September 9, 2026 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- Jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial speak out
- Gestational twins!
- Fundamental Islam on the rise & the 9/11 anniversary
- New foldable iPhone & man purses
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
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 at the
George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
And now, here's Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
Three of the 12 jurors are speaking out about the
events that led to the mistrial in Massachusetts, revealing the
panel was deadlocked 11 to 1. Three female jurors went
on in those interviews on TV to describe that their
arguments got so loud that the six alternates could actually
hear them outside the room. They went on to say
that the sole holdout refused to listen to the rest
(00:45):
of the jurors, including nurses on the panel.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
So we're about to hear from the three females who
have done some interviews. Do you have any thoughts on
stuff you've heard so far about the conversations as a
former juror?
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Just the idea that they should pay special regard to
nurses I find interesting. I wouldn't say it's ridiculous, but
it's not a compelling argument.
Speaker 5 (01:12):
Anyway.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Let's hear from some of these jurors.
Speaker 6 (01:15):
He was very arrogant.
Speaker 7 (01:17):
He really did not take anything.
Speaker 8 (01:21):
That anybody said.
Speaker 7 (01:22):
The nurses, he tried to ask a question about the medications,
and we went back to the report from South Shore Hospital.
We had the toxicology report. We could see exactly the amounts.
The nurses in the room spoke to that and talked
to that.
Speaker 8 (01:42):
There were nurses on the jury.
Speaker 9 (01:43):
Yes.
Speaker 7 (01:44):
And they spoke to that specific thing. That was a
question that he had. And he just completely disregarded the
information that they gave him.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
So I think we're going to have to go through
these before we get into our conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Roll on.
Speaker 6 (02:02):
I mean, he had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had
reasonable doubt after we watched that video of the interview.
I think that's when it was. He admitted he had
reasonable doubt. And I started filling out the forms. I
was so excited. I actually, there were three forms I
had to fill out. And I started filling them out.
I wrote my signature on each one. And then he said,
(02:25):
but I'm still not going to say that she's not
guilty by reason of insanity.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So, okay, I'm going to have to, I'm having trouble
keeping my head wrapped around this in the same way
that I can't deal with time changes very well. I
can't ever figure out what spring forward fallback means. I'm
having trouble with this one. So in most states, I
kill somebody and I don't want the chair. I got
(02:54):
to convince the jury I'm crazy.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
But in Massachusetts, it's what?
Speaker 4 (03:02):
Not only is it the prosecution's duty to prove that
the defendant was criminally responsible at the time of offense,
they must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So the
same standard that applies for a conviction where the government
takes away your freedom or your money or whatever applies
(03:22):
to whether you are criminally responsible or not.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
That's a high bar. But there, if I say I'm crazy,
they got to prove I'm not crazy.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Correct. The prosecution does.
Speaker 9 (03:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Wherever else, everywhere else, the defense has to prove they're
trying to get me, keep me from getting the chair.
They have to prove I'm crazy. And the jury either
buys it or not.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
My understanding is Massachusetts is an extremely rare case of that.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
But in Massachusetts, if I say I'm crazy, you have
to assume he's crazy unless somebody can prove beyond a
reasonable doubt he's not.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Right.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Wow, that's a really different way to approach it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
One more juror.
Speaker 9 (04:05):
Not sure if rogue is the right word, Sue, but
every one of us, in the hours of our frustration,
would get up and walk the room, because you just
couldn't sit anymore, and would all go to the cart
with the exhibits. He, I think, got up to the
cart once, very briefly, and went back to his seat.
(04:27):
He would not.
He would not interact with us and try to understand.
We read to him on numerous occasions the definition of
reasonable doubt from Judge Sullivan's instruction. He actually said one
day in the end, why don't we have the judge
(04:49):
come in and read it again? And we were like, no,
we have it in front of us. We don't need that.
And we would highlight it. And, you know, so-and-so, this
is the definition of a reason to go. But he
had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay
viciously killed her children.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Yeah, well, you know, I can understand why it's a
difficult thing to get past. The fact that she strangled
three little kids and you had to look at their
pictures over and over again and all that sort of stuff.
That leaves a mark. But for the whole.
I didn't follow the trial every single day. It's hard
(05:29):
for me to imagine how you could prove to me
beyond a reasonable doubt that she's not crazy.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Well, right.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
There are 14, maybe 15 states where the burden is
on the state. Once the defense introduces credible evidence of
a mental defect, the prosecution must prove the defendant's sanity
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
That is an odd thing to demand.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
30 of the other states, except for five, I'm sorry,
except for four, say the defendant bears the burden of
proving they were insane, usually by a preponderance of evidence
or clear and convincing evidence. So it's interesting that the
few states, including Massachusetts, that put the burden on the prosecution,
not only put the burden on the prosecution, but they
(06:14):
have a much higher standard of There are four states, Idaho, Kansas, Montana,
and Utah, that do not permit a traditional insanity defense
at all. I don't know how that works exactly if
you're completely Froot Loops, but yeah, it is the absolutely
under-discussed aspect of this trial.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Well, so there were five charges that they had available
to them. Those 11 wanted which one? Acquittal. Which would
have been she walks out of the courtroom?
Speaker 1 (06:48):
No, no.
Speaker 4 (06:50):
Years and years and years of care in a mental
health facility with annual appraisals of whether she was a
danger to herself and others. Okay. Keeping in mind this
woman is now apparently, allegedly, completely sane and is completely
aware she choked her.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Three children to death.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
So at the point she's no longer a suicide risk,
call me at home.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
I'm not going to wait for your call.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Yeah, a lot of people have commented on that. She's
no longer a danger to society.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
As long as she doesn't give birth to another child.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Yeah, we got one text who said, how is she
not like, you got to keep me locked up. I mean,
look what I'm capable of. Just I can snap and
do this sort of thing. There's something wrong with me.
Speaker 9 (07:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Horrible.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
So what a weird thing all the way around. So
what do you think of the whole bout? You think
he was just letting his disgust with what she did
override his following the law?
Speaker 4 (08:03):
I'm conflicted here because I agree with his conclusion. On
the other hand, it seems to me a pretty clear
case of what they'll sometimes call jury nullification. Where the
juror says, yeah, I understand that's the law, but the
law sucks. I'm not going to be party to it.
And that shouldn't happen. It's just not a good thing
to happen in general. That's not your job as a juror,
(08:25):
but I understand.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
Boy, and this is an extreme case.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
Oh, yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
There ain't no way, I don't care what you say,
I can't vote to acquit this woman.
Speaker 9 (08:34):
Right.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I've seen the pictures. I know what she did.
Speaker 8 (08:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Like I said, I can understand it.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's a rough one.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
So, do you have more on that topic?
