker 4: that and what I would do.
Speaker 2: You know. Two months later, completely different topic, they found
Speaker 2: a second sphinx buried under the sand in Egypt. You
Speaker 2: know the stak, the big old the lion with a
Speaker 2: pharaoh's head or whatever the heck that thing is that
Speaker 2: the snake tailor Napoleon blew the nose off of it.
Speaker 2: That's why it looks like that. Thanks Napoleon, You jackass,
Speaker 2: couldn't you jackass? Anyway, they found another one buried under
Speaker 2: the sand, suggesting a megas structure of many pyramids and
Speaker 2: sphinxes that might exist under the sand. Still, I would
Speaker 2: have thought we'd have had some sort of X ray
Speaker 2: technology or something where we could have figured that out
Speaker 2: by now.
Speaker 4: Apparently, Yeah, given all the antiquities and riches and everything.
Speaker 4: On the other hand, maybe the pharaoh just had a
Speaker 4: Bogo coupon them. Buy one, get one by one's finx,
Speaker 4: get one free.
Speaker 2: Who knows.
Speaker 4: Jimmy the sphinx maker was struggling for business so started
Speaker 4: sending no coupons.
Speaker 2: Think about all the slaves whose entire lives were toiling
Speaker 2: in the hot sun to build those things.
Speaker 4: For one's things up there, and just bury the other
Speaker 4: one and we'll grab it when we needed well, I'll
Speaker 4: remember it's there.
Speaker 2: That's how it went. Some sort of super giant complex though,
Speaker 2: Oh that would be amazing. A's who I was said
Speaker 2: a couple of weeks ago, and I'm not to drag
Speaker 2: the Iran war back into this, but if the Middle
Speaker 2: East became like Europe, God, there's a lot of great
Speaker 2: too destinations there. No, I might just move there for
Speaker 2: a year, maybe two. Check out all this two stuff. Yeah,
Speaker 2: mentioned Trump's gonna put his signature on the money. Usually
Speaker 2: the Secretary of Treasury sens signs all the money, but
Speaker 2: it's gonna be Trumps signature. And then there's also a
Speaker 2: gold coin coming out with his face on it. I
Speaker 2: heard that on MS Now is that true?
Speaker 4: I didn't hear people on currency? Is that Is that
Speaker 4: a real rule or did you? That's the Joe Getty rule.
Speaker 4: That's myral. No, I think it's federal law, but I
Speaker 4: can't be sure. I mean, it's the sort of thing
Speaker 4: you learn as an eight year old.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure I care. I don't. I don't rank
Speaker 2: these up to the level of caring.
Speaker 4: So these sort of Trump's self aggrandizement is already so
Speaker 4: far beyond my comprehension and ability to believe it. That's
Speaker 4: one more thing, would just be one more thing.
Speaker 2: But does he feel like putting his name on the
Speaker 2: Kennedy Art Center, The Trump Kennedy Art Center or whatever
Speaker 2: is gonna last past the first Democratic administration.
Speaker 4: I have no idea how he thinks about these things.
Speaker 4: It seems nuts to me for reasons like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but again I don't care either way, not on
Speaker 2: my list. What is that thing you're going to tell
Speaker 2: us coming up? I love this, Oh, it's absolutely great.
Speaker 4: It's a psychotherapist who says he's talking about the next
Speaker 4: No King's rally. I had no idea one was happening.
Speaker 4: I guess it's happening tomorrow. No Kings politics is bad
Speaker 4: group therapy. There's a novelgics has become ineffective bad group therapy,
Speaker 4: and he explains why.
Speaker 2: He's very insightful. There will be a No King's rally
Speaker 2: while we're trying to get rid of a king in
Speaker 2: Iran and you're complaining about it, Okay.
Speaker 4: A king who behaves just like the Handmaid's Tale.
Speaker 2: Yes, anyway. Yeah, it's as if you people are idiots,
Speaker 2: the mindset of people who go to rallies and protests.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I look forward to talking about that and
Speaker 2: a whole bunch of other stuff that we got coming
Speaker 2: up on the show.
