October 3, 2024 • 36 mins
Hour 4 of A&G features...
- Biden's weak response to Iran
- The power of censorship
- A lot of well educated people don't understand free speech
- Final Thoughts!
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Getty and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
All of this is happening in the background of the
big thing that the entire region is waiting for, which
is what will Israel's response to those one hundred and
eighty ballistic missiles filed by the Iranians just about two
days ago. What will that response look like? And of
course that is what is going to set the tone
and the tempo for this really region wide war that
(00:44):
we're now seeing. We've been talking to the past year
about the threat of the regionalization of this conflict between
Iran and Israel. Now we are seeing it in real time,
and it's up to the Israelis to determine whether or
not they are going to pummel Aron and invite a
further escalation, or they're going to restrain themselves as the
Biden administration seems to be asking them to do.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Seems to be. Joe Biden was asked specifically yesterday, should
Israel take out the nuclear facilities? Is no, No, The
response needs to be proportional, Okay, what's a proportional response
to having two hundred ballistic missiles shot at you? It
seems like seems like taking out the entire government would
(01:25):
be a proportional response. They're trying to take out your
biggest city.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Yeah, a major attack like that, And I'm sure Joe
Biden will say would say, well, Israel's good at shooting
down missiles, so a proportional expense is one that doesn't
do much damaging her on either.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
Yeah, that's not what proportional response means. But I don't
want to get hung up on that thing again. So
we have new Joe Biden information. He was asked this morning, well,
let's listen to the clip and then we can discuss.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Health striking Iran oil facility CERNCE word discussion.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
I think I think that would be a little anyway
swift plan to allow strike back against Ron.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
First of all, we don't allow he is real.
Speaker 4 (02:13):
We advis is real, and there's nothing going to happen today.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
There's nothing going to happen today, which is probably not
something he should be saying, because that's not the same
being at war works. You don't like announce today today
you're in the clear, so stand down. We're not doing
anything today. That's odd, element I surprise, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
Well, and how about to straight out of that Saturday
Night Live bit the other night he hit us with
a well, I tell.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
You what anyway?
Speaker 1 (02:44):
Yeah, whoa, whoa, whoa. That sentence, that sentence, it started
with such promises.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
What were you going to say? Well, played again. I
just want to hear that first part again and then
we'll come in here.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Michael, do you support is well striking Iran oil facilities?
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Service? Word discuss?
Speaker 5 (03:00):
I think I think that would be a little strip plan.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
Okay, So I think that would be a little anyway.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Well, he realized he shouldn't be saying that because he
got in trouble yesterday and rightfully so for saying no
when asked if they should strike the nuclear facilities. So
today about the oil refineries, I think that would be
a little bit we're no. Just saying we're in discussion
about that obviously puts it on the table like you
think that'd be okay, which it definitely will be. And
(03:31):
as he was correct in saying, we don't tell them
what to do, or shouldn't be telling them what to do.
Although you know, when you give a country all their stuff,
it's kind of like if you're if you're adult child
is going to live at your house. They're adults, but
they live at your house. So it's not a lot
(03:56):
like that, You don't think, I well, legally we don't
have the right to tell Iszuel what to do. But
I mean, if we give them three to five billion
dollars a year and eight in the planes and the
bombs and everything like that, and rearm the velvet dome,
iron dome, I don't know where it came from for them.
(04:18):
We have some say.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Some yeah, but I think it's it's reminiscent of all
of us. All of us have had bosses, for instance,
that are smart and innovative and great leaders. We have
had mediocre bosses. We have had gutless, spineless bosses who've
got in the way of the productivity of the enterprise.
I don't care who you are, what the line of
work you're in, you've probably run into that sort of thing.
(04:42):
Benjamin Not in Yahoo and the Israeli people have a gutless,
spineless sugar daddy right and Joe Biden, and they are
managing upward the best they can. They cannot defer to
his wishes or it will end in defeat, so they're
trying to smooth it the best they can.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Now. From and what I understand, the sentiment is overwhelming
in Israel, even though Netanyao himself is not that popular,
although it's gone up in recent months, it's overwhelmingly popular.
The idea of hitting Iran directly really really hard. So
he's on solid political ground in his own country on
(05:20):
some sort of direct attack on Iran, even though our
prisons said no, or we're having discussions about well, I
don't think they should. Well anyway, these are a little anyway,
These are some major decisions like could change world history
(05:41):
sorts of decisions.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
And these might be lead ups to decisions that are
ten times as impactful.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
And the guy in charge is, well, we shouldn't. I
mean I probably oughtn't. I think they anyway?
Speaker 1 (05:55):
What I don't think I'm supposed to talk about this
Jackie Jackie dead or is she here.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
About our institutions now?
Speaker 1 (06:05):
But he's good to go for another four years as
of like seventy days ago. Effing believe they were claiming
that with a straight face.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
Oh my god, And I don't want to.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
I don't want to, I mean change my words.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
So I'm talking to some of Yes, I'm sorry, who's
from Amas? Wait, there's more. I'm talking to some of
about there because I've talked to several of you in
the last couple of days. I brought up the idea
of I'm concerned about who's making the decisions on a
(06:42):
lot of this stuff, because I think sometimes Joe Biden
is capable of being sharp and understanding what's going on
and making a decision. But I think we all agree
that there are lots of times he's not, And what
if something happens when he's not who's making the decisions?
And as with a few people who said you don't
know that, I said, no, do you? Yeah, Obama is
(07:04):
don't you read the news? Obama's making all the decisions
now him and Hillary. So apparently for some of you,
that's a story that's floating around somewhere that Obama and
Hillary are currently running the government. Obama I don't believe that, but.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Thank Junior always appreciated. I actually think it's you know,
a lot of Obama's team that's very influential in the
Biden White House.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
It's blinking on this stuff. Probably with Sullivan discussing with
the Secretary Defense. Maybe I don't know, because I mean,
if the Secretary of State says, I think we should blank,
the Secretary of Defense might say, you don't tell me
what to do. So I don't know how to make
those decisions. That's the problem with not having you know,
the constitutional order working right now is I don't know how.
(07:53):
That's why I ask who's making the decisions and how,
because nobody actually has the authority. And let's think we
go ahead unless Blincoln's coming out of meetings and saying, hey,
Lloyd Austin, we need to move another aircraft carrier, or
on the orders of Joe Biden. You know, he's claiming
that Joe Biden is saying these things. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
I was just going to say, we've all seen dramas
of uh, you know, contested wills or succession at a
company or whatever, where the doddering oldster is being manipulated
by the young connivers behind the scenes. And then Totter's
out and says, yeah, I'm not going to bequeath my
(08:33):
estate quite yet. I've reconsidered, and everybody looks around like
they got to him somehow, they got to him because
they're manipulating the old farts, and that's what's happening at
the White House almost certainly.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
So you think Jake Sullivan goes in there with the
piece of paper, could you sign this, sir? It's a
National blueberry Day and it's just important to you said,
yet it put your name there and date.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
It's a aircraft. It's an aircraft carrier full of bloe.
We're gonna donate them to the Polynesians.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Yeah, Asians. They're dirt hungry keeping their cats.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
And Lloyd Austin's like, what what did you do? You
conniving bastard. I'm telling you the.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Movies with his really low voice, what are you doing?
