All Episodes

June 11, 2024 38 mins
Mark as Played

Episode Transcript

Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
I'm starting to get a little hobbyhorse of my own. And this hobby
that I'm starting to really dig intoare these LGBT nonprofits, These LGBT nonprofits,

the resource centers for LGBT people.And you'll notice that there's sort of
an interplay sometimes between these LGBT resourcecenters, and then it seeps even into
city politics, like Jerry Dyer appointsan LGBT liaison for the city of Fresno,
which has always I've always thought wasa ridiculous thing that he did.

Why do LGBT persons need a cityliaison well to help them with oxocial services?
What is it about being gay orany variety of lergy or b or
t that means you need a specialcity representative to help you access services.
It's not like gay people speak adifferent language or something. Okay, Look,

if you want among liaison service forrecent immigrants from Southeast Asia who don't
know English and need help navigating socialservices or something like that, Okay,
like for something for recent immigrants,all right, that makes sense. Spanish
language representative for again new arrivals comingfrom Mexico or whatever, all right,

that makes some sense. Anyway,one of these entities I've been talking about
is the Source LGBT Q Plus Center. It's another one of these LGBT nonprofit
quote resource providers that's located in Visalia. And one of the things I've been

noticed and sort of connecting the dotshere, is how so many of these
LGBT nonprofits LGBT events like the recentyou know, gay Pride thing that happened
at the Chaffee Zoo, is theinterplay between them and various medical entities.
So one of the big entities supportingthis LGBT resource centers in Vicealia is a

local federally qualified health clinic that offerstransgender hormone treatments. Transgender hormone treatments,
which is a big business. It'sa very profitable, lucrative service to offer

to LGBT persons. Why, well, doesn't take up a lot of provider
time, doesn't take up a lotof exam room time, and you get
a big fat reimbursement if you're thedoctor providing it, if you're the clinic
providing it, you get a bigfat re imbursement for the drugs for the
hormones. So it's very lucrative.So what I've noticed is okay. Yeah,

Let's say you're a medical clinic thatoffers stuff like that, and especially
inn FQHC, you're making money handover fist because not only even if you're
getting a patient who's covered by medicalyou're getting way more than medical money because
you're supplemented by federal subsidization. That'swhat a federally qualified health clinic is.
It's basically a clinic that's designed totake Medicaid patients, but it gets additional

federal money to supplement the usually fairlypaltry reimbursement that you would get from someone's
Medicaid in California medical coverage. Sowhat I notice is all of these LGBT
entities, they're being sponsored and supportedby local medical entities who want to get

in on the trans gender hormone game. And it makes sense. You're one
of these clinics. You give aten thousand dollars donation to some LGBT quote
resource center, you get named,You set up a relationship with them.
Hey, if you know of someonewho needs medical services, you can refer
them to us. We'll take careof them. So you spend ten thousand

dollars on a charitable donation to them, set up, you know, this
nice partnership, and they send youten patients in a year. Guess what
you're gonna make that ten thousand dollarsback? And then some Now there's this
interplay, I think, between medicalentities, the cultural left, and these

different LGBT But basically, here's thethesis. When you scratch the surface of
the LGBT movement, and especially thetransgender movement, but the LGBT movement more
broadly, why is it getting somuch cultural purchase? Why is it so
widespread? I think this happens witha lot of altruistic liberal so called altruistic

liberal causes. You scratch that exteriorsurface a little bit, and what do
you find. They may have aflag with all the colors of the rainbow,
but you scratch that surface a bit, and what do you find underneath?
Green money, money, money,money, money, money, Guess

what. Healthcare for LGBT persons isoften pretty expensive, and when healthcare is
expensive, medical providers make money.Here's the news about it, just a
gleaming story about it, with nosinister, sinister undertones at all, with

no questions asked from your Central Valleydot com. I think that's connected with
like KC twenty four and CBS fortyseven. The source LGBT Plus Center in
Vicealia will receive a six hundred thousanddollars grant in over in over three years
and guessing that means over the courseof three years, as part of an

innovative program to help stop the spreadof HIV, Center officials announced on Friday.
Hmm, what is this plan tostop the spread of HIV? Center
officials say the grant was provided bythe California Department of Public Health. Here
you go, your tax dollars atwork as part of their PRP and PEP

Initiation and Retention Initiative, which willaward over nineteen million dollars in grants to
twenty four organizations across the state.According to center officials, the initiative is
focused on increasing access to and utilizationof pre Exposure Profile Axis pr EP and

post Exposure Profile Axis PEP among populationswith the highest risk of HIV. So
what does that mean, mister Girardi, what these regimens of drugs are?