Speaker 4 (08:43):
Or I thought this was about as well put an
expression of the sentiment I have come across. I do
not know this gal's name, but here she is, 68, Michael.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Okay, with this Lancey Clancy child, I feel like maybe
I missed the mark because I've been seeing all of
y'all's videos and I'm just a woman.
Speaker 8 (09:02):
So maybe I just didn't understand fully, so help me
out here, okay?
Speaker 5 (09:05):
Because what I have gathered from all of your information
that you've put out there is is that women are
fully incapable of self-governing our emotions and our hormones. So
if we murder someone or multiple people, it is absolutely
not our fault. It is because of our emotions and
our hormones that made us do it.
Speaker 8 (09:25):
Because we cannot control it. Unless we went to the.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
Doctor and we got put on medication for these hormones
and emotions.
Speaker 8 (09:34):
But then it's the medication's fault. It's not our fault.
Speaker 5 (09:36):
It's not our hormones and emotions' fault anymore because we're
on medicine for it. And so then it's the medicine's
fault if we murder someone. Unless it's the wrong.
Speaker 8 (09:44):
Medicine, too much medicine, not enough medicine, then it's the
doctor's fault. It's definitely not our fault as women.
Speaker 5 (09:50):
It is the doctor's fault or the medication's fault or
our hormones and emotions.
Speaker 8 (09:55):
But you know what else we are? We are women.
We are to be respected. We are to be seen as.
Speaker 5 (10:00):
equal to men. We can do every job that a
man can do. We can be the next president. We
can be police officers. We can be in high stressful
jobs with weapons. Unless our hormones go crazy because then
our emotions and our hormones could cause us to pop
off and act some type of way. But it's not
our fault. It's not our fault. It is our hormones
(10:20):
and our emotions. Unless we're on medicine, then it's the medication.
Unless it's the wrong medicine, too much medicine, not enough medicine, then.
Speaker 8 (10:25):
It's the doctors.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
That's pretty damn good.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
The response would be, well, postpartum psychosis is a very
limited and specific diagnosis of a very specific malady.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
It's not just emotions and hormones, etc., etc.
Speaker 4 (10:42):
On the other hand, the takeaway culturally is is pretty
much what she said.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, and then there's been this blurring the lines of
postpartum psychosis versus postpartum depression, which is where I think
a lot of the support comes in from the various
women across the country holding their babies up on TikTok saying,
me too, or whatever, which is just disgusting.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Same, Lindsay.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
But her lawyer yesterday, I saw him on one of
the TV shows saying, saying maybe now we can move
out of the dark ages with the way we handle
postpartum depression. So he blurred the lines between postpartum depression
and psychosis and claims we're living in the dark ages
for the way we handle treat women over this.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Smart lawyer.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
I'll bet he played that in the courtroom, too.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
I don't know. I haven't read the transcript.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Or he's preparing for the next go-round for her.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Yeah, it's certainly possible. This one is so thorny and disturbing.
If someone said to me, look.
All of this is really interesting. But if I design
a society, it's going to say if you murder your children,
you're going away for good. I would say to that person, yeah, yeah,
(11:55):
I see your point.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
And I think 90% of people would agree with that.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Hard to say.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
It is hard to say. You can get hammered drunk.
You killed somebody. You're guilty. You don't get to say
I was drunk. I was out of my mind. I
don't even remember it. I don't even know what happened.
Speaker 4 (12:11):
How about you completely lose your temper and see red?
You're in a state you may never be in again
as long as you live, but you have murderous rage
for two minutes and the person ends up dead.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
You're guilty. If you're that and drunk, you're guilty.
Speaker 9 (12:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
Man, that woman, that little thing she laid out, she
was good. She needs to have her own talk show
or something.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
No, she'd compete with us. She sucks.
Speaker 8 (12:35):
Boo.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Well, ladies and germs, the wait is over for one
brand of pro football coming back tonight. Football is here,
and so is DraftKings.
Speaker 4 (12:43):
DraftKings is now live in all 50 states, one app
every sport nationwide.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
New DraftKings customers sign up with the code Armstrong. Spend
$ 5 to get $ 200 in rewards within 21 days. Includes
all markets. That's code Armstrong. In partnership with DraftKings, the
crown is yours.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
Speaker 11 (13:02):
1-800-MY-RESET.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Connecticut. Call 888-789-7777.
Speaker 11 (13:04):
Visit ccpg.org. On behalf of Boot Hill Casino in Kansas,
bet tax pass-through may apply in Illinois. 21 plus. Void
in Canada. Bet with DraftKings Sportsbook to get bonus bets
that expire in seven days or trade with DraftKings Predictions
to get predictions dollars that expire in one year. Event
contract trading involves risk of loss. Predictions offer void in
(13:24):
New York. Non-withdrawable rewards issued as $ 50 click-to-claims every 7
days for 21 days. Terms at DKNG.co slash offer.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
Limited time offer.
Speaker 11 (13:33):
Nationwide based on sportsbook predictions and free-to-play sports contest availability.
Varies by state.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Armstrong and Getty. Apple's show today with one of their
biggest debuts in many, many years. So we'll get to
that a little bit later.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Super. Plus, next half hour, a.
Speaker 4 (13:54):
A good deal of information on the theme of, as
we approach the 25th anniversary of 9-11, radical Islam is
on the march.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
And it's on the march in the United States. And
you ought to know about it.
Speaker 4 (14:06):
And we have some incredibly compelling testimony from the mouths
of reformed Muslims who would like to make it clear
exactly what the risks are. So I hope you can
stay tuned for that.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
One more piece.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
It's this century's nightmare.
Speaker 6 (14:20):
That's right.
Speaker 9 (14:21):
Jihadism.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
That's true.
Speaker 4 (14:24):
A quick note, FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression,
are out with their college free speech rankings, and 121
out of the 261 schools got an F for their
speech climate.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
We'll be diving into that.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
But the kids got an A.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
So true.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
Yeah, the percentages of the students who find shouting down
a speaker or blocking people from attending or using violence
to stop them from speaking, the number of kids who
find that acceptable will shock you to your core, if
you'd like to be shocked to your core.
Speaker 1 (14:57):
But first, this story.
Speaker 4 (15:00):
An Australian woman has given birth to twins conceived by
separate fathers.
Speaker 11 (15:05):
Oh, boy.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Katie, that was exactly the sort of look. That was,
that was, uh, wait, what?
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Yeah, the math isn't mathing, Hal.
Speaker 4 (15:14):
In what is believed to be the country's first such case,
the mother from Queensland was carrying a couple's IVF embryo
when she became pregnant.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
In the natural fashion last year.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
Sorry for calling you a slut.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
Well, for all we know, she is entirely monogamous and
reliable as a.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Partner.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
I jump to conclusions. And yet, a surrogate mother.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So, she gave birth to a boy, which was hers,
and a girl, which was a different couple's, as she
was the surrogate.