I think it's important consider carefully, Oh, the lighter side
of the run up to World War three? I hope
not hope not in here. But it's freaking weird that
we got a president that's not capable of like understanding
in any given time, what the hell's going on? Mesh
(09:36):
for them Inwa unless you want to get the back
I tell you what.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
The Mullas are quaking in their slippers whatever they weardals
hearing that sort of forcefulness.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
It's interesting that so much of the world wears pretty
much only sandals only. Ah, it's warm there hot, that's it.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Your feet get all gamy. You don't want that. How
about a lovely croc for the ayatola. It's got the
all ventilation holes. They might rock them behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Where's that Satan's own shoe.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
It's Western decadence, no doubt, but they got them. They
got them. It's like the all the hypocrisy. Oh, we're
a devout scholar. I just happen to have seventeen fourteen
year old wives, right and.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Crocs, So you think they walk out and sandals and
then behind the scenes, Ah, back into my crocs.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Woo. I wish I could not sporting three hundred dollars
loafers or whatever Western suits.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
Right, dang it, what a situation. So that was just
a little bit ago that Joe Biden was asked that
and how much I mean, this is this is the
biggest international story in the world right now. How hard
is Israel going to hit Iran?
Speaker 1 (10:51):
And the President's a little anyway.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
We're still discussing that. I don't know, it's a well anyway,
but it's not gonna happen today. Wow, that was unhelpful.
All three half sentences were incredibly unhelpful. Yeah, wow, all right,
we got a lot more on the way.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
Another shocking story coming out of Lebanon that's breaking right now.
Pagers belonging to members of Hesbola were simultaneously detonated, and
walkie talkies all over the country began exploding in another
wave of what appears to be Israeli retaliations, but just
moments ago, in a truly surreal twist, the rectums of
goats all over the country exploded at the same time,
(11:39):
killing an additional one thy eight hundred people and injuring
thousands of others, as well as killing countless goats. PETA
has just issued a statement denouncing the actions of the
IDF for senselessly killing all those goats. However, you'd have
to think if the IDF was behind this, they may
have been doing those goats a huge favor.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
How long is that is artificial intelligence generated a fake report?
Speaker 2 (12:07):
Yeah, exactly. You may have played that in violation of
the state law of California.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
The Gavin News gosh, yeah, the anti parody law.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
That was not Jake Tapper, you know, that fits in
perfectly with this, did you We didn't talk about John
Kerry's speech that he gave the other day at the
World the Economic Forum about the First Amendment, right, and
it's really quite amazing. Rather than I'm reading from Jonathan
Turley's piece in the New York Post today, rather than
(12:37):
extole the benefits of the democratic liberty versus dictatorships and oligarchs,
John Kerry, presidential candidate in two thousand and four, former
Secretary of State called the First Amendment of the United
States Constitution a major block to keeping people from believing
the wrong things. Here's the quote. You know, there's a
lot of discussion. I won't talk like John Cary the
(12:59):
whole time that would it would be kind of fun.
You know, there's a lot of discussion now about how
you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you're
going to have some accountability on facts. But look, if
people only get to one source, and the source they
go to is sick and you know, has an agenda
and they're putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as
(13:19):
a major block to be able to just you know,
hammer it out of existence. So what we need is
to win the ground, win the right to govern by
hopefully winning enough votes that you're free to be able
to implement change. So Jonathan Turley writes, the freedom to
be won in this election is to liberate officials who
look like him, who look like himself, can set about
(13:42):
controlling what can be said, read or heard. Carry insisted
that the problem with social media is that the one
who is controlling what they can say or read needs
to be dealt with. I I so, do you understand
what the the powerful like John Kerry and some others
(14:02):
are saying, what their vision of the First Amendment is
in their way?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
I think I think the problem And just as an aside,
it's funny, I have prepared a First AMENDMENTEE segment next segment,
which is perfect. I'll talk about it for days. But
I honestly think and it's hard for normal people like
y'all and like ourselves. I think to picture having this
sort of hubris. John Carry actually thinks he and his
(14:32):
ilk have the wisdom, the knowledge, and the well they
can be trusted with the power of censorship because they'll
just censor the things that ought to be censored. They
will just censor misinformation and disinformation to keep the poor fool.
So he mentioned, who just see one source from being
misled by the evil doers, We'll give us that right
(14:54):
and we'll protect you.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Carrie went on to say that now mostly free speech,
now most protects corporate interests and threatens essential jobs of
the state, such as protecting national security and the safety
and privacy of its citizens.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Wow, So free speech only protects corporate interests, but the
government and of course the citizens who belove their government,
are being screwed by free speech somehow.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Right, the free speech is getting in the way of
the security of the state, that is what he said.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
And whether it is deliberate evil doing or just that
sort of hubristic, you know, naive self regard, I don't know, you.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Know, maybe it fits in with like the moderators on
the debate the other night, or the last couple of debates,
where it's amazing to me that intelligent people can be
so blind did by their beliefs, that they are fully
in the camp of our side is all good and
right and honest, and the other side is evil and awful.
(16:09):
And it makes perfectly good sense as a decent, law abiding,
smart person to put my thumb on the scale for
the side that is good and honest and decent and
against the side that is evil. And you know, Margaret
Brennan and O'Donell and so many others seem to believe that,
and John Carey believes that, Well, I'm on the side
that is good as honest, and we never abuse our
power or do anything wrong or lie, so of course
(16:32):
we can make that decision. What are you even talking about.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
The nightmare of everybody's rights being taken away during COVID, Well,
the data changed. We didn't hear about the schools in
Sweden are intent with?
Speaker 2 (16:44):
I think I've had an epiphany, a slow and coming.
Can you sum it up for us, Well, just that
these people actually freaking believe that they are on the
side of what is right and good and that they
never do wrong, which.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
Is what makes them so scary. Seal Lewis's famous quote
about the worst sort of oppression is the person who
believes they're doing it for your own good.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Yeah, that is what makes it so scary. They actually
believe it.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
Or on this theme, the car Strong and Getty, some
business news CVS just and as they're laying off nearly
three thousand workers in an effort.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
To cut costs. Now, every CVS pharmacy will just have
a pumpkin bucket filled with pills and as.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Time as says, please take one.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
That's interesting. Yeah, I uh, I don't think I can
get any trouble for saying this. So is that the
CVS One time and because I got one near my house,
so I used it because it was just so handy
being a couple of blocks away, especially with the number
of prescriptions we have in my family. Ah, but is
(17:49):
there one time and I was getting it's just like
a ridiculous price for this one prescription, and the person said,
the pharmacists behind the counter, see, can I talk to
you for a second. She comes out around we go
over to the side and she said, you could get
this at Costco for like eighty cents. Oh. I said, okay,
thanks for the tip, and I started using the Costco pharmacy.
It's the best pharmacy there is is the Costco pharmacy
(18:10):
that I've ever used. Fast friendly, you get somebody on
the phone right away if you ever have to call.
The prices. I just I'm not getting paid for this.
Its just been my personal experience as a guy who
has lots of prescriptions.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Yeah, I just don't. Well, we can talk off the airs,
can I say, doesn't our health plan tell us to
go to some place?