Let me explain what this is insteadof telling let's be blunt oft in gay
men, Hey, maybe restrain yourselves. Maybe heck, maybe even only stick
to one sexual partner. Heck,maybe reduce your risky behavior in order to

lessen the chance that you'll get HIV. Instead, what we've decided to do,
what medical providers are deciding to do, and again this sounds like a
very expensive and lucrative process, isgive gay men a bunch of drugs to

have them basically be constantly using preexposure prophylactic drugs before you're being exposed to
HIV. Use a drug that isthat could have a prophylactic measure, So

just constantly be taking antibiotics, justknowing that you're going to engage in very
health risky sexual behaviors. It's basicallya way of saying gay men cannot exercise
or will not or certain percentage ofgame and just will not exercise the kind

of self control needed to live ahealthy sexual lifestyle. So therefore we're just
going to load them up on somany drugs antibiotics to sort of help give
them some prophylactic protection against HIV.On the front end, here's the story
about it from The American Conservative.I talked about this a couple months ago,

written by Theodore Dalrymple. There's aneasy way to eliminate death on the
roads prohibit all traffic. Unfortunately,such a policy would have effects other than
the elimination of death on the roads, but road safety experts might have difficulty
in appreciating this, As we sawduring COVID Enthusiasts, who may be perfectly
honest and sincere, are sometimes blindedto other considerations by their enthusiasm. The

elaboration of public policy requires more thanattention to narrow scientific findings. Important as
the latter are, policy rarely hitsonly its target. Trials of the old
and cheap antibiot doxycycline taken post exposurehave been shown in trials to be effective
in preventing sexually transmitted diseases, atleast among cisgender men who have unprotected sex

with men, as the scientific literaturenow delicately puts it, and among quote
transgender women. The CDC therefore nowproposes to recommend the prophylactic use of doxycycline
by such persons in such circumstances.To enter the literature of what is now

known as doxi PEP is to entera world in which acronymic medical bureaucretse confront
sodom and gomorrah. The paper publishedin April last year in the New England
Journal of Medicine as a good example. It describes a trial in which five
hundred one people in California were signedeither to take prophylactic doxycycline after quote unprotected
sex, or to receive quote normalcare. The five hundred one people were

of defined types. They were menwho have sex with men and transgender women,
so men who have attempted to becomeand live as women who were taking
prep pre exposure prophylaxis to HIV orplwh's persons living with HIV infection, all
of whom had had Gonneria, chlamydiaor syphalis infections within the last year,

and still practiced unprotected sexual relations.One might hope that even in California,
the five hundred and one persons whoentered the trial were not representative of the
population as a whole, but theresults of the trial were clearer and more
decisive than the results of clinical trials. Often are those subjects who took the
doxycycline immediately after having had perhaps Ishould say, experienced unprotected sex contracted considerably

fewer sexually transmitted diseases than those whodid not. Among the preps, the
percentage of those who took doxycycline whodeveloped STIs during follow up was ten point
seven percent compared with thirty one pointnine percent of those who did not.
So basically, you're going to gaymen are what the politically correct medical culture

is now recommending to gay men,because statistically speaking, we're seeing a lot
of gay men who are just notregulating their sexual lives in a safe way
at all. Is. Let's loadyou up with antibiotics pretty much, just

constantly before you've been exposed to sexuallytransmitted disease and therefore will lessen your odds
of getting a sexually transmitted disease sexuallytransmitted infection from thirty one percent to ten
percent, not eliminate your chances,not bring your chances down to one percent.