Speaker 9 (15:54):
Wow!
Speaker 2 (15:56):
In November of last year, apparently. Are they considered brother
and sister?
Speaker 3 (15:59):
No.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
There was, that's a great question.
Speaker 4 (16:03):
There was no dispute over parenthood, and the couples had
been raising their children separately since their birth.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
But the case became public because.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
So the babies just split ways? It's been real. It's
been fun, but it ain't been real fun. See you later.
Good hang, bud.
Speaker 6 (16:20):
See ya.
Speaker 1 (16:21):
Exactly.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Hey, you're a good roommate.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
I appreciate the courtesy, but I'm off. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (16:26):
So this is in court now because the state has
surrogacy laws that ban the separation of birth siblings. You
can't become a breeding sow and just knock out as
many kids, twins or triplets or whatever, and sell each
one to a different couple or whatever.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
They have laws against that.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
So one judge has ruled that the babies were not
birth siblings under the laws in the unique case. They
were gestational twins.
Speaker 9 (16:54):
So. Hmm. Hmm.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (16:57):
Sounds like I got complicated quickly. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
You're already pregnant. Don't be going having sex with some
other dude. Of course, she probably didn't think I could
get pregnant again.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Oh, right. Why was she ovulating?
Speaker 2 (17:12):
If you have sex with your pregnant.
Speaker 10 (17:14):
Hey, you!
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Why are you ovulating?
Speaker 2 (17:16):
You know, like, if you have sex with your pregnant wife,
you don't think, oh, God, this is going to lead
to twins. You don't think that.
Speaker 4 (17:22):
Or maybe two babies three months apart or six months
or maybe a baby every month and a half.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
Your wife would kill you for that and you would
deserve it.
Speaker 4 (17:33):
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know what we don't have time for?
You can figure out the rest. This story comes out
every few years. Silicon Valley executives are big tech fans,
but not for their own kids. The number of tech
heavyweights who say, no freaking way, my 14-year-old's on social media.
It ought to get your damn attention.
Speaker 9 (17:53):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (17:54):
That maybe in the hour four we can get into that. Sobering,
and I hate being sobered. Coming up next half hour, though,
the 9-11 families, by the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds,
are saying to Mamdani, stay away.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
And I think they've got a damn good case. We'll
get into that.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
If you miss it, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty
On Demand.
Speaker 11 (18:17):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Mayor Mamdani plans to actually attend the September 11th ceremonies
marking the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
But this is nice. 19 of his family members are
also flying in.
Speaker 9 (18:32):
Oh, wow.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
That's a heck of a joke. Now you're supporting him?
Speaker 4 (18:40):
We're going to get back to the question of Mamdani
at the 9-11 festivities in a moment or two. We've
been talking a fair amount about the AI doomers today,
including a fellow just quit, Anthropic. And that may or
may not come to visit mankind. But I will tell
you this with 100% certainty. There is a massive worldwide
(19:00):
political movement that aims to conquer the Western world in
the name of a brutal fundamentalist religion-slash-political system called that
is called Islam. Fundamentalist Islam is on the march, and
they're in the United States in large numbers. And if we,
these 25 years after 9-11, have forgotten that, it's time
to remember in a big damn hurry for a couple
(19:22):
of reasons.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Number one, the threat's never gone away.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
And number two, we were talking the other day about
how in the Communist Manifesto, Marx says, we will support
any movement that aims to overthrow the current political and
social structures.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
And the From the perspective of a.
Speaker 4 (19:36):
Marxist, I see fundamentalist Islam as, holy cow, they got
the numbers, they've got the fervor, they're absolutely adamant that.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
They want to overthrow the current system.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
They're willing to die for their country.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Oh, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (19:51):
They're the perfect allies. Then, you know, then when the
system falls, we got to make sure we get them
butt quick because they're brutal. Meanwhile, the fundamentalist Muslims are
thinking the same thing about the communists and The wins
is an open question in the places where they're successful.
I aim to do whatever little I can to make
(20:12):
them not successful in the United States of America.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
So having opened with that, a little context to the discussion.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
Osama bin Laden and his hijackers are killing more people
now or in the past several years than they killed
on 9-11. The number of 9-11 cancer victims has skyrocketed
about 1,700% over the past decade, fueled by rare variations
(20:40):
of cancer, according to stats released as the 25th anniversary nears.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
That's the cause that Jon Stewart's been on for all
these years in New York?
Speaker 1 (20:49):
Yeah, to his credit.
Speaker 4 (20:50):
Cancer certifications among Twin Towers survivors, downtown Manhattan residents, and
workers honor near the pile. have exploded from 3,200 in
2015 to 57,000-plus this year for the obvious reasons that
cancer takes a while to develop from whatever cause.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Do they know what they were breathing in that caused it?
Speaker 4 (21:12):
There are probably 150 different things that are suspected or
known to have caused the cancer. They're losing two clients
a day. and see a new cancer certification every 50 minutes.
This is a law firm that represents survivors. For the
first time, the number of cancer cases among survivors who
resided in or around, etc., has now surpassed the number
(21:34):
of emergency responders, such as firefighters and police, who had
prolonged exposure.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
So it's just everybody in the area now.
Speaker 4 (21:40):
Osama bin Laden and fundamentalist Islam are continuing to kill
Americans thanks to 9-11.
Speaker 1 (21:46):
So, you know... Let's.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
Get into Lauren Green's report from Special Report last night
as the next step in our discussion.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
My message to Mayor Mondani is, dude, we don't want
you to come.
Speaker 11 (21:58):
We are asking respectfully that he not show up.
Speaker 10 (22:03):
9-11 family members and first responders stood on the steps
of New York City Hall.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Holding pictures of loved ones murdered.
Speaker 10 (22:10):
By radical Islamic terrorists 25 years ago at the World
Trade Center. They're increasing the pressure on Mayor Zoran Mamdani
not to attend Friday's remembrance ceremony.
Speaker 8 (22:20):
I don't know why he's so animate about going to
this one.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Let us have our morning and understand that this is
sacred and hallowed space. But Mayor Mamdani is standing firm
on going. Well, far be it for me to stand
up for Mayor Mamdani, but I feel like if he
had announced he wasn't going to go a while back,
he'd be getting killed for that as the mayor of
New York to not go on the 25th anniversary.
Speaker 9 (22:44):
I agree.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
It is a conundrum.
Speaker 4 (22:45):
And also in if he were to back down in
the face of this controversy. he would be admitting, you
know what, people have a legitimate gripe. I'm not a
reformed Muslim. I believe in fundamentalist Islam and am bent
on it being promoted, which I believe he is.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
But I think we could, if he'd announced I'm not
going prior to the flap, I think it would have
been seen as he's a fundamentalist Muslim who's not willing
to honor the death of, yeah.