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Makes us go to a variety of places. Yeah, and
everybody makes money. Yeah, right, so that's something that.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
The person at CBS pulled me aside. Oh, yes, good
for her, it's very nice for she cared more about
you know, me than her business apparently.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And the executives at CVS has figured out what branch
that is. And she is now out of work and
crying softly on her couch at home. Well else, she
just lost her home thanks to Jack. So, continuing our
free speech theme, thought this was just great. It's a
couple of different things. But the free press talking about
(19:10):
a lot of powerful, well educationd well educated people don't
understand how free speech works. For example, Tim Walls at
Tuesday's vice presidential debate, the Minnesota governor said the First
Amendment does not cover hate speech or yelling fire in
a crowded theater. Wrong on both counts.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
And I'm a knucklehead at times.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
Right, So it doesn't protect hate speech is an assertion
you hear ten thousand times a day on America's college campuses.
That is absolutely patently false. One person's hate speech is
another person's legitimate criticism. And just anybody who ever claims
that to you know you are dealing with either a
(19:52):
muttonhead or a neo Marxist, and reject them.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
I like your hate speech. Probably I hate you, I
really hate you.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
That is hate speech. Yes. In fact, if you run
into a person making that claim, I suggest you knock
them down and run away from them as quickly as possible.
But the other part that I thought was so very interesting,
and once again it's our our good friends at thefire
dot org used to be the Foundation for individual Rights
and education. Now it's just the what do they call
(20:21):
themselves foundation for in visual rights? Excellent? I can't remember
what the E stands for in fire anymore, but they
are crusaders for the First Amendment and I love them
for that. Wow. Wow, inappropriate and inaccurate. But you need
to be silenced anyway. I thought this was so interesting
(20:42):
in a discussion about the riot at the US Capitol, walstl.
Vanstir limus free speech.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
You can't, you know, fire in a crowded theater.
Speaker 1 (20:48):
That's the test that's the Supreme Court test. Well, as
usual with the old coach, he only has half an
idea what the hell he's talking about? But what's lead
at times that you've heard expressed a thousand times in
your life, that you can't yell fire in a crowded theater.
That that's the Supreme Court's test for unprotected speech is
(21:11):
both wild, widely held and dead wrong. That phrase comes
from Justice the infamous Justice for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
in a nineteen nineteen opinion called Shank versus Us and writes,
fire it's a testament to the power of a well
turned phrase that we're still hearing it more than one
hundred years later. Stop and think, can it possibly be true?
(21:32):
You can't shout fire in a crowded theater? Well, if
there is a fire, or you really think there is one,
do you need to be quiet about it? Must you
remain silent as you race to pull the fire alarm?
Of course not, that's absurd.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Well, first of all, I always believe that I've heard
it my whole life, and I always thought that was
the test I heard. Sarah Isger of The Dispatch do
a long piece on this probably similar to what you're
about to read, like a year ago or something. She said,
nothing makes me crazier as a Then somebody's saying you
can't yell fire in a crowded theater. It's not true,
and I thought it's not. So I listened to the
(22:05):
whole thing, but I believed it my whole life, and
I always assumed it meant if there's not a fire,
not you're not allowed to yell. If there's a fire,
that would be really awful.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Well, right, we're working on.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
Is the word.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
But that premise leaves out some crucial details, which is
precisely why that's not what Justice Holmes wrote. What he
did write was this, the most stringent protection of free
speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire
in a theater and causing a panic. Notice the two qualifications.
The shout of fire has to be false if there
(22:41):
were fire, a good reasona believe there was, the prohibsion
does not apply. And don't worry, there's even more to
it than that.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Honor.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Can you be punished if you falsely shout fire in
a theater? But there is no panic. That means people
whose alert simply caused no panickers safe from prosecution as.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
For thoroughness's sake.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Also note that Holmes phrase doesn't touch on whether the
theaters crowded. You wouldn't get a free pass to falsely
Panica theater that's only half full either. So and here's
where it gets interesting.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
That's interesting. So five month theater and there's just three
of us there. We're watching a very unpopular movie months
after it came out. There's just three of us in there.
It's ridiculously cold because they have the air conditioners set
for a crowd. And I help fire and people say, yeah,
I thought a shot of smoke too, And everybody just
gets up and walks out.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
At regular smail, I reckon, we ought to go. This
movie sucks anyway, right exactly. But again, here's where it
gets really interesting. So what exactly did Shank do? Because
he lost unanimously the Supreme Court case, the decision famously
written by Justice Holmes, he wrote and distributed a pamphlet
(23:47):
urging Americans to peacefully resist being drafted to fight into
World War One.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
That's all. That's all he did.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
The true insidiousness of the fire in the crowded theater
phrase is the way that from the very beginning. It's
been wielded to justify censorship of a broad range of
speech that has nothing to do with fires or theaters.
His pamphlet, it's two pages, were headed long lived the
Constitution of the United States. Wake up, America, your liberties
(24:18):
are in danger. Assert your rights, quoted the Thirteenth Amendment,
which abolished slavery. Labeled the draft a form of involuntary
servitude and was quite well reasoned, whether you'd agree with
it or not. In a democracy, in a democratic country,
each man must have the right to stay whether he's
willing to join the army. It also said conscription laws
(24:39):
belong to a bygone age. That's a quote, and urged
recipients quote to write your congressman and tell him you
want the law repealed. Do not submit to intimidation. You
have a right to appeal to any law.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
And for that.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
He was convicted of three counts of violating the Espionage
Act of nineteen seventeen served six months in jail because
the Supreme Court said, well, he said, this is a
clear and present danger. It's like shouting fire in a
crowded theater. When what he said was one hundred percent
(25:13):
defensible under the First Amendment, the point being obviously reasonable
sounding standards and examples are used from the beginning to
outlaw speech. This one hundred percent defensive.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
So he I'd forgotten that he was. He lost that
case that a lot of there are a lot of
things that are happening, particularly in the early early twentieth century,
that are awful, and the idea that things were better
back in the day and you know, going the wrong
direction on every front is not true. You know, you
(25:52):
back to the days when that sort of thing was happening.
But I'm trying to think, first of all, in the
debate the other night, why did Walls bring that up?
What was his point? What? How did he apply the
fire theater? Did it have to do?
Speaker 1 (26:06):
I think with social media and the need for social
media to enforce the dictates of the government to ban
disinformation and misinformation. I don't remember he was holding the
big platforms responsible for misinformation.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
And then I was trying to think, when have I
ever used it before? Like I said, up until a
year ago, and I'm old, I've believed it my whole life.
Well it's it's true, though, right I can yell fire,
Well if I if I what what happens if you
get if I'm in a crowded theater and I ye'll.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
Think the thread that was not the key point.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Well, I know, I know, I know, I know, but
I'm trying to get So if I yell fire in
a crowded theater and there is a panic and there
was not a fire, I have committed a crime. Yes,
since she caused a panic.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
You certainly could be held civilly liable.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
But I'm trying to think in what cases did I
ever use Have I ever used that argument? I'm not
sure I have. I think it might just be something
I heard and thought was interesting, and I believe my
whole life, I'm not sure I've ever used the argument.