We're just going to reduce it fromthirty percent to ten percent, meaning
that if you keep living this kindof sexual lifestyle, you're certainly going to
get all kinds of STIs, butthis is just going to somewhat reduce the
likelihood of that. But at thesame time, pharmaceutical and medical entities can

make money off of giving you allthese drugs. By the way, the
persons who participated in this study thatwas written up last year in the New
England Journal of Medicine, and againState of California is giving a six hundred
thousand dollars grant to this Vicealia LGBTResource Center to help them promote this practice

of just loading gay men up withantibiotics beforehand to lessen their odds of getting
sdis from like thirty percent to tenpercent. The study from the New England
Journal Medicine that discussed this five hundredand one biological mail, the number of
sexual partners experienced over the past threemonths by this cohort varied between four and

seventeen, with lifetime figures being betweenone hundred and forty three and four hundred
and ninety one. Now this wasself report, admittedly with its possible under
and overestimation. The median age forthis group was thirty six for the preps
and forty three for the plwhs.So the first flush of youth cannot account

for the continued large number of sexualpartners, or what, at any rate
to me seemed in my bourgeois conventionalitya large number neither past infection nor the
prospect of future infection seems to havemoderated behavior very much in this cohort of
people, not even to the extentof using condoms. So forgive me for

forgive me for maybe noticing this.There is evidence to indicate, I mean,
this study indicates, and I'm notthis is a survey of five hundred
and one gay men. I don'tthink it was necessarily self selecting for gay
men with high numbers of sexual partners. But basically, I think the medical

industry that there is certainly a cohortof gay men who this is the lifestyle
they lead, is sexual activity withan alarmingly high number of people in ways
that are not regulated by any sortof sense of safety. And I think

the medical and pharmaceutical industries view themas a cash cow and this stuff is
coming and you see, so youhave medical and pharmaceutical entities making money,
you have nonprofits getting grant money fromthe state to help fund more of this.

I'm sure that the FQHC that's fundingthe sore, that that's you know,
supporting the source is just you know, rubbing their hands into light over
the idea that let's get more andmore of these gay patients that we're just
gonna load up on antibiotics pretty muchconstantly, and we're going to constantly have
this person as a patient. They'llhave this. Oh well, oh that'll

lessen my chances of getting an STI. Yeah, it lessens it from thirty
percent to ten percent, which means, by the way, if you keep
having sexual encounters with you know,multiple, multiple, multiple people per year
with it. If you're if you'rehaving sexual encounters with a dozen different people
every year, guess what, you'regonna get an STI, even if it's

a thirty percent to ten percent riskreduction. When we return the bizarre nature
of the local media coverage of theseLGBT stories during June, that's next on
The John Girardi Show. If youlook across the landscape of America and America's
views on quote issues relating to theLGBT question, okay, what you find

is not a united America. Oneof the interesting things is that over the
last ten years, support for gaymarriage has actually decreased, and it's particularly
decreased among younger Americans. It's certainlya majority who still support gay marriage,
but it's a still very sizable minorityof Americans who don't support gay marriage.

There's a large percentage of Americans,probably the majority, who don't think biological
males should compete in women's sports.There are large, significant numbers of Americans
who either not sure what they thinkor are negative about the whole concept of
transgender interventions, and especially when we'retalking about transgender interventions for children. Liberals

do this thing of basically proclaiming victorywell in advance and proclaiming victory so often
and in such a sustained way,And they've been helped in this by,
frankly, the Supreme Court. Theywere helped by the Supreme Court. On
the abortion issue, the Supreme Courtjust sort of ruled in nineteen seventy three.
Yep. Well, the national debate'sover abortions. The constitutional right embedded

firmly fundamentally in the Constitution has toabsolutely be legal law forty weeks of pregnancy
effect effectively, all forty weeks ofpregnancy effectively, any reason. That's it.
The Court did the same thing inObergafell. Sorry, gay marriage is
legal throughout the country. The debate'sover, it's in the constitution fundamental right

for anyone to get married. Forany two people to get married, why
it's any two people. I don'tknow what bigamy law is still out on
the books, you know. Well, no, no, there's definitely a
distinction we can make. Okay,sure, they sort of just proclaim victory.
And when you have the Supreme Courtproclaiming victory or you have individual state

governments in different states, it justprovides cover for corporate entities that are engaged
in litigation avoidance. And so allthese entities government, corporate just proclaim June
is Pride month. June is PrideMonth. And by the way, if
I were African American, I'd beroyally ticked off about this that I've seen.

There is so much more Pride Monthstuff. Then there is African American
History Month. I mean, Februarycomes and goes, and I see,
you know one or two things aboutAfrican America. You see some things,
Yeah, you go to Barnes andNoble or Borders. But for some reason,
this all encompassing Pride Month push everyJune where in Alexandria, Virginia.