Speaker 4: Michael, do we still have that old clip quit being
Speaker 4: an idiot.
Speaker 2: That was one of the I can find its lots
Speaker 2: all the way if you missed the sec making the
Speaker 2: podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 9: It doesn't make any sense to have a swimmer who
Speaker 9: was the four hundred and seventy second ranked swimmer when
Speaker 9: he was a man at Penn either winning or coming
Speaker 9: close to winning against women a year and a half
Speaker 9: after transitioning. If that's what the person wants to do,
Speaker 9: that person should be treated with dignity and respect. But
Speaker 9: there ought to be common sense, and common sense is
Speaker 9: not transphobic.
Speaker 2: Well that's Bob Costas, who I think is an amazing
Speaker 2: announcer and one of the greatest interviews viewers in history.
Speaker 2: But if you follow Bob Costas, he got very political
Speaker 2: in the last several years. Where was that while this
Speaker 2: was happening, when that Penn swimmer was beaten all the
Speaker 2: girls and where were you?
Speaker 5: Then?
Speaker 2: Bob Goss says he didn't have the nerve to say that.
Speaker 2: Now he says it with obviously we all agree on this,
Speaker 2: it's not.
Speaker 4: Sort of I didn't realize he was passive while it
Speaker 4: was happening.
Speaker 2: When we are yelling about it.
Speaker 4: But anyway, Bob is actually reacting to the announcement from
Speaker 4: the IOC. And here's the iOS, the International Olympic Committee,
Speaker 4: their president, Kirsty Coventry.
Speaker 1: The policy that we have announced is based on science
Speaker 1: and it has been led by medical experts with the
Speaker 1: best interests of athletes at its heart. The scientific evidence
Speaker 1: is very clear male chromosomes give performance advantages in sports
Speaker 1: that rely on strength, power, or endurance. At the Olympic Games,
Speaker 1: even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory
Speaker 1: and defeat. So it's absolutely clear that it would not
Speaker 1: be fair for biological males to compete in the female category.
Speaker 1: In addition, in some sports it would simply not be safe.
Speaker 4: Can you imagine reviving perhaps loved one who passed away
Speaker 4: fifteen years ago, right, and they would hear that, and
Speaker 4: they would say, they're talking about men playing in women's sports.
Speaker 2: Why is she answering a question nobody's ever asked, and
Speaker 2: why is she so worthy? The answer is, no, men
Speaker 2: can't play in women's sports. We're through here. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: it is so astonishing and in some cases are dangerous.
Speaker 2: You mean, like when that dude beat the crap out
Speaker 2: of the girls in the boxing, to the point that
Speaker 2: some of them quit halfway through, like I'm gonna get
Speaker 2: killed out of here exactly.
Speaker 4: I'm even in non combat sports like basketball, volleyball. Terrible
Speaker 4: injuries to young women and grown women as well. Yeah,
Speaker 4: it's absolutely bizarre. It shows how quickly a social contagion
Speaker 4: can infect people and make them say and do things
Speaker 4: that are just insane. Anyway, speaking of progressive attitudes, good
Speaker 4: for the IOC a little late to the party, but
Speaker 4: thanks for coming.
Speaker 2: Anyway.
Speaker 4: Speaking of the left's attitudes, apparently there's going to be
Speaker 4: another No King's demonstration or a bunch of them. I'm
Speaker 4: against things, very good, great, me too, all across the
Speaker 4: country tomorrow. And Jonathan Albert, who is not only a
Speaker 4: practicing psychotherapist, but he is writing.
Speaker 2: He's about to release.
Speaker 4: A book on how bad a lot of psychotherapy is.
Speaker 4: Something that'll be near and dear to your heart, Jack,
Speaker 4: I'm sure, and he describes he's written a piece. Excuse me,
Speaker 4: my goodness, allergies are bad this time here piece. I
Speaker 4: could be well, we're all dying slowly from time anyway,
Speaker 4: he says. After No King's rally last October, I was
Speaker 4: walking through the area and pository the science. A woman
Speaker 4: asked me, aren't these great? And I said, I don't know.