And it's just an.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
Expression that there is some speech that can be regulated,
and then is used too to start regulating speech. Yeah,
And the problem is it's always used improperly and you know,
and overused interestingly enough, Oliver Weldell Holmes himself backtracked. He
backpedaled not too long after that and said, you know,
(27:40):
against peculiar or dangerous peculiar to war the principles of
the right to free speech is anyway, But it sounded
like he was admitting he made a mistake. And finally,
in the nineteen sixty nine case Brandenburg versus Ohio, in
which KKK leader AKKK leader was convicted for promising revengeance
against the government in a speech before a small crowd
(28:01):
of media and clan nut jobs, the Supreme Court pulled
the plug on shank the original case to discarding its
clear and present danger tests, the Court replaced it with
a new test for unlawful incitement. To be punishable, speech
must be quote directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless
action and be quote likely to incite or produce such action.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
So then you got I wish I remembered all these
I've read about these so many times, but I'm not
good at committing this stuff to memory. And then you
got the course out of San Francisco with the guy
who had the F word on his jacket, I think,
and whether or not he was allowed to be in
a courtroom with that, and that became a big thing
in the Supreme Court, I believe ruled Yeah, again, it's
not cool, it's indelicate. We wish you wouldn't, but it's
(28:46):
not against the law.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
And there are very, very vanishingly few limitations on the
First Amendment that are legitimate.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
How do you deal with people who wear obnoxious shirts
in public? You just hope social pressure deals with it
over time. Hit him with a bat, which would happen someplaces. Yeah,
get out of here, their kids.
Speaker 1 (29:11):
Around, Yeah, social pressure call them nasty names. From now on,
I don't go to many movies, but every movie I
go to, I'm gonna yell fire at the top of
my lungs, just to make a point. And then I'm
gonna say you know, originally, let me tell you about
nineteen nineteen. This is an interesting story. If you've ever
wanted to co host a radio show slash podcast, reach
(29:34):
out to me, Joe Ketty.
Speaker 2 (29:37):
So you're at Barbi two, the reckoning or whatever and.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Barbie two, the barbining, the pinkinning.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
There you go, Yes, three tries. What finished strong?
Speaker 6 (29:52):
Next New York, theyre Eric Adams blearned the federal bribery
case against him. May Wan prosecutor said additional charges against
Adams are possible and new defendants are likely, telling the
judge we're moving quickly. One possible new charge witness tampering,
After prosecutors said they have evidence. Adams told a witness
(30:13):
to lie. Prosecutor said the witness was given a clear
message from the defendant they should not tell the truth
to the FBI. The mayor asked the judge to hold
a trial by March. He says he fully intends to
be on the ballot for re election a year from now.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Yeah. So I meant to grab the audio because it
was kind of entertaining. Yesterday, Eric Adams came out and
talked to a crowd of supporters, and then there was
a giant crowd there, and he walked up to the
podium and said, they're trying to keep me down. They're
trying to keep you down, and everybody was cheering, and
we're gonna fight whoa. I mean, he had a lot
of support right there from people who just think, you know,
(30:49):
the man, somebody's out to get him. But then you
combine that with both Jonathan Turley and the Wall Street
Journal saying, eh, they don't have a very good case here.
I'm thinking he's both guilty and going to get away
with it.
Speaker 1 (31:03):
And being railroaded. Can you be railroaded if you're guilty? Yeah,
Selective prosecution of the sort of things lots of politicians
do it seemed a little egregious to me, the whole
guilty ship with Turkey and everything.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
But I wouldn't say he's guilty of a crime. I
don't know that he's guilty of a crime. I think
he's guilty of doing things we don't want our politicians
to do, taking ridiculous gifts from people to give them favors.
I don't like that, but he certainly might not be
guilty of a crime. That's the problem the whole that's
the way the whole politics thing works. So it's really difficult.
(31:39):
That's why it's so hard to prosecute bribery.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Well, right, the quid pro quote, there's got to be
a quo there, and speeding up the fire inspections is
just not the sort of thing that gets me up
at arms. I'm not saying I approve of it, and
I think the guy's half a crook and he's a crackpot.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
But even if it's much much bigger than that, how
do you unless you have in print somewhere, I wouldn't
have given you this dam under any circumstances except for
the fact that you gave me that plane. I mean,
unless you've got that, there's always a plausible reason that
you went ahead and signed off on the dam or
the inspection cleared or whatever.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
I like lakes better than rivers. Rivers they just run
right away from you. I like to look at the water.
So I built a dam.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
And we've all seen tons of examples of that. At
the example I used the other day, they couldn't get
Obamacare going, which changed healthcare for all of us for
the rest of our lives, until they got that senator
from Nebraska to sign on. So they offered him a
whole bunch of stuff in an omnibus bill to get
him on board. And she said, yes, Well, how is
(32:46):
that different than Turkey flying air adams around? Not a
lot different, Not a whole lot different.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
No, No, indeed, And if you include the fact that
so much of policy has a positive or negative effect
on the very stocks that these people are fond of trading,
ask Nancy Pelosi about that. I mean, then you really
get into a pole. Hey, if you can vote for this,
(33:15):
which is really going to help the corn futures in
my district, I'll get you that bridge and then we'll have,
you know, the stock prices go up for this other
stuff we're invested in this Yes winning. Speaking of stock prices,
I guess oil briefly spiked. I don't know if it'll
stay spiked on Joe Biden's weird answer.
Speaker 5 (33:35):
About attacking noil refiners in Iran. Oh my God, admit
me chorus to this history. Who prologue like your humble.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Patients, prey gently to hear, kindly, to judge the final
thoughts of Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Here's your host for final thoughts, heyez Joe Getty.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Hey, let's get a final thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap things up for the day. Gleangelow, our
technical director, will lead the way. Michael final thought. Yeah,
I don't eat a lot of sweets anymore, but I
did have one the other day. It's chocolate chip cheesecake. Whoa,
it was a very small piece. Man Oh, that could
be my last meal I've ever. You know, get the
(34:16):
death penalty, that's gonna be my last.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
It's good to have a plan in case you get
the death penalty.
Speaker 1 (34:21):
I think we all have that plan, which is odd
since we're all fairly peaceful people. Katie Green are esteemed Newswoman.
As a final thought, Katie all right, Michael, if you're into.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
That cheesecake factory Adam's Peanut butter cup fudge ripple, Hi.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
The diabean is you can take a bite.
Speaker 5 (34:43):
Come on.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
Yes, I'm here to help you, Michael, not undermine you.
Like the rest of these runs, I could run it off.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
That's exactly That sounds pretty good, Katie Jack. A final
thought for us, Yeah, there's a lot of reasons to
uh want to live a long life, be around for
my kids, et cetera. But I want to live long
enough to see the books written when people are finally
honest about this period of Joe Biden being president, who
is running things and making decisions and how often was
(35:12):
he completely out of it?
Speaker 1 (35:15):
Kamala loses Those books will be out within a year.
I think my final thought is, and I know it's odd,
but a friend of mine, my neighbor, had a brush
with death the other day and I've reached out to
him and you know, let him know we're very, very
happy it ended the way it did.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
But have you ever dealt with that? How can I?
Speaker 1 (35:35):
Because it has its after effects? What should I say
to the guy? Is that what would be helpful?
Speaker 2 (35:42):
What's not helpful?
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Mail Bag at Armstrong and Getty dot com.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
That's super glad you're around. That's a good question. We
will see you tomorrow. God bless America. I'm strong and get.
Speaker 4 (35:54):
You some absolutely stunning remarks.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
He but never gave it.