Like we're permanently painting the street thecrosswalks with rainbow flags and we're filing like
felony mischief charges against teenagers for doingdonuts on the Rainbow flag with their motorized
scooters. It's this whole, allencompassing attitude of no that we just uncritically

support the L and the G andthe B and the T and whatever else
that encompasses. And meanwhile, youknow, I'm talking about this story about
this charity, this LGBT quote ResourceCenter in Visalia that's getting a six hundred
thousand dollars grand from the State ofCalifornia for basically these regimens of STD mitigation.

It's not not STD prevention at all. It's it's purely it's purely mitigation
for gay men to basically be ona regime of constant, constantly being on
antibiotics, being on antiotics before you'reexposed to sexually transmitted infections. So just
just be permanently on antibiotics to lessenyour chances of getting an SDI from thirty

percent to ten percent, not eliminateit. And by the way, if
you continue having sexual partners at thenumbers that some gay men do, you're
it doesn't matter if you reduce yourrisk from thirty percent to ten percent,
you're still gonna get an SDI likeand it could be a very serious STI
undoubtedly, And yet this grant,so this is a grant to a Vicealia

area nonprofit for a very bizarre,very open to criticism regimen of treatment for
STIs that people with a brain wouldbe like, hmm, not sure about
this. What's all the media coveras, Oh, you're's casey twenty four.
Oh, this wonderful grant. Everylocal media outlet I've seen talking about Pride

Month talks about it as if there'sno controversy, as if there's no debate,
as if this is an obvious goodcitizenship thing that we as media entities
wholeheartedly must proclaim support. Oh,come to the Chauffee Zoo for their Pride
Day thing, ignoring the huge controversythat surrounded it. I think just last

year it was either just last yearor the year before where they had a
drag story hour right after the MeasureZ vote and you had all these local
politicians, including Gary Brettefeld, whowere spitting mad that they had just you
know, stumped for Measure Z.And then the Chaffey Zoo turns around and

has a drag queen story hour thereand by the way, what's it sponsored
by Local FQHC. Local FQHC wantsto make money off of gay patients,
off of transgender patients, That's whatAnd I'm more and more convinced with this
grant from the state of California.You scratch the LGBT movement, you scratch

the rainbow, and what do youfind. Green? That's the only color
under that facade. Green. Peoplemaking money, often at the expense of
the suffering of people who identify asLGBT. When we return, how curious
is it that no other states havejoined Gavin Newsom and is called to amend
the Constitution, to amend the SecondAmendment. Maybe it's not that curious at

all. That's next on the JohnGerardi Show. So last year Gavin Newso
made some momentary headlines by calling foramending the United States Constitution for amending specifically
the Second Amendment in order to facilitatemore regulations on guns. And part of

this, I think was in responseto Supreme Court decisions. We've had a
couple of recent Supreme Court decisions aboutthe Second Amendment and whether it is an
individual right and concealed carry laws beingsort of a frankly very much at the
heart of the Second Amendment. Ifyou have a right to keep end bare
arms, if you have a rightto bear arms, that would mean presumably

that you can carry them outside ofyour house. And that's what concealed carry
is. You know, it's verysquarely within the historical, you know,
definition of what keeping bare arms means. So anyway, Newsom has been very
upset about this, and he sohe has proposed a constitutional amendment, an

amendment to the United States Constitution togive more leeway to gun control advocates to
pass restrictions on guns. And there'sa part of me, as much as
I don't know that I don't thinkat all that I agree with the gun
control lobby. It's sort of athing of it's kind of an all or

nothing. Either completely ban private gunownership in the United States or don't keep
our regime that we have. Ithink those are the only two intellectually honest
positions, because all of the guncontrol restrictions that knew that the left is

proposing are things that would not reallydo much to actually reduce the supply of
guns in the country, and therebydoing anything to reduce the actual lart the
actual number of gun violence deaths.You know, let's have an assault weapons

ban, all right, Well,most gun violence in America is happening with
handguns. It's not happening with quoteassault weapons, which again is kind of
a made up term that doesn't necessarilyhave any real world significance. Often something
can be deemed a quote assault weaponon the basis of sort of features and

add ons and stuff like that thatare somewhat cosmetic in nature, rather than
actually things that impact the lethality ofa gun. So there, I just
see the attempts at regulation on thepart of the left as not really going

to be things that are going toimpact gun violence. We need more mandated
background checks, Okay, well wealready have a bunch of background checks.
Criminals necessarily are going to like,how is that going to stop a criminal
though, wants to kill people.Criminals are going to get guns illegally off
the black market. They don't needto go through a background check because they're