Speaker 4: I actually like some of Trump's policies. Well f you that,
Speaker 4: she shouted. Then he gets into the whole No King's rally,
Speaker 4: and given our history, I mean, it's a striking claim
Speaker 4: that we're living under one or about too or something.
Speaker 2: But he says, still it's revealing.
Speaker 4: It reflects a broader shift and how political disagreement is
Speaker 4: understood not as a clash of views but as.
Speaker 2: A struggle between victims and villains.
Speaker 4: Then he describes how the US is what has always
Speaker 4: been a contentious, oft and frustrated democracy with competing interests
Speaker 4: and imperfect leadership, but describing it in more dramatic terms
Speaker 4: raises the emotional stakes. It transforms ordinary political conflict into
Speaker 4: something more absolute and more psychologically satisfying. He says, in
Speaker 4: my work as a psychotherapist, I've seen a parallel change,
Speaker 4: and now people interpret their personal lives. Feelings are increasingly
Speaker 4: treated not as signals to examine, but as conclusions to affirm.
Speaker 4: And I think we're kind of all familiar with We've
Speaker 4: heard that verbiage about how you can't deny my feelings,
Speaker 4: or I've got to trust my feelings and all when
Speaker 4: feelings are often wildly misleading, the last thing you should
Speaker 4: trust anyway. You shouldn't ignore them, but they should not
Speaker 4: dictate your life anyway. Discomfort is no longer something to
Speaker 4: work true, but something to explain, often by projecting blame
Speaker 4: onto an external source. This mindset doesn't stay in the
Speaker 4: therapy room. It has begun to shape political life, and
Speaker 4: the No King's Rallies offer a framework that supports that
Speaker 4: favors affirmation over scrutiny, a clean moral narrative in which
Speaker 4: there are those who are wronged and those responsible for
Speaker 4: the wrongdoing. At their core, the rallies resemble bad group therapy,
Speaker 4: gatherings that offer validation, solidarity, and emotional release. They feel
Speaker 4: good in the moment. Participants vent to find reinforcement among
Speaker 4: like minded people and leave feeling heard and aligned. The
Speaker 4: experience can seem productive, even clarifying, but like bad group therapy,
Speaker 4: it stops at validation. The feelings are processed but not challenged,
Speaker 4: reinforced but not examined. There is relief but little resolution,
Speaker 4: and the underlying problems remain. It offers the feelings of
Speaker 4: progress without the substance of it. Yeah, there's got to
Speaker 4: be a personality type that's susceptible to that. And it
Speaker 4: runs one direction politically, because otherwise you would think it
Speaker 4: would be happening exactly the same on the right with
Speaker 4: a certain kind of person who get their feelings validated
Speaker 4: and enjoy seeing well, there's a whole bunch of people
Speaker 4: that agree with me and all that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2: But it doesn't.
Speaker 4: It exists on the right, but it's a much much
Speaker 4: smaller scale. I think a lot of the Trump rallies
Speaker 4: are that, but it's it's tiny compared to some of
Speaker 4: this stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then I don't know that so outside of
Speaker 2: a Trump rally where it's around you know the personality
Speaker 2: that is the president, Sure, you know, an issue rally
Speaker 2: on the right, why, there have been very few of
Speaker 2: those in my lifetime that have had any of And
Speaker 2: I only became aware of this because I have a friend,
Speaker 2: really good dude, him and his wife, fantastic, great kids,
Speaker 2: blah blah blah, all that sort of stuff. But they
Speaker 2: apparently go to every rally that exists, and just and
Speaker 2: the first time I became aware of it member is
Speaker 2: years ago, and he said I see at the rally tomorrow,
Speaker 2: and I was like, I don't know anything about any rally. No,
Speaker 2: I'm going to be doing something that I had to
Speaker 2: look it up and there was some rally going on
Speaker 2: in our town that I was a comple unaware of.
Speaker 2: But it's just like, of course, you know, that's what
Speaker 2: we're all doing tomorrow. We're all gonna be at the rally.