Speaker 4 (36:00):
Even the particular field and particularly of harsh attacks.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
It's one hundred on the crazy meter. Everyone knows that.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
Really, do want to ask you about your leadership qualities.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
I've become friends with school shooters and from that I
learned I'm a knucklehead at times. Well, let me tell
you he's gotta go to hell.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
No, gentlemen, there's a lot to discuss.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
We have to move on. Thank you all very much,
Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Getty and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
All of this is happening in the background of the
big thing that the entire region is waiting for, which
is what will Israel's response to those one hundred and
eighty ballistic missiles filed by the Iranians just about two
days ago. What will that response look like? And of
course that is what is going to set the tone
and the tempo for this really region wide war that
(00:44):
we're now seeing. We've been talking to the past year
about the threat of the regionalization of this conflict between
Iran and Israel. Now we are seeing it in real time,
and it's up to the Israelis to determine whether or
not they are going to pummel Aron and invite a
further escalation, or they're going to restrain themselves as the
Biden administration seems to be asking them to do.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Seems to be. Joe Biden was asked specifically yesterday, should
Israel take out the nuclear facilities? Is no, No, The
response needs to be proportional, Okay, what's a proportional response
to having two hundred ballistic missiles shot at you? It
seems like seems like taking out the entire government would
(01:25):
be a proportional response. They're trying to take out your
biggest city.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Yeah, a major attack like that, And I'm sure Joe
Biden will say would say, well, Israel's good at shooting
down missiles, so a proportional expense is one that doesn't
do much damaging her on either.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
Yeah, that's not what proportional response means. But I don't
want to get hung up on that thing again. So
we have new Joe Biden information. He was asked this morning, well,
let's listen to the clip and then we can discuss.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Health striking Iran oil facility CERNCE word discussion.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
I think I think that would be a little anyway
swift plan to allow strike back against Ron.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
First of all, we don't allow he is real.
Speaker 4 (02:13):
We advis is real, and there's nothing going to happen today.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
There's nothing going to happen today, which is probably not
something he should be saying, because that's not the same
being at war works. You don't like announce today today
you're in the clear, so stand down. We're not doing
anything today. That's odd, element I surprise, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
Well, and how about to straight out of that Saturday
Night Live bit the other night he hit us with
a well, I tell.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
You what anyway?
Speaker 1 (02:44):
Yeah, whoa, whoa, whoa. That sentence, that sentence, it started
with such promises.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
What were you going to say? Well, played again. I
just want to hear that first part again and then
we'll come in here.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Michael, do you support is well striking Iran oil facilities?
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Service? Word discuss?
Speaker 5 (03:00):
I think I think that would be a little strip plan.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
Okay, So I think that would be a little anyway.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Well, he realized he shouldn't be saying that because he
got in trouble yesterday and rightfully so for saying no
when asked if they should strike the nuclear facilities. So
today about the oil refineries, I think that would be
a little bit we're no. Just saying we're in discussion
about that obviously puts it on the table like you
think that'd be okay, which it definitely will be. And
(03:31):
as he was correct in saying, we don't tell them
what to do, or shouldn't be telling them what to do.
Although you know, when you give a country all their stuff,
it's kind of like if you're if you're adult child
is going to live at your house. They're adults, but
they live at your house. So it's not a lot
(03:56):
like that, You don't think, I well, legally we don't
have the right to tell Iszuel what to do. But
I mean, if we give them three to five billion
dollars a year and eight in the planes and the
bombs and everything like that, and rearm the velvet dome,
iron dome, I don't know where it came from for them.
(04:18):
We have some say.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Some yeah, but I think it's it's reminiscent of all
of us. All of us have had bosses, for instance,
that are smart and innovative and great leaders. We have
had mediocre bosses. We have had gutless, spineless bosses who've
got in the way of the productivity of the enterprise.
I don't care who you are, what the line of
work you're in, you've probably run into that sort of thing.
(04:42):
Benjamin Not in Yahoo and the Israeli people have a gutless,
spineless sugar daddy right and Joe Biden, and they are
managing upward the best they can. They cannot defer to
his wishes or it will end in defeat, so they're
trying to smooth it the best they can.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Now. From and what I understand, the sentiment is overwhelming
in Israel, even though Netanyao himself is not that popular,
although it's gone up in recent months, it's overwhelmingly popular.
The idea of hitting Iran directly really really hard. So
he's on solid political ground in his own country on
(05:20):
some sort of direct attack on Iran, even though our
prisons said no, or we're having discussions about well, I
don't think they should. Well anyway, these are a little anyway,
These are some major decisions like could change world history
(05:41):
sorts of decisions.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
And these might be lead ups to decisions that are
ten times as impactful.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
And the guy in charge is, well, we shouldn't. I
mean I probably oughtn't. I think they anyway?
Speaker 1 (05:55):
What I don't think I'm supposed to talk about this
Jackie Jackie dead or is she here.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
About our institutions now?
Speaker 1 (06:05):
But he's good to go for another four years as
of like seventy days ago. Effing believe they were claiming
that with a straight face.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
Oh my god, And I don't want to.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
I don't want to, I mean change my words.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
So I'm talking to some of Yes, I'm sorry, who's
from Amas? Wait, there's more. I'm talking to some of
about there because I've talked to several of you in
the last couple of days. I brought up the idea
of I'm concerned about who's making the decisions on a
(06:42):
lot of this stuff, because I think sometimes Joe Biden
is capable of being sharp and understanding what's going on
and making a decision. But I think we all agree
that there are lots of times he's not, And what
if something happens when he's not who's making the decisions?
And as with a few people who said you don't
know that, I said, no, do you? Yeah, Obama is
(07:04):
don't you read the news? Obama's making all the decisions
now him and Hillary. So apparently for some of you,
that's a story that's floating around somewhere that Obama and
Hillary are currently running the government. Obama I don't believe that, but.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Thank Junior always appreciated. I actually think it's you know,
a lot of Obama's team that's very influential in the
Biden White House.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
It's blinking on this stuff. Probably with Sullivan discussing with
the Secretary Defense. Maybe I don't know, because I mean,
if the Secretary of State says, I think we should blank,
the Secretary of Defense might say, you don't tell me
what to do. So I don't know how to make
those decisions. That's the problem with not having you know,
the constitutional order working right now is I don't know how.
(07:53):
That's why I ask who's making the decisions and how,
because nobody actually has the authority. And let's think we
go ahead unless Blincoln's coming out of meetings and saying, hey,
Lloyd Austin, we need to move another aircraft carrier, or
on the orders of Joe Biden. You know, he's claiming
that Joe Biden is saying these things. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
I was just going to say, we've all seen dramas
of uh, you know, contested wills or succession at a
company or whatever, where the doddering oldster is being manipulated
by the young connivers behind the scenes. And then Totter's
out and says, yeah, I'm not going to bequeath my
(08:33):
estate quite yet. I've reconsidered, and everybody looks around like
they got to him somehow, they got to him because
they're manipulating the old farts, and that's what's happening at
the White House almost certainly.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
So you think Jake Sullivan goes in there with the
piece of paper, could you sign this, sir? It's a
National blueberry Day and it's just important to you said,
yet it put your name there and date.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
It's a aircraft. It's an aircraft carrier full of bloe.
We're gonna donate them to the Polynesians.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Yeah, Asians. They're dirt hungry keeping their cats.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
And Lloyd Austin's like, what what did you do? You
conniving bastard. I'm telling you the.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Movies with his really low voice, what are you doing?