getting them illegally. Right. Usually, when you arrest a gang banger for
a gun violence crime, you canalso tack on, you know, a
couple more years of sending another chargefor unlawful possession of a firearm because ninety
nine times out of one hundred,or I don't know what the exact percentage
is, maybe it's nine times outof ten, whatever it is, they've
got that handgun illegally. They've gota handgun with the serial number sand it

off or whatever it is. Andeven like the attempts that all these states
make to restrict concealed carry, beingable to get a concealed carry permit,
and that New York was doing theCalifornia does, and in California it's kind
of a it had been in NewYork, it had been kind of a
county by county basis, and theSupreme Court said, hey, you can't

have a county by county, youknow, different regime. What a silly
way of reducing gun violence. Concealedcarry permit holders are some of the least
likely people to actually engage in gunviolence. Like, it's such a silly
thing. Here's the people who demonstratedthe greatest willingness to jump through all the

legal hoops necessary to carry a gunsafely, and we're going to restrict them.
They're not the ones doing the crimes. Now, the only thing I
could see, actually making a dentin the total number of gun violence incidents

that happen in this country would bea massive something where you need to pitch
out the Second Amendment almost entirely andsay individual gun ownership is no kind of
a right whatsoever, and that thegovernment can just basically confiscate all the guns,
put all the gun manufacturing companies outof business in America, and massively

drastically lessen the supply of guns throughoutthe United States. Now, that has
a lot of bad side effects toit also, which is why I'm not
advocating it. But I am saying, if you're being intellectually honest, I
think you have to either advocate forthat or for the status quo. I

think most of the liberal gun controlpolicies that are in the air right now
they're just sort of flim flamming aroundthe edges of what would actually lessen gun
violence. Now, Newsome proposes thisconstitutional amendment, and when I heard it,

I it was like, Okay,this is refreshing. He realizes that
most liberal gun control policies are justflim flam around the edges of what can
we get away with. As faras interpreting the Second Amendment and allowing us
still to restrict guns, which isnot much, which I think is half
you know what, you know,half budded. I'm not sure if I'm
allowed to say the actual word onthe radio. Half you know what,

died restrictions on gun violence that arenot actually gonna have a big impact.
So Newsom's like, all right,let's just have a whole new paradigm here
where we're not restricted by the SecondAmendment at all. Let's let's just rewrite
the Second Amendment and let's really restrictthe supply of guns in the Okay,
Like, again, I don't agreewith it, but at least I found

I would find it intellectually refreshing.But then I actually hear the specific proposals
Newsom's offering, and it's more ofthe same. He wants to amend the
Second Amendment just to keep doing thesame. Flimflam, Oh, just more
background checks, more of this,more more restrictions on on assault weapons and

dead do none of that's really impactingthe gun violence rate. Why are you
going through the rigamarole of trying tointerpret the Second Amendment, of trying to
amend the Second Amendment to refashion theSecond Amendment, just to do that,
what's the point. And then Irealized what it was. I realized what

it was because I saw a tweetfrom Gavin Newsom's personal Twitter account, not
his official State of Governor of CaliforniaTwitter account, which is owned by the
state, which he can't use forcampaign purposes. A tweet from his personal
account with an image leading to alink to his super pack. Super Pack

that he helped get started with allof his extra campaign money from his three
you know, gubernatorial elections, says, if you support amending the constitution to
allow for federal background checks and youknow, restricting assault weapons and all this
sort of buzzword language that the progun control left always uses, click here

to sign the petition. And that'swhen I knew, all right, sign
the petition. Ding ding dinging inging ding. There goes John Girardi's BS
alarm. Any politician asking you tosign a petition unless it's an actual qualify
a ballot initiative for a ballot petition, that's that's that's the only thing I'm

excluding here that's an actual thing toget a ballot initiative on the ballot.
Other than that, if a politicianis asking you to sign a petition.
This is a scam. This isa scam to get your email address and
get your your phone number so thatthat politician can email and or text you

donation, solicit solicitations come election time. That's all it is. So we
get this story from the La Timesthat it's been a year since Newsom introduced
this idea of amending the state constitution, and no other Blue state has taken