Speaker 2: And then I became aware of that. Yeah, that's that's
Speaker 2: what you do everyone. I don't know what email thing
Speaker 2: you get on where you get the alert all the time,
Speaker 2: but you go to them all. Wow, just what you do.
Speaker 4: You were prescient in your question about personality types.
Speaker 2: You tend to lean left.
Speaker 4: The Good Doctor rights on the composition of these rallies
Speaker 4: help helps explain part of their dynamic. According to a
Speaker 4: survey conducted at No Kings rally in the District of Columbia,
Speaker 4: attendees skew heavily towards highly educated, left leaning white women
Speaker 4: in their forties who probably don't have.
Speaker 2: Kids, so they have time to go to a rally
Speaker 2: because they're not at the Little League game or trying
Speaker 2: to get some sleep after a long week or whatever else.
Speaker 4: And this demographic stands at the forefront of the broader
Speaker 4: shift towards therapeutic language, in which emotional experience is elevated, validated,
Speaker 4: and often treated as a kind of truth in itself.
Speaker 4: Many learn about the allies through social networks, where political
Speaker 4: views and identity are intertwined.
Speaker 2: You know, unless fancy language. I remember being.
Speaker 4: Amused and appreciating the thought expressed to us many, many
Speaker 4: years ago. Just because you're mad doesn't mean you're right,
Speaker 4: or just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right. And
Speaker 4: what the good doctor is writing about here is the
Speaker 4: attitude that being offended is proof that I should be offended.
Speaker 4: You don't examine these feelings or question them or challenge them.
Speaker 4: You merely affirm them.
Speaker 2: Proof that I'm offended, proof that I should be offended
Speaker 2: is that I am offended, which turns psychotherapy on its head.
Speaker 4: We've been battling, Katie. Any thoughts on this based on
Speaker 4: the folks you've run into.
Speaker 8: I mean, the folks that I've run into that go
Speaker 8: to these things use them as like a party scene
Speaker 8: though I mean I had yeah, and you know, they'd
Speaker 8: stop at the gas station and grab their tall cans
Speaker 8: beforehand and head out to San Francisco, and it turned
Speaker 8: into you know, yeah, and which side are you on?
Speaker 2: So it's either young people without kids or old hippies
Speaker 2: whose kids are grown. I just can't believe that if
Speaker 2: you got children, there's a lot that as a percentage,
Speaker 2: that's very many of the people.
Speaker 8: Yeah, none of them had kids at this at this time,
Speaker 8: still don't.
Speaker 2: Actually, yeah, it's it's interesting.
Speaker 4: This is you know, it's really an intersection of so
Speaker 4: many different aspects of human beings and how odd we are.
Speaker 4: But like, if I go to, uh, you know, my
Speaker 4: favorite sports team game and we're all cheering and wearing
Speaker 4: similar gear and colors and the rest of.
Speaker 2: It, it's fun. It feels good to be part of
Speaker 2: a crowd that you're all pulling for the same thing.
Speaker 2: And hey, wait a minute, I'm cheering for the cops.
Speaker 2: You're cheering for the cops. Yeah, we high five.
Speaker 4: We've never met each other, we'll never see each other again.
Speaker 2: Oh I hate them. I hate them. I play for
Speaker 2: a city that's somewhat further from my.
Speaker 4: Home address than this team, so I hate them anyway, right, Ah,
Speaker 4: I was I gonna say, oh, but I don't let
Speaker 4: that like dictate my politics.
Speaker 2: I don't know. People are strange. Uh. Many rallies have
Speaker 2: taken on a performative, even theatrical quality, with costumes and
Speaker 2: exaggerated symbolism, replacing direct political engagement. That approach lowers the
Speaker 2: stakes of confrontation, but reinforces the idea that the primary
Speaker 2: goal is expression rather than persuasion, and the pattern extends
Speaker 2: beyond protests. In some corners of the culture, people have committed,
Speaker 2: who have committed or been accused of violence, such as
Speaker 2: Luigi Mangioni, have been recast as anti establishment symbols, valued
Speaker 2: less for their actions than for what they appear to represent.
Speaker 2: The details differ, but the impulse is the same, a
Speaker 2: search for villains who make anger feel justified. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: human beings. What are you gonna do with them?