I think it's important consider carefully, Oh, the lighter side
of the run up to World War three? I hope
not hope not in here. But it's freaking weird that
we got a president that's not capable of like understanding
in any given time, what the hell's going on? Mesh
(09:36):
for them Inwa unless you want to get the back
I tell you what.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
The Mullas are quaking in their slippers whatever they weardals
hearing that sort of forcefulness.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
It's interesting that so much of the world wears pretty
much only sandals only. Ah, it's warm there hot, that's it.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Your feet get all gamy. You don't want that. How
about a lovely croc for the ayatola. It's got the
all ventilation holes. They might rock them behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Where's that Satan's own shoe.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
It's Western decadence, no doubt, but they got them. They
got them. It's like the all the hypocrisy. Oh, we're
a devout scholar. I just happen to have seventeen fourteen
year old wives, right and.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Crocs, So you think they walk out and sandals and
then behind the scenes, Ah, back into my crocs.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Woo. I wish I could not sporting three hundred dollars
loafers or whatever Western suits.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
Right, dang it, what a situation. So that was just
a little bit ago that Joe Biden was asked that
and how much I mean, this is this is the
biggest international story in the world right now. How hard
is Israel going to hit Iran?
Speaker 1 (10:51):
And the President's a little anyway.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
We're still discussing that. I don't know, it's a well anyway,
but it's not gonna happen today. Wow, that was unhelpful.
All three half sentences were incredibly unhelpful. Yeah, wow, all right,
we got a lot more on the way.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
Another shocking story coming out of Lebanon that's breaking right now.
Pagers belonging to members of Hesbola were simultaneously detonated, and
walkie talkies all over the country began exploding in another
wave of what appears to be Israeli retaliations, but just
moments ago, in a truly surreal twist, the rectums of
goats all over the country exploded at the same time,
(11:39):
killing an additional one thy eight hundred people and injuring
thousands of others, as well as killing countless goats. PETA
has just issued a statement denouncing the actions of the
IDF for senselessly killing all those goats. However, you'd have
to think if the IDF was behind this, they may
have been doing those goats a huge favor.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
How long is that is artificial intelligence generated a fake report?
Speaker 2 (12:07):
Yeah, exactly. You may have played that in violation of
the state law of California.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
The Gavin News gosh, yeah, the anti parody law.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
That was not Jake Tapper, you know, that fits in
perfectly with this, did you We didn't talk about John
Kerry's speech that he gave the other day at the
World the Economic Forum about the First Amendment, right, and
it's really quite amazing. Rather than I'm reading from Jonathan
Turley's piece in the New York Post today, rather than
(12:37):
extole the benefits of the democratic liberty versus dictatorships and oligarchs,
John Kerry, presidential candidate in two thousand and four, former
Secretary of State called the First Amendment of the United
States Constitution a major block to keeping people from believing
the wrong things. Here's the quote. You know, there's a
lot of discussion. I won't talk like John Cary the
(12:59):
whole time that would it would be kind of fun.
You know, there's a lot of discussion now about how
you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you're
going to have some accountability on facts. But look, if
people only get to one source, and the source they
go to is sick and you know, has an agenda
and they're putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as
(13:19):
a major block to be able to just you know,
hammer it out of existence. So what we need is
to win the ground, win the right to govern by
hopefully winning enough votes that you're free to be able
to implement change. So Jonathan Turley writes, the freedom to
be won in this election is to liberate officials who
look like him, who look like himself, can set about
(13:42):
controlling what can be said, read or heard. Carry insisted
that the problem with social media is that the one
who is controlling what they can say or read needs
to be dealt with. I I so, do you understand
what the the powerful like John Kerry and some others
(14:02):
are saying, what their vision of the First Amendment is
in their way?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
I think I think the problem And just as an aside,
it's funny, I have prepared a First AMENDMENTEE segment next segment,
which is perfect. I'll talk about it for days. But
I honestly think and it's hard for normal people like
y'all and like ourselves. I think to picture having this
sort of hubris. John Carry actually thinks he and his
(14:32):
ilk have the wisdom, the knowledge, and the well they
can be trusted with the power of censorship because they'll
just censor the things that ought to be censored. They
will just censor misinformation and disinformation to keep the poor fool.
So he mentioned, who just see one source from being
misled by the evil doers, We'll give us that right
(14:54):
and we'll protect you.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Carrie went on to say that now mostly free speech,
now most protects corporate interests and threatens essential jobs of
the state, such as protecting national security and the safety
and privacy of its citizens.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Wow, So free speech only protects corporate interests, but the
government and of course the citizens who belove their government,
are being screwed by free speech somehow.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Right, the free speech is getting in the way of
the security of the state, that is what he said.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
And whether it is deliberate evil doing or just that
sort of hubristic, you know, naive self regard, I don't know, you.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Know, maybe it fits in with like the moderators on
the debate the other night, or the last couple of debates,
where it's amazing to me that intelligent people can be
so blind did by their beliefs, that they are fully
in the camp of our side is all good and
right and honest, and the other side is evil and awful.
(16:09):
And it makes perfectly good sense as a decent, law abiding,
smart person to put my thumb on the scale for
the side that is good and honest and decent and
against the side that is evil. And you know, Margaret
Brennan and O'Donell and so many others seem to believe that,
and John Carey believes that, Well, I'm on the side
that is good as honest, and we never abuse our
power or do anything wrong or lie, so of course
(16:32):
we can make that decision. What are you even talking about.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
The nightmare of everybody's rights being taken away during COVID, Well,
the data changed. We didn't hear about the schools in
Sweden are intent with?
Speaker 2 (16:44):
I think I've had an epiphany, a slow and coming.
Can you sum it up for us, Well, just that
these people actually freaking believe that they are on the
side of what is right and good and that they
never do wrong, which.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
Is what makes them so scary. Seal Lewis's famous quote
about the worst sort of oppression is the person who
believes they're doing it for your own good.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Yeah, that is what makes it so scary. They actually
believe it.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
Or on this theme, the car Strong and Getty, some
business news CVS just and as they're laying off nearly
three thousand workers in an effort.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
To cut costs. Now, every CVS pharmacy will just have
a pumpkin bucket filled with pills and as.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Time as says, please take one.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
That's interesting. Yeah, I uh, I don't think I can
get any trouble for saying this. So is that the
CVS One time and because I got one near my house,
so I used it because it was just so handy
being a couple of blocks away, especially with the number
of prescriptions we have in my family. Ah, but is
(17:49):
there one time and I was getting it's just like
a ridiculous price for this one prescription, and the person said,
the pharmacists behind the counter, see, can I talk to
you for a second. She comes out around we go
over to the side and she said, you could get
this at Costco for like eighty cents. Oh. I said, okay,
thanks for the tip, and I started using the Costco pharmacy.
It's the best pharmacy there is is the Costco pharmacy
(18:10):
that I've ever used. Fast friendly, you get somebody on
the phone right away if you ever have to call.
The prices. I just I'm not getting paid for this.
Its just been my personal experience as a guy who
has lots of prescriptions.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Yeah, I just don't. Well, we can talk off the airs,
can I say, doesn't our health plan tell us to
go to some place?