him up on it, No otherBlue state, no other Blue state governor
has sort of joined him in callingfor amending the constitution. The governor's pitch,
the story goes, inspired a roundof media coverage last year that elevated
his national profile as a Democrat tryingto do something about mass shootings and other

gun violence. Mass shootings are avery small minority of all the gun violence
in America. To call it massshootings and other gun violence, it should
be the other way around, othergun violence and mass shootings whatever. Newsom
pointed to findings of a Fox newspolthat found overwhelming voter support for the restrictions.
The gun initiative has given him anotheropportunity to reach out to voters outside
of California, ding Ding, Dingding Ding. Gavin news I wants to

run for president. This is justabout increasing his profiles. We can run
for president. It's just about ticklingthe fancy of the you know, two
hundred or so super wealthy people thathe's hoping will bankroll his eventual run for
president, if not this year,than in twenty twenty eight. Yet Newsom

must still contend with the stubborn politicsof the Second Amend. Oh, that's
stubborn Second Amendment. Many lawmakers atthe national and state level are reluctant to
buck a powerful gun lobby. Forgod's sake, that there are so many
liberal lobbies that have more money thanthe NRA. It's this is idiotic and
risk being accused of trying to dilutethe constitutional right to bear arms. I

mean, it wouldn't be being accusedof it would be diluting it. If
you amend the Second Amendment to allowfor more gun regulation, you would be
diluting the right to bare arms.The governor said he expected the slow pop
progress, adding that support for aconstitutional amendment on gun control could take twenty
years to catch on. Come on, no one was naive about this.

K Newsom said in a recent interviewwith The Times, Actually, I think
he was banking on lots and lotsof people being naive about this, because
again, this is not about actuallyamending the Constitution, which he knows is
wellnigh impossible to do, especially overa contentious issue like this. The point
of this, the point of GavinNewsom proposing to amend the Constitution about gun

control, was to increase his profile, to tickle the fancy of the ultra
wealthy donors who watch MSNBC and loveit when Newsom, you know, gets
in fights with Ron DeSantis and doesthis kind of performative stuff that's clearly to
entertain those people so that they willgive him money for twenty twenty eight.
That's what this is all about.When we return, how do people propose

we talk about LGBT stuff with ourkids next? On the John Girardi Show,
my wife and I were genuinely goingthrough this, as you know,
it's June and there are lots ofstores where the Pride Month merch is all
over the place, and we nowhave our kids are sort of getting older.

We've got nine year old, sevenyear old, five year old who
can all read four year old can't, baby can't, And it was down
to this thing of My wife andI are kind of at the point that
we basically refuse to go to Targetduring June. Target is maybe the of
all, like big store retailers,probably the most aggressively pro LGBT. They

have been for years. They wereallowing biological men and women's restrooms long before,
long before anyone else was doing it. So my wife and I are
like we were. It's and it'snot just that we don't want to support
it. It's also like our kidscan read and they'll probably see this stuff

and ask us like, well,what's this about? And I guess I'm
just not sure. I how howis a Christian parent who believes that sexuality
is ordered in a certain way.I just feel as though, like I
find it difficult, and my wifefinds it difficult just to take our kids

to places where they're so loudly proclaimingan ethic that is so contrary to what
we believe, and that's so loudlyproclaiming an ethic that's contray to what not
just I believe, but a largepercentage of the country. I just find

it difficult, and it saddens methat probably a lot of parents may struggle
with this, but it's just partof the air we breathe and it just
shouldn't be. That'll do it forJohn Girardi Show, See you next time
on Power Talk.
Advertise With Us

Popular Podcasts

1. Start Here
2. Dateline NBC

2. Dateline NBC

Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.

3. Amy and T.J. Podcast

3. Amy and T.J. Podcast

"Amy and T.J." is hosted by renowned television news anchors Amy Robach and T. J. Holmes. Hosts and executive producers Robach and Holmes are a formidable broadcasting team with decades of experience delivering headline news and captivating viewers nationwide. Now, the duo will get behind the microphone to explore meaningful conversations about current events, pop culture and everything in between. Nothing is off limits. “Amy & T.J.” is guaranteed to be informative, entertaining and above all, authentic. It marks the first time Robach and Holmes speak publicly since their own names became a part of the headlines. Follow @ajrobach, and @officialtjholmes on Instagram for updates.

Music, radio and podcasts, all free. Listen online or download the iHeart App.


© 2024 iHeartMedia, Inc.