Speaker 4 (23:13):
Yeah, he can't win because he is precisely what he
appears to be. To wit, you're looking for a chief
legal advisor, chief counsel for the city?
Speaker 1 (23:26):
How many lawyers are there in New York City? Eight million.
It might be half a million.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
Right.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Okay. Let's hear about who he chose.
Speaker 10 (23:34):
A centerpiece of the controversy is the mayor's appointment of
Ramzi Qasim. As the city's chief legal counsel, Kasim had
represented a convicted al-Qaeda member whose brother-in-law was one of
the 9-11 attackers. He was with Mamdani Friday when the
mayor signed an executive order designating September 11th as an
official day of remembrance and service. The mayor also signed
(23:54):
an order to increase security and create a task force
to help respond to potential threats. The advocacy group September
11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows says it, quote, firmly supports
the presence at Ground Zero of anyone who comes to
pay their respects and believes Mamdani has consistently affirmed his
intentions to honor victims, survivors, and first responders.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
The person's brother-in-law was one of the attackers on the plane?
Speaker 4 (24:20):
This guy, okay, so I'm a moderate Muslim elected to
high office. I'm looking for a chief legal counsel. Here's
this guy who made his bones defending Al-Qaeda. Let's go
with him, says I. Are you kidding me?
Speaker 2 (24:35):
And his brother-in-law was actually on one of the planes?
Speaker 6 (24:40):
What?
Speaker 4 (24:44):
I'm a Muslim doctor who treats 9-11 victims. Why I'm
outraged by Hassan Piker's venom. And this is not about
Hassan Piker, really, but... It was written, it was published
recently in the New York Post. I'm an observing Muslim woman,
British by birth, American by privilege. You witnessed 9-11 in
real time. That was my introduction to radical Islam, a
profound distortion of my faith. Today, as a doctor who
(25:07):
treats 9-11 first responders and survivors, as a consulting sleep specialist,
et cetera, I see the long-term impacts of the horrific
day close up. So it outraged me deeply to hear
9-11 vilified by far-left Democratic twitch mouthpiece Hassan Piker, who's
casually declared that America deserved 9-11. He's trying to backtrack
(25:27):
on his comments just in time for the 25th anniversary
of those heinous attacks. As a Muslim who rejects Islamism,
I must speak out against this venom. And she goes
into the absolute horrific toll on Americans during the event
and after. She goes into the long list of cancers.
and other maladies, breathing. I mean, if the number were
(25:49):
merely breathing troubles, diseases, and not cancer, it would still
be absolutely horrifying. And she, you know, her takeaway is
that Islamism is a threat for Moderate Muslims, too.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:12):
And they need to speak out against it or the
wave is going to crest over all of us. I
think it's a very brave piece to write. There is
a price on her head for sure.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
Oh, absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:21):
There's also a price on the head of, I said
I was going to remember it, Danny Burmawi, who left
the religion of Islam. And so he's an apostate. He
is dead, according to fundamentalist Islam, too. But he writes,
(26:42):
are bad Muslims bad because of Islam? And he says,
the answer is yes. You can read much of my work,
which proves beyond a shred of doubt that the worst
acts committed by Muslims from the Beheadings of infidels to lying, rape, exploitation, corruption, dictatorship,
the oppression of women, child abuse, and so forth are
rooted in Islamic teachings. Not merely in descriptive passages, but
(27:03):
in prescriptive ones. Yes, all humans have the capacity for evil.
We all have within us the ability to justify unspeakable horrors.
But most religions restrain human evil. They set moral boundaries
condemning acts of violence, injustice, and cruelty. Christianity commands its
followers to love their enemies, forgive those who harm them,
and refuse vengeance. Judaism, despite its history of persecution, never
(27:24):
formed a doctrine commanding global conquest or the extermination of non-Jews.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
Islam, however, does the opposite.
Speaker 4 (27:34):
And he makes a rather compelling case, paragraph after paragraph
after paragraph, trying to alert the West that these people
are serious, they are willing to kill, they are willing
to die, they are well organized, and they're coming. And
it's not paranoia, it's not xenophobia, it's not bigotry. It's
a political movement. You're worried about communism?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
You should be.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
If you're on the left and you're worried about fascism,
there could be no more strict and brutal form of
fascism than this.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
I suppose we'll be talking about this more on Friday
is the anniversary of 9-11, and we like round numbers
and quarters and three quarters for some reason.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
But how about the week after 9-11, and you just said,
25 years later, the Taliban will still be in charge
of Afghanistan. And I thought, how would that be possible?
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
So the great God Saad, I wish he had a
different name because it sounds like I'm rapping or something
in the way it's spelled. He's a Middle Eastern Christian
who became a Canadian academic, but Canada's so woke he's
now in America, and welcome, doctor. But he's written a
book recently called Suicidal Empathy, and that's the tendency of
(28:57):
the West to believe if we judge anyone or don't
permit anyone to come in, or if we don't, you know,
extend all of our rights and openness to everyone that
we're bad people.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
We should empathize with them. Here's a great example of it.
Speaker 4 (29:10):
Columbia University's prestigious Knight First Amendment Institute is holding a
symposium on the eve of the 25th anniversary of 9-11.
And the symposium will feature Mohsen Madawi, the Palestinian student
protest leader, who was recently exposed for championing the annihilation
of all Jews worldwide and supporting terrorist organizations. He and
(29:34):
others will examine how post 9-11, the war on terror,
the forever war has stifled free speech. It will also
provide a sympathetic platform to a man facing a deportation
order who once promised to annihilate the Jews.
Speaker 9 (29:48):
Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
Columbia.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
So, uh, mom, Donnie is going to show up on
Friday to something. He has to.
Speaker 9 (29:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
As you made the point.
Speaker 9 (29:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
Boy, if he gets booed, that's going to be quite
the deal, quite the scene.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
Yeah, and.
Speaker 4 (30:11):
The final note in Lauren Green's report was another 9-11
commemorative group said, look, anybody who wants to come with
an open heart and mourn the death and destruction, we'll.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Have them there. I like that spirit. That's a nice spirit.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
But when empathy becomes suicidal empathy, then you're making a terrible,
terrible mistake. So we'll have to see what happens Friday.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
I'll tell you what, if you've never read it, the
9-11 commission report, when they put that book out, it
reads like a thriller. I mean, you don't want to
get through the whole thing because it gets really, unless
you're a real super into it. But that first chapter
of just that day, And what went down, the way
they wrote it, it's thrilling. In fact, I will. I'll
(30:57):
reread it before Friday and bring you some of the
highlights in case you've forgotten them. It's something else.
Speaker 4 (31:05):
My other favorite book on that topic is The Looming Tower,
Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9-11 by Lawrence Wright. And
I know we should have a list of recommended books.