Speaker 7: Oh?
Speaker 2: That reminds me maybe later.
Speaker 4: I'm always cautious of relatives of Martin Luther King because
Speaker 4: a lot of them, some of them are grifters and phonies.
Speaker 4: But one of his nephews wrote a great piece on
Speaker 4: what was it entitled? It had a very great simple title. Essentially,
Speaker 4: You're not Your demonstrations are not what doctor King wanted
Speaker 4: us to do. You're not protesting like doctor King, he said,
Speaker 4: and he explains why, and I think he would be
Speaker 4: not only in agreement with the writer I was just quoting,
Speaker 4: but anybody who despises like Antifa and the pro Palestine
Speaker 4: window smashers.
Speaker 2: So anyway, more on that later. So didn't get to
Speaker 2: the story yesterday in Redley, California, which I don't know
Speaker 2: that I knew of, which is down by Fresmo, Fresno,
Speaker 2: or oh by Fresno, depending where you're listening right now,
Speaker 2: or three thousand miles from you. I don't know where
Speaker 2: you're listening right now. Over by fres they found a
Speaker 2: lab that was operated by a Chinese national that was
Speaker 2: full of HIV, malaria, covid obola, and all kinds of
Speaker 2: awful things, but similar to a find in Las Vegas,
Speaker 2: also run by a Chinese national. What the hell is
Speaker 2: going on there? Among other things to talk about? Stay here.
Speaker 10: And finally, a video has gained attention online of a
Speaker 10: gray squirrel in London carrying a vape pen. So congratulations,
Speaker 10: the very first squirrel in history to figure out a way.
Speaker 2: To relax uptight squirrels. Hey, here's a text. This came
Speaker 2: up on the show and it's worth revisiting about putting
Speaker 2: on your socks standing up. Oh no, yesterday you all
Speaker 2: mentioned how unusual it seemed that a listener normally put
Speaker 2: on their socks while standing. Well, well, that's unusual. Also
Speaker 2: incredibly unusual was that person thought everybody else did it
Speaker 2: that way and was surprised to find out that people
Speaker 2: think that's odd and people sit to put on their socks.
Speaker 4: I merely admire their flexibility and athletic ability.
Speaker 2: Could I even do that? I think I could. I don't.
Speaker 2: Maybe I'll try that anyway. This person goes on to say,
Speaker 2: my wife and I have a standing challenge every day
Speaker 2: to always attempt to put on our socks and shoes
Speaker 2: while standing instead of sitting down, which is you can imagine,
Speaker 2: is a pretty funny thing to witness. Give it a
Speaker 2: try and do it every day.
Speaker 4: You'll think, Now, the family that plays together stays together,
Speaker 4: and it's kind of funny.
Speaker 2: So I assume you'd put your socks on standing up,
Speaker 2: then your pants, then your shoes on standing up. Pretty
Speaker 2: sure I couldn't put on my shoes and tie them
Speaker 2: all standing just from a balance standpoint, if.
Speaker 4: You like, went into a half squat and crossed your
Speaker 4: leg over. I know that because that's a that's a
Speaker 4: hip stretch I have to do constantly, really without touching
Speaker 4: a wall. U it helps to have a golf club
Speaker 4: in hand, for instance. So yeah, it is socks then
Speaker 4: pants kind of shoes. I've always I've always.
Speaker 8: Done it standing up. And then I told that story
Speaker 8: since I got pregnant, and I decided to try it
Speaker 8: while I was pregnant and almost broke my face.
Speaker 2: I stop, your ciner, gravity has shifted. You always done
Speaker 2: You've always done what's standing up? Put my socks on you?
Speaker 2: You have always done that standing up? Did I miss
Speaker 2: that yesterday? You put on your socks standing up? I
Speaker 2: do your whole life. Yeah, I've just always done it.
Speaker 8: But then it was like a couple of weeks ago
Speaker 8: that I tried it and I smashed my face into
Speaker 8: the back of my office chair.