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Makes us go to a variety of places. Yeah, and
everybody makes money. Yeah, right, so that's something that.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
The person at CBS pulled me aside. Oh, yes, good
for her, it's very nice for she cared more about
you know, me than her business apparently.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And the executives at CVS has figured out what branch
that is. And she is now out of work and
crying softly on her couch at home. Well else, she
just lost her home thanks to Jack. So, continuing our
free speech theme, thought this was just great. It's a
couple of different things. But the free press talking about
(19:10):
a lot of powerful, well educationd well educated people don't
understand how free speech works. For example, Tim Walls at
Tuesday's vice presidential debate, the Minnesota governor said the First
Amendment does not cover hate speech or yelling fire in
a crowded theater. Wrong on both counts.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
And I'm a knucklehead at times.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
Right, So it doesn't protect hate speech is an assertion
you hear ten thousand times a day on America's college campuses.
That is absolutely patently false. One person's hate speech is
another person's legitimate criticism. And just anybody who ever claims
that to you know you are dealing with either a
(19:52):
muttonhead or a neo Marxist, and reject them.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
I like your hate speech. Probably I hate you, I
really hate you.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
That is hate speech. Yes. In fact, if you run
into a person making that claim, I suggest you knock
them down and run away from them as quickly as possible.
But the other part that I thought was so very interesting,
and once again it's our our good friends at thefire
dot org used to be the Foundation for individual Rights
and education. Now it's just the what do they call
(20:21):
themselves foundation for in visual rights? Excellent? I can't remember
what the E stands for in fire anymore, but they
are crusaders for the First Amendment and I love them
for that. Wow. Wow, inappropriate and inaccurate. But you need
to be silenced anyway. I thought this was so interesting
(20:42):
in a discussion about the riot at the US Capitol, walstl.
Vanstir limus free speech.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
You can't, you know, fire in a crowded theater.
Speaker 1 (20:48):
That's the test that's the Supreme Court test. Well, as
usual with the old coach, he only has half an
idea what the hell he's talking about? But what's lead
at times that you've heard expressed a thousand times in
your life, that you can't yell fire in a crowded theater.
That that's the Supreme Court's test for unprotected speech is
(21:11):
both wild, widely held and dead wrong. That phrase comes
from Justice the infamous Justice for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
in a nineteen nineteen opinion called Shank versus Us and writes,
fire it's a testament to the power of a well
turned phrase that we're still hearing it more than one
hundred years later. Stop and think, can it possibly be true?
(21:32):
You can't shout fire in a crowded theater? Well, if
there is a fire, or you really think there is one,
do you need to be quiet about it? Must you
remain silent as you race to pull the fire alarm?
Of course not, that's absurd.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Well, first of all, I always believe that I've heard
it my whole life, and I always thought that was
the test I heard. Sarah Isger of The Dispatch do
a long piece on this probably similar to what you're
about to read, like a year ago or something. She said,
nothing makes me crazier as a Then somebody's saying you
can't yell fire in a crowded theater. It's not true,
and I thought it's not. So I listened to the
(22:05):
whole thing, but I believed it my whole life, and
I always assumed it meant if there's not a fire,
not you're not allowed to yell. If there's a fire,
that would be really awful.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Well, right, we're working on.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
Is the word.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
But that premise leaves out some crucial details, which is
precisely why that's not what Justice Holmes wrote. What he
did write was this, the most stringent protection of free
speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire
in a theater and causing a panic. Notice the two qualifications.
The shout of fire has to be false if there
(22:41):
were fire, a good reasona believe there was, the prohibsion
does not apply. And don't worry, there's even more to
it than that.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Honor.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Can you be punished if you falsely shout fire in
a theater? But there is no panic. That means people
whose alert simply caused no panickers safe from prosecution as.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
For thoroughness's sake.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Also note that Holmes phrase doesn't touch on whether the
theaters crowded. You wouldn't get a free pass to falsely
Panica theater that's only half full either. So and here's
where it gets interesting.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
That's interesting. So five month theater and there's just three
of us there. We're watching a very unpopular movie months
after it came out. There's just three of us in there.
It's ridiculously cold because they have the air conditioners set
for a crowd. And I help fire and people say, yeah,
I thought a shot of smoke too, And everybody just
gets up and walks out.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
At regular smail, I reckon, we ought to go. This
movie sucks anyway, right exactly. But again, here's where it
gets really interesting. So what exactly did Shank do? Because
he lost unanimously the Supreme Court case, the decision famously
written by Justice Holmes, he wrote and distributed a pamphlet
(23:47):
urging Americans to peacefully resist being drafted to fight into
World War One.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
That's all. That's all he did.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
The true insidiousness of the fire in the crowded theater
phrase is the way that from the very beginning. It's
been wielded to justify censorship of a broad range of
speech that has nothing to do with fires or theaters.
His pamphlet, it's two pages, were headed long lived the
Constitution of the United States. Wake up, America, your liberties
(24:18):
are in danger. Assert your rights, quoted the Thirteenth Amendment,
which abolished slavery. Labeled the draft a form of involuntary
servitude and was quite well reasoned, whether you'd agree with
it or not. In a democracy, in a democratic country,
each man must have the right to stay whether he's
willing to join the army. It also said conscription laws
(24:39):
belong to a bygone age. That's a quote, and urged
recipients quote to write your congressman and tell him you
want the law repealed. Do not submit to intimidation. You
have a right to appeal to any law.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
And for that.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
He was convicted of three counts of violating the Espionage
Act of nineteen seventeen served six months in jail because
the Supreme Court said, well, he said, this is a
clear and present danger. It's like shouting fire in a
crowded theater. When what he said was one hundred percent
(25:13):
defensible under the First Amendment, the point being obviously reasonable
sounding standards and examples are used from the beginning to
outlaw speech. This one hundred percent defensive.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
So he I'd forgotten that he was. He lost that
case that a lot of there are a lot of
things that are happening, particularly in the early early twentieth century,
that are awful, and the idea that things were better
back in the day and you know, going the wrong
direction on every front is not true. You know, you
(25:52):
back to the days when that sort of thing was happening.
But I'm trying to think, first of all, in the
debate the other night, why did Walls bring that up?
What was his point? What? How did he apply the
fire theater? Did it have to do?
Speaker 1 (26:06):
I think with social media and the need for social
media to enforce the dictates of the government to ban
disinformation and misinformation. I don't remember he was holding the
big platforms responsible for misinformation.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
And then I was trying to think, when have I
ever used it before? Like I said, up until a
year ago, and I'm old, I've believed it my whole life.
Well it's it's true, though, right I can yell fire,
Well if I if I what what happens if you
get if I'm in a crowded theater and I ye'll.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
Think the thread that was not the key point.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Well, I know, I know, I know, I know, but
I'm trying to get So if I yell fire in
a crowded theater and there is a panic and there
was not a fire, I have committed a crime. Yes,
since she caused a panic.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
You certainly could be held civilly liable.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
But I'm trying to think in what cases did I
ever use Have I ever used that argument? I'm not
sure I have. I think it might just be something
I heard and thought was interesting, and I believe my
whole life, I'm not sure I've ever used the argument.