We've never been able to get our act together. We'll
work on it. I've said for the 500th time.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
The 9-11 report is basically just a news account of
what happened after doing all the research. And it's, again,
written like a thriller. I'll get into some of the
highlights from that on Friday, including my favorite part. What's
the current CIA director at the time said as soon
as he heard the news? I love that part. Anyway,
(31:41):
Apple's having one of their big events today, as they
usually do in September. Biggest one they've had in a very,
very long time for one of the most valuable companies
in the world. Tell you why next.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Armstrong and Getty. Some business news tomorrow.
Speaker 11 (31:59):
Apple is set to debut its first foldable phone, and
it costs up to.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
$ 3, 000.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
Ooh.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Or $ 6, 000 if you forget which way it folds.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
So, yeah, Apple's doing their usual September thing. They haven't
launched anything that was a wow in many, many years.
So two things today, and this will have an effect
on your 401k. because it's one of the most valuable
companies in the world, driving the stock market's crazy rise
over the last several years. They got their new CEO
(32:32):
and the foldable phone coming out, which is the biggest
new product thing they've had in a very, very long time,
is they've just been tweaking phones for quite some time. Anyway,
the other companies already have some foldable phones. We'll see
what Apple's is like. I don't know where he got
upward to $ 3, 000. I do a lot of the Apple
rumor sites for this stuff, and it's supposed to be
around $ 2, 000, which is plenty. I mean, that's a lot.
(32:55):
That's a lot for a phone. You're already paying $ 1, 200
if you're getting a Pro Max over the past several years.
I bought the very first iPhone the week it came out,
and I think it was $ 400 in those dollars, 2007. 2007.
(33:16):
But still, man, they've gotten a $ 2, 000 phone.
Speaker 7 (33:19):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
The advantage of folding it would be it's smaller?
Speaker 4 (33:23):
No, you can fold it out and it has a
super big screen.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
That and it's small.
Speaker 4 (33:31):
Oh, yeah, you fold it in your pocket. It's an
iPad you can fit in your pocket. Or women can
fit in their clutches, I heard. There's a cute little
blonde chick on Fox and Friends.
Speaker 1 (33:43):
Ainsley?
Speaker 2 (33:44):
I heard Ainsley say, and I can fit it in
my little purse.
Speaker 9 (33:47):
It's lovely.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Is that appealing to you, Katie? Very important. This brick
fits in nothing right now. Yeah, yeah. You see women
walking around with their tight jeans with their little pockets
and their big phone just sticking out just about to
fall out and smash onto the sidewalk. Or we have
these dumb wristlet things wrapped around so we can just
carry them this way now because they don't fit in pockets.
(34:09):
I'm surprised it hasn't caught on the neck lanyard that
I see some people wear just since everyone's carrying a phone.
I'm surprised that just hasn't become a part of life.
Speaker 4 (34:17):
Why don't you tuck it into your brassiere like I
see in old westerns? You know, you tuck the little
thing down there.
Speaker 2 (34:28):
Nerd. It's funny. I heard our conversation about man bags,
which have become popular and that kind of slung over
your shoulder, one shoulder. and I see lots of cool
hipster sort of dudes using them or whatever, but my son,
when we were in New Orleans, I told this story
(34:49):
at the time, he saw one kind of like it,
and I said, yeah, I see lots of them in
their magazines, and cool guys wear them, and Tom Brady
has one, blah, blah, blah. He got one, really liked it,
everything like that. Within an hour, we're in New Orleans.
They're having a college football game that day, a bunch
of drunk college guys around. Henry gets on the elevator.
Some college kid says, nice purse. And that was the
(35:09):
end of that. He's never used it since.
Speaker 4 (35:11):
It's an honorary man bun, please. I was at that
wedding over the weekend with a bunch of friends, and
one of our friends was carrying a man bag. And
there were a couple of wry comments made about it.
And then as he wandered away, we were all like,
what's he got in there anyway?
Speaker 1 (35:26):
The hell you need that for? You got pockets.
Speaker 2 (35:28):
It's tampons.
Speaker 4 (35:30):
Oh, boy.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
That's just.
Speaker 9 (35:32):
Huh?
Speaker 2 (35:33):
Made Katie laugh. Yeah, because that's all we carry in
our purses. Tampons. Copious amounts of tampons.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Cases, yes.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
What's your hat say? We talked about this earlier. Very funny.
Your hat is? Hold my drink. I gotta pet this dog.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
Yeah, which is very, very funny.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
And it reminded me, I had screen captured a t-shirt
that I liked from a guy that said, Undiagnosed, but
something ain't right. Which I also thought was funny.
Speaker 9 (35:59):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (36:00):
Um.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
I thought Joe Scarborough said something really ridiculous this morning
as he was talking about the big tennis match last night.
You know what I'm talking about? If you watched it,
it was one of the great tennis matches of all time.
Just ridiculous about immigration. And a bunch of other stuff
that we'll get into, including that AI expert who said
we're all going to die and they know it at Anthropic.
(36:22):
And why aren't we talking about this more? If you
missed the segment, get the podcast. Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 1 (36:31):
Armstrong and Getty.
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio at the
George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
And now, here's Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
Three of the 12 jurors are speaking out about the
events that led to the mistrial in Massachusetts, revealing the
panel was deadlocked 11 to 1. Three female jurors went
on in those interviews on TV to describe that their
arguments got so loud that the six alternates could actually
hear them outside the room. They went on to say
that the sole holdout refused to listen to the rest
(00:45):
of the jurors, including nurses on the panel.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
So we're about to hear from the three females who
have done some interviews. Do you have any thoughts on
stuff you've heard so far about the conversations as a
former juror?
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Just the idea that they should pay special regard to
nurses I find interesting. I wouldn't say it's ridiculous, but
it's not a compelling argument.
Speaker 5 (01:12):
Anyway.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Let's hear from some of these jurors.
Speaker 6 (01:15):
He was very arrogant.
Speaker 7 (01:17):
He really did not take anything.
Speaker 8 (01:21):
That anybody said.
Speaker 7 (01:22):
The nurses, he tried to ask a question about the medications,
and we went back to the report from South Shore Hospital.
We had the toxicology report. We could see exactly the amounts.
The nurses in the room spoke to that and talked
to that.
Speaker 8 (01:42):
There were nurses on the jury.
Speaker 9 (01:43):
Yes.
Speaker 7 (01:44):
And they spoke to that specific thing. That was a
question that he had. And he just completely disregarded the
information that they gave him.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
So I think we're going to have to go through
these before we get into our conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Roll on.
Speaker 6 (02:02):
I mean, he had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had
reasonable doubt after we watched that video of the interview.
I think that's when it was. He admitted he had
reasonable doubt. And I started filling out the forms. I
was so excited. I actually, there were three forms I
had to fill out. And I started filling them out.