Speaker 2: And I've never done it again. You know now that
Speaker 2: I've never really thought about it before. But I think
Speaker 2: I have seen lots of women throughout my life who
Speaker 2: put on their socks standing up.
Speaker 8: Yeah, there's no need to sit down to do it.
Speaker 4: Really, I've not witnessed the socification of many different women
Speaker 4: I've got to admit my sample size is smallish.
Speaker 2: I'm not going like just you know, just like I think,
Speaker 2: like my nieces put on their socks and shoes standing up,
Speaker 2: I think, yeah, like I'll athletic and young.
Speaker 8: I'll slip my shoes on standing up, but I have
Speaker 8: to sit to tie them.
Speaker 2: Time to go to the restaurant, Okay, and they stand
Speaker 2: up and put on their socks and shoes.
Speaker 4: Heck, I sit down to put on a hat. I
Speaker 4: just safety first, Katie, you know, safety first.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm like Joe, I just fall over. I'm gonna
Speaker 2: try that tonight, see if I can do it. Okay,
Speaker 2: that's a good one. How much time I got here, Michael,
Speaker 2: try to determine three minutes? Okay, plenty of time. So
Speaker 2: this has happened more than once in the United States,
Speaker 2: but here's the latest. This is from the Los Angeles Times.
Speaker 2: The case of a lifetime started with a putrid smell
Speaker 2: and a green garden hose sticking out of the side
Speaker 2: of a supposedly vacant warehouse in California farm Country near Fresno.
Speaker 2: Inside the sprawling building, code enforcement officer Jesslyn Harper found
Speaker 2: vials filled with liquid, some marked in English or Chinese,
Speaker 2: others with just a code that bore frightening labels such
Speaker 2: as malaria, COVID nineteen HIV refrigerators lined up in columns
Speaker 2: along a wall that had labels that read blood and
Speaker 2: a bola. Can you imagine you get called to what
Speaker 2: you thought was a vacant warehouse and you go in
Speaker 2: there and you see all those labels, jes it freak out.
Speaker 2: As she walked deeper into the warehouse, passing lab workers
Speaker 2: filling pregnancy test kits, she located the source of the
Speaker 2: smell that had brought her there, droppings from one thousand
Speaker 2: lab tested mice. She told the La Times during a
Speaker 2: recent interview. The workers were nice enough, she said, but
Speaker 2: when she started asking questions, the mood changed. I realized
Speaker 2: I'm in trouble on any to get out of this
Speaker 2: building without tipping them off, that I'm scared. Her discovery
Speaker 2: blew open in an elaborate criminal case with ties to California, Vegas,
Speaker 2: and China. Joe mentioned the Vegas version of this, It's
Speaker 2: a lab part of an elaborate scheme to import COVID
Speaker 2: tests from China and pass them off as American made Okay,
Speaker 2: that's one thing. You're trying to get illegal COVID tests
Speaker 2: in the United States when that was a booming business.
Speaker 2: But what's with all the bola and HIV and blood
Speaker 2: Is a bola test from their cvs or just a
Speaker 2: bola itself? Anyway, the investigation is ongoing, and the places
Speaker 2: run by Chinese nationals, and they're trying to figure out
Speaker 2: what was going on there. Don't trust China.
Speaker 4: Our good friend Kevin Kylie, Republicans soon to be jerry
Speaker 4: mandered out of his district in California, put out a
Speaker 4: statement back in February about both of these labs and
Speaker 4: says specifically that they are Chinese Communist Party linked, which.
Speaker 2: Everything really Chinese is Chinese Communist Party linked pretty much.
Speaker 4: But this one is definitely indisputably so it's it's a
Speaker 4: Chinese Communist Party bio weapons lab in the US two.
Speaker 2: Of them, at least two of them. Wow, And for
Speaker 2: what purpose to unleash that stuff on us if they
Speaker 2: wanted to? Yeah, we were a soft country. You think
Speaker 2: they would allow a US owned lab full of a
Speaker 2: bola to just show up somewhere in China.
Speaker 4: The Chinese constantly use our openness as a society to
Speaker 4: try to bring us down every day.
Speaker 2: That's a heck of a story. Armstrong and Getty