And it's just an.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
Expression that there is some speech that can be regulated,
and then is used too to start regulating speech. Yeah,
And the problem is it's always used improperly and you know,
and overused interestingly enough, Oliver Weldell Holmes himself backtracked. He
backpedaled not too long after that and said, you know,
(27:40):
against peculiar or dangerous peculiar to war the principles of
the right to free speech is anyway, But it sounded
like he was admitting he made a mistake. And finally,
in the nineteen sixty nine case Brandenburg versus Ohio, in
which KKK leader AKKK leader was convicted for promising revengeance
against the government in a speech before a small crowd
(28:01):
of media and clan nut jobs, the Supreme Court pulled
the plug on shank the original case to discarding its
clear and present danger tests, the Court replaced it with
a new test for unlawful incitement. To be punishable, speech
must be quote directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless
action and be quote likely to incite or produce such action.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
So then you got I wish I remembered all these
I've read about these so many times, but I'm not
good at committing this stuff to memory. And then you
got the course out of San Francisco with the guy
who had the F word on his jacket, I think,
and whether or not he was allowed to be in
a courtroom with that, and that became a big thing
in the Supreme Court, I believe ruled Yeah, again, it's
not cool, it's indelicate. We wish you wouldn't, but it's
(28:46):
not against the law.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
And there are very, very vanishingly few limitations on the
First Amendment that are legitimate.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
How do you deal with people who wear obnoxious shirts
in public? You just hope social pressure deals with it
over time. Hit him with a bat, which would happen someplaces. Yeah,
get out of here, their kids.
Speaker 1 (29:11):
Around, Yeah, social pressure call them nasty names. From now on,
I don't go to many movies, but every movie I
go to, I'm gonna yell fire at the top of
my lungs, just to make a point. And then I'm
gonna say you know, originally, let me tell you about
nineteen nineteen. This is an interesting story. If you've ever
wanted to co host a radio show slash podcast, reach
(29:34):
out to me, Joe Ketty.
Speaker 2 (29:37):
So you're at Barbi two, the reckoning or whatever and.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Barbie two, the barbining, the pinkinning.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
There you go, Yes, three tries. What finished strong?
Speaker 6 (29:52):
Next New York, theyre Eric Adams blearned the federal bribery
case against him. May Wan prosecutor said additional charges against
Adams are possible and new defendants are likely, telling the
judge we're moving quickly. One possible new charge witness tampering,
After prosecutors said they have evidence. Adams told a witness
(30:13):
to lie. Prosecutor said the witness was given a clear
message from the defendant they should not tell the truth
to the FBI. The mayor asked the judge to hold
a trial by March. He says he fully intends to
be on the ballot for re election a year from now.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Yeah. So I meant to grab the audio because it
was kind of entertaining. Yesterday, Eric Adams came out and
talked to a crowd of supporters, and then there was
a giant crowd there, and he walked up to the
podium and said, they're trying to keep me down. They're
trying to keep you down, and everybody was cheering, and
we're gonna fight whoa. I mean, he had a lot
of support right there from people who just think, you know,
(30:49):
the man, somebody's out to get him. But then you
combine that with both Jonathan Turley and the Wall Street
Journal saying, eh, they don't have a very good case here.
I'm thinking he's both guilty and going to get away
with it.
Speaker 1 (31:03):
And being railroaded. Can you be railroaded if you're guilty? Yeah,
Selective prosecution of the sort of things lots of politicians
do it seemed a little egregious to me, the whole
guilty ship with Turkey and everything.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
But I wouldn't say he's guilty of a crime. I
don't know that he's guilty of a crime. I think
he's guilty of doing things we don't want our politicians
to do, taking ridiculous gifts from people to give them favors.
I don't like that, but he certainly might not be
guilty of a crime. That's the problem the whole that's
the way the whole politics thing works. So it's really difficult.
(31:39):
That's why it's so hard to prosecute bribery.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Well, right, the quid pro quote, there's got to be
a quo there, and speeding up the fire inspections is
just not the sort of thing that gets me up
at arms. I'm not saying I approve of it, and
I think the guy's half a crook and he's a crackpot.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
But even if it's much much bigger than that, how
do you unless you have in print somewhere, I wouldn't
have given you this dam under any circumstances except for
the fact that you gave me that plane. I mean,
unless you've got that, there's always a plausible reason that
you went ahead and signed off on the dam or
the inspection cleared or whatever.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
I like lakes better than rivers. Rivers they just run
right away from you. I like to look at the water.
So I built a dam.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
And we've all seen tons of examples of that. At
the example I used the other day, they couldn't get
Obamacare going, which changed healthcare for all of us for
the rest of our lives, until they got that senator
from Nebraska to sign on. So they offered him a
whole bunch of stuff in an omnibus bill to get
him on board. And she said, yes, Well, how is
(32:46):
that different than Turkey flying air adams around? Not a
lot different, Not a whole lot different.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
No, No, indeed, And if you include the fact that
so much of policy has a positive or negative effect
on the very stocks that these people are fond of trading,
ask Nancy Pelosi about that. I mean, then you really
get into a pole. Hey, if you can vote for this,
(33:15):
which is really going to help the corn futures in
my district, I'll get you that bridge and then we'll have,
you know, the stock prices go up for this other
stuff we're invested in this Yes winning. Speaking of stock prices,
I guess oil briefly spiked. I don't know if it'll
stay spiked on Joe Biden's weird answer.
Speaker 5 (33:35):
About attacking noil refiners in Iran. Oh my God, admit
me chorus to this history. Who prologue like your humble.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Patients, prey gently to hear, kindly, to judge the final
thoughts of Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Here's your host for final thoughts, heyez Joe Getty.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Hey, let's get a final thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap things up for the day. Gleangelow, our
technical director, will lead the way. Michael final thought. Yeah,
I don't eat a lot of sweets anymore, but I
did have one the other day. It's chocolate chip cheesecake. Whoa,
it was a very small piece. Man Oh, that could
be my last meal I've ever. You know, get the
(34:16):
death penalty, that's gonna be my last.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
It's good to have a plan in case you get
the death penalty.
Speaker 1 (34:21):
I think we all have that plan, which is odd
since we're all fairly peaceful people. Katie Green are esteemed Newswoman.
As a final thought, Katie all right, Michael, if you're into.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
That cheesecake factory Adam's Peanut butter cup fudge ripple, Hi.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
The diabean is you can take a bite.
Speaker 5 (34:43):
Come on.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
Yes, I'm here to help you, Michael, not undermine you.
Like the rest of these runs, I could run it off.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
That's exactly That sounds pretty good, Katie Jack. A final
thought for us, Yeah, there's a lot of reasons to
uh want to live a long life, be around for
my kids, et cetera. But I want to live long
enough to see the books written when people are finally
honest about this period of Joe Biden being president, who
is running things and making decisions and how often was
(35:12):
he completely out of it?
Speaker 1 (35:15):
Kamala loses Those books will be out within a year.
I think my final thought is, and I know it's odd,
but a friend of mine, my neighbor, had a brush
with death the other day and I've reached out to
him and you know, let him know we're very, very
happy it ended the way it did.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
But have you ever dealt with that? How can I?
Speaker 1 (35:35):
Because it has its after effects? What should I say
to the guy? Is that what would be helpful?
Speaker 2 (35:42):
What's not helpful?
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Mail Bag at Armstrong and Getty dot com.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
That's super glad you're around. That's a good question. We
will see you tomorrow. God bless America. I'm strong and get.
Speaker 4 (35:54):
You some absolutely stunning remarks.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
He but never gave it.
Speaker 4 (36:00):
Even the particular field and particularly of harsh attacks.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
It's one hundred on the crazy meter. Everyone knows that.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
Really, do want to ask you about your leadership qualities.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
I've become friends with school shooters and from that I
learned I'm a knucklehead at times. Well, let me tell
you he's gotta go to hell.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
No, gentlemen, there's a lot to discuss.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
We have to move on. Thank you all very much,
Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.