I wrote my signature on each one. And then he said,
(02:25):
but I'm still not going to say that she's not
guilty by reason of insanity.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So, okay, I'm going to have to, I'm having trouble
keeping my head wrapped around this in the same way
that I can't deal with time changes very well. I
can't ever figure out what spring forward fallback means. I'm
having trouble with this one. So in most states, I
kill somebody and I don't want the chair. I got
(02:54):
to convince the jury I'm crazy.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
But in Massachusetts, it's what?
Speaker 4 (03:02):
Not only is it the prosecution's duty to prove that
the defendant was criminally responsible at the time of offense,
they must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So the
same standard that applies for a conviction where the government
takes away your freedom or your money or whatever applies
(03:22):
to whether you are criminally responsible or not.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
That's a high bar. But there, if I say I'm crazy,
they got to prove I'm not crazy.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Correct. The prosecution does.
Speaker 9 (03:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Wherever else, everywhere else, the defense has to prove they're
trying to get me, keep me from getting the chair.
They have to prove I'm crazy. And the jury either
buys it or not.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
My understanding is Massachusetts is an extremely rare case of that.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
But in Massachusetts, if I say I'm crazy, you have
to assume he's crazy unless somebody can prove beyond a
reasonable doubt he's not.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Right.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Wow, that's a really different way to approach it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
One more juror.
Speaker 9 (04:05):
Not sure if rogue is the right word, Sue, but
every one of us, in the hours of our frustration,
would get up and walk the room, because you just
couldn't sit anymore, and would all go to the cart
with the exhibits. He, I think, got up to the
cart once, very briefly, and went back to his seat.
(04:27):
He would not.
He would not interact with us and try to understand.
We read to him on numerous occasions the definition of
reasonable doubt from Judge Sullivan's instruction. He actually said one
day in the end, why don't we have the judge
(04:49):
come in and read it again? And we were like, no,
we have it in front of us. We don't need that.
And we would highlight it. And, you know, so-and-so, this
is the definition of a reason to go. But he
had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay
viciously killed her children.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Yeah, well, you know, I can understand why it's a
difficult thing to get past. The fact that she strangled
three little kids and you had to look at their
pictures over and over again and all that sort of stuff.
That leaves a mark. But for the whole.
I didn't follow the trial every single day. It's hard
(05:29):
for me to imagine how you could prove to me
beyond a reasonable doubt that she's not crazy.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Well, right.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
There are 14, maybe 15 states where the burden is
on the state. Once the defense introduces credible evidence of
a mental defect, the prosecution must prove the defendant's sanity
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
That is an odd thing to demand.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
30 of the other states, except for five, I'm sorry,
except for four, say the defendant bears the burden of
proving they were insane, usually by a preponderance of evidence
or clear and convincing evidence. So it's interesting that the
few states, including Massachusetts, that put the burden on the prosecution,
not only put the burden on the prosecution, but they
(06:14):
have a much higher standard of There are four states, Idaho, Kansas, Montana,
and Utah, that do not permit a traditional insanity defense
at all. I don't know how that works exactly if
you're completely Froot Loops, but yeah, it is the absolutely
under-discussed aspect of this trial.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Well, so there were five charges that they had available
to them. Those 11 wanted which one? Acquittal. Which would
have been she walks out of the courtroom?
Speaker 1 (06:48):
No, no.
Speaker 4 (06:50):
Years and years and years of care in a mental
health facility with annual appraisals of whether she was a
danger to herself and others. Okay. Keeping in mind this
woman is now apparently, allegedly, completely sane and is completely
aware she choked her.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Three children to death.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
So at the point she's no longer a suicide risk,
call me at home.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
I'm not going to wait for your call.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Yeah, a lot of people have commented on that. She's
no longer a danger to society.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
As long as she doesn't give birth to another child.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Yeah, we got one text who said, how is she
not like, you got to keep me locked up. I mean,
look what I'm capable of. Just I can snap and
do this sort of thing. There's something wrong with me.
Speaker 9 (07:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Horrible.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
So what a weird thing all the way around. So
what do you think of the whole bout? You think
he was just letting his disgust with what she did
override his following the law?
Speaker 4 (08:03):
I'm conflicted here because I agree with his conclusion. On
the other hand, it seems to me a pretty clear
case of what they'll sometimes call jury nullification. Where the
juror says, yeah, I understand that's the law, but the
law sucks. I'm not going to be party to it.
And that shouldn't happen. It's just not a good thing
to happen in general. That's not your job as a juror,
(08:25):
but I understand.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
Boy, and this is an extreme case.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
Oh, yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
There ain't no way, I don't care what you say,
I can't vote to acquit this woman.
Speaker 9 (08:34):
Right.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I've seen the pictures. I know what she did.
Speaker 8 (08:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Like I said, I can understand it.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's a rough one.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
So, do you have more on that topic?
Speaker 4 (08:43):
Or I thought this was about as well put an
expression of the sentiment I have come across. I do
not know this gal's name, but here she is, 68, Michael.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Okay, with this Lancey Clancy child, I feel like maybe
I missed the mark because I've been seeing all of
y'all's videos and I'm just a woman.
Speaker 8 (09:02):
So maybe I just didn't understand fully, so help me
out here, okay?
Speaker 5 (09:05):
Because what I have gathered from all of your information
that you've put out there is is that women are
fully incapable of self-governing our emotions and our hormones. So
if we murder someone or multiple people, it is absolutely
not our fault. It is because of our emotions and
our hormones that made us do it.
Speaker 8 (09:25):
Because we cannot control it. Unless we went to the.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
Doctor and we got put on medication for these hormones
and emotions.
Speaker 8 (09:34):
But then it's the medication's fault. It's not our fault.
Speaker 5 (09:36):
It's not our hormones and emotions' fault anymore because we're
on medicine for it. And so then it's the medicine's
fault if we murder someone. Unless it's the wrong.
Speaker 8 (09:44):
Medicine, too much medicine, not enough medicine, then it's the
doctor's fault. It's definitely not our fault as women.
Speaker 5 (09:50):
It is the doctor's fault or the medication's fault or
our hormones and emotions.
Speaker 8 (09:55):
But you know what else we are? We are women.
We are to be respected. We are to be seen as.
Speaker 5 (10:00):
equal to men. We can do every job that a
man can do. We can be the next president. We
can be police officers. We can be in high stressful
jobs with weapons. Unless our hormones go crazy because then
our emotions and our hormones could cause us to pop
off and act some type of way. But it's not
our fault. It's not our fault. It is our hormones
(10:20):
and our emotions. Unless we're on medicine, then it's the medication.
Unless it's the wrong medicine, too much medicine, not enough medicine, then.
Speaker 8 (10:25):
It's the doctors.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
That's pretty damn good.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
The response would be, well, postpartum psychosis is a very
limited and specific diagnosis of a very specific malady.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
It's not just emotions and hormones, etc., etc.
Speaker 4 (10:42):
On the other hand, the takeaway culturally is is pretty
much what she said.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, and then there's been this blurring the lines of
postpartum psychosis versus postpartum depression, which is where I think
a lot of the support comes in from the various
women across the country holding their babies up on TikTok saying,
me too, or whatever, which is just disgusting.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Same, Lindsay.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
But her lawyer yesterday, I saw him on one of
the TV shows saying, saying maybe now we can move
out of the dark ages with the way we handle
postpartum depression. So he blurred the lines between postpartum depression
and psychosis and claims we're living in the dark ages
for the way we handle treat women over this.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Smart lawyer.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
I'll bet he played that in the courtroom, too.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
I don't know. I haven't read the transcript.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Or he's preparing for the next go-round for her.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Yeah, it's certainly possible. This one is so thorny and disturbing.
If someone said to me, look.
All of this is really interesting. But if I design
a society, it's going to say if you murder your children,
you're going away for good. I would say to that person, yeah, yeah,
(11:55):
I see your point.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
And I think 90% of people would agree with that.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Hard to say.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
It is hard to say. You can get hammered drunk.
You killed somebody. You're guilty. You don't get to say
I was drunk. I was out of my mind. I
don't even remember it. I don't even know what happened.
Speaker 4 (12:11):
How about you completely lose your temper and see red?
You're in a state you may never be in again
as long as you live, but you have murderous rage
for two minutes and the person ends up dead.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
You're guilty. If you're that and drunk, you're guilty.
Speaker 9 (12:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
Man, that woman, that little thing she laid out, she
was good. She needs to have her own talk show
or something.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
No, she'd compete with us. She sucks.
Speaker 8 (12:35):
Boo.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Well, ladies and germs, the wait is over for one
brand of pro football coming back tonight. Football is here,
and so is DraftKings.
Speaker 4 (12:43):
DraftKings is now live in all 50 states, one app
every sport nationwide.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
New DraftKings customers sign up with the code Armstrong. Spend
$ 5 to get $ 200 in rewards within 21 days. Includes
all markets. That's code Armstrong. In partnership with DraftKings, the
crown is yours.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
Speaker 11 (13:02):
1-800-MY-RESET.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Connecticut. Call 888-789-7777.
Speaker 11 (13:04):
Visit ccpg.org. On behalf of Boot Hill Casino in Kansas,
bet tax pass-through may apply in Illinois. 21 plus. Void
in Canada. Bet with DraftKings Sportsbook to get bonus bets
that expire in seven days or trade with DraftKings Predictions
to get predictions dollars that expire in one year. Event
contract trading involves risk of loss. Predictions offer void in
(13:24):
New York. Non-withdrawable rewards issued as $ 50 click-to-claims every 7
days for 21 days. Terms at DKNG.co slash offer.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
Limited time offer.
Speaker 11 (13:33):
Nationwide based on sportsbook predictions and free-to-play sports contest availability.
Varies by state.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Armstrong and Getty. Apple's show today with one of their
biggest debuts in many, many years. So we'll get to
that a little bit later.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Super. Plus, next half hour, a.
Speaker 4 (13:54):
A good deal of information on the theme of, as
we approach the 25th anniversary of 9-11, radical Islam is
on the march.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
And it's on the march in the United States. And
you ought to know about it.
Speaker 4 (14:06):
And we have some incredibly compelling testimony from the mouths
of reformed Muslims who would like to make it clear
exactly what the risks are. So I hope you can
stay tuned for that.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
One more piece.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
It's this century's nightmare.
Speaker 6 (14:20):
That's right.
Speaker 9 (14:21):
Jihadism.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
That's true.
Speaker 4 (14:24):
A quick note, FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression,
are out with their college free speech rankings, and 121
out of the 261 schools got an F for their
speech climate.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
We'll be diving into that.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
But the kids got an A.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
So true.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
Yeah, the percentages of the students who find shouting down
a speaker or blocking people from attending or using violence
to stop them from speaking, the number of kids who
find that acceptable will shock you to your core, if
you'd like to be shocked to your core.
Speaker 1 (14:57):
But first, this story.
Speaker 4 (15:00):
An Australian woman has given birth to twins conceived by
separate fathers.
Speaker 11 (15:05):
Oh, boy.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Katie, that was exactly the sort of look. That was,
that was, uh, wait, what?
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Yeah, the math isn't mathing, Hal.
Speaker 4 (15:14):
In what is believed to be the country's first such case,
the mother from Queensland was carrying a couple's IVF embryo
when she became pregnant.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
In the natural fashion last year.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
Sorry for calling you a slut.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
Well, for all we know, she is entirely monogamous and
reliable as a.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Partner.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
I jump to conclusions. And yet, a surrogate mother.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So, she gave birth to a boy, which was hers,
and a girl, which was a different couple's, as she
was the surrogate.
Speaker 9 (15:54):
Wow!
Speaker 2 (15:56):
In November of last year, apparently. Are they considered brother
and sister?
Speaker 3 (15:59):
No.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
There was, that's a great question.
Speaker 4 (16:03):
There was no dispute over parenthood, and the couples had
been raising their children separately since their birth.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
But the case became public because.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
So the babies just split ways? It's been real. It's
been fun, but it ain't been real fun. See you later.
Good hang, bud.
Speaker 6 (16:20):
See ya.
Speaker 1 (16:21):
Exactly.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Hey, you're a good roommate.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
I appreciate the courtesy, but I'm off. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (16:26):
So this is in court now because the state has
surrogacy laws that ban the separation of birth siblings. You
can't become a breeding sow and just knock out as
many kids, twins or triplets or whatever, and sell each
one to a different couple or whatever.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
They have laws against that.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
So one judge has ruled that the babies were not
birth siblings under the laws in the unique case. They
were gestational twins.
Speaker 9 (16:54):
So. Hmm. Hmm.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (16:57):
Sounds like I got complicated quickly. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
You're already pregnant. Don't be going having sex with some
other dude. Of course, she probably didn't think I could
get pregnant again.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Oh, right. Why was she ovulating?
Speaker 2 (17:12):
If you have sex with your pregnant.
Speaker 10 (17:14):
Hey, you!
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Why are you ovulating?
Speaker 2 (17:16):
You know, like, if you have sex with your pregnant wife,
you don't think, oh, God, this is going to lead
to twins. You don't think that.
Speaker 4 (17:22):
Or maybe two babies three months apart or six months
or maybe a baby every month and a half.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
Your wife would kill you for that and you would
deserve it.
Speaker 4 (17:33):
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know what we don't have time for?
You can figure out the rest. This story comes out
every few years. Silicon Valley executives are big tech fans,
but not for their own kids. The number of tech
heavyweights who say, no freaking way, my 14-year-old's on social media.
It ought to get your damn attention.
Speaker 9 (17:53):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (17:54):
That maybe in the hour four we can get into that. Sobering,
and I hate being sobered. Coming up next half hour, though,
the 9-11 families, by the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds,
are saying to Mamdani, stay away.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
And I think they've got a damn good case. We'll
get into that.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
If you miss it, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty
On Demand.
Speaker 11 (18:17):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Mayor Mamdani plans to actually attend the September 11th ceremonies
marking the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
But this is nice. 19 of his family members are
also flying in.
Speaker 9 (18:32):
Oh, wow.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
That's a heck of a joke. Now you're supporting him?
Speaker 4 (18:40):
We're going to get back to the question of Mamdani
at the 9-11 festivities in a moment or two. We've
been talking a fair amount about the AI doomers today,
including a fellow just quit, Anthropic. And that may or
may not come to visit mankind. But I will tell
you this with 100% certainty. There is a massive worldwide
(19:00):
political movement that aims to conquer the Western world in
the name of a brutal fundamentalist religion-slash-political system called that
is called Islam. Fundamentalist Islam is on the march, and
they're in the United States in large numbers. And if we,
these 25 years after 9-11, have forgotten that, it's time
to remember in a big damn hurry for a couple
(19:22):
of reasons.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Number one, the threat's never gone away.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
And number two, we were talking the other day about
how in the Communist Manifesto, Marx says, we will support
any movement that aims to overthrow the current political and
social structures.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
And the From the perspective of a.
Speaker 4 (19:36):
Marxist, I see fundamentalist Islam as, holy cow, they got
the numbers, they've got the fervor, they're absolutely adamant that.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
They want to overthrow the current system.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
They're willing to die for their country.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Oh, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (19:51):
They're the perfect allies. Then, you know, then when the
system falls, we got to make sure we get them
butt quick because they're brutal. Meanwhile, the fundamentalist Muslims are
thinking the same thing about the communists and The wins
is an open question in the places where they're successful.
I aim to do whatever little I can to make
(20:12):
them not successful in the United States of America.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
So having opened with that, a little context to the discussion.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
Osama bin Laden and his hijackers are killing more people
now or in the past several years than they killed
on 9-11. The number of 9-11 cancer victims has skyrocketed
about 1,700% over the past decade, fueled by rare variations
(20:40):
of cancer, according to stats released as the 25th anniversary nears.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
That's the cause that Jon Stewart's been on for all
these years in New York?
Speaker 1 (20:49):
Yeah, to his credit.
Speaker 4 (20:50):
Cancer certifications among Twin Towers survivors, downtown Manhattan residents, and
workers honor near the pile. have exploded from 3,200 in
2015 to 57,000-plus this year for the obvious reasons that
cancer takes a while to develop from whatever cause.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Do they know what they were breathing in that caused it?
Speaker 4 (21:12):
There are probably 150 different things that are suspected or
known to have caused the cancer. They're losing two clients
a day. and see a new cancer certification every 50 minutes.
This is a law firm that represents survivors. For the
first time, the number of cancer cases among survivors who
resided in or around, etc., has now surpassed the number
(21:34):
of emergency responders, such as firefighters and police, who had
prolonged exposure.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
So it's just everybody in the area now.
Speaker 4 (21:40):
Osama bin Laden and fundamentalist Islam are continuing to kill
Americans thanks to 9-11.
Speaker 1 (21:46):
So, you know... Let's.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
Get into Lauren Green's report from Special Report last night
as the next step in our discussion.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
My message to Mayor Mondani is, dude, we don't want
you to come.
Speaker 11 (21:58):
We are asking respectfully that he not show up.
Speaker 10 (22:03):
9-11 family members and first responders stood on the steps
of New York City Hall.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Holding pictures of loved ones murdered.
Speaker 10 (22:10):
By radical Islamic terrorists 25 years ago at the World
Trade Center. They're increasing the pressure on Mayor Zoran Mamdani
not to attend Friday's remembrance ceremony.
Speaker 8 (22:20):
I don't know why he's so animate about going to
this one.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Let us have our morning and understand that this is
sacred and hallowed space. But Mayor Mamdani is standing firm
on going. Well, far be it for me to stand
up for Mayor Mamdani, but I feel like if he
had announced he wasn't going to go a while back,
he'd be getting killed for that as the mayor of
New York to not go on the 25th anniversary.
Speaker 9 (22:44):
I agree.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
It is a conundrum.
Speaker 4 (22:45):
And also in if he were to back down in
the face of this controversy. he would be admitting, you
know what, people have a legitimate gripe. I'm not a
reformed Muslim. I believe in fundamentalist Islam and am bent
on it being promoted, which I believe he is.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
But I think we could, if he'd announced I'm not
going prior to the flap, I think it would have
been seen as he's a fundamentalist Muslim who's not willing
to honor the death of, yeah.
Speaker 4 (23:13):
Yeah, he can't win because he is precisely what he
appears to be. To wit, you're looking for a chief
legal advisor, chief counsel for the city?
Speaker 1 (23:26):
How many lawyers are there in New York City? Eight million.
It might be half a million.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
Right.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Okay. Let's hear about who he chose.
Speaker 10 (23:34):
A centerpiece of the controversy is the mayor's appointment of
Ramzi Qasim. As the city's chief legal counsel, Kasim had
represented a convicted al-Qaeda member whose brother-in-law was one of
the 9-11 attackers. He was with Mamdani Friday when the
mayor signed an executive order designating September 11th as an
official day of remembrance and service. The mayor also signed
(23:54):
an order to increase security and create a task force
to help respond to potential threats. The advocacy group September
11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows says it, quote, firmly supports
the presence at Ground Zero of anyone who comes to
pay their respects and believes Mamdani has consistently affirmed his
intentions to honor victims, survivors, and first responders.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
The person's brother-in-law was one of the attackers on the plane?
Speaker 4 (24:20):
This guy, okay, so I'm a moderate Muslim elected to
high office. I'm looking for a chief legal counsel. Here's
this guy who made his bones defending Al-Qaeda. Let's go
with him, says I. Are you kidding me?
Speaker 2 (24:35):
And his brother-in-law was actually on one of the planes?
Speaker 6 (24:40):
What?
Speaker 4 (24:44):
I'm a Muslim doctor who treats 9-11 victims. Why I'm
outraged by Hassan Piker's venom. And this is not about
Hassan Piker, really, but... It was written, it was published
recently in the New York Post. I'm an observing Muslim woman,
British by birth, American by privilege. You witnessed 9-11 in
real time. That was my introduction to radical Islam, a
profound distortion of my faith. Today, as a doctor who
(25:07):
treats 9-11 first responders and survivors, as a consulting sleep specialist,
et cetera, I see the long-term impacts of the horrific
day close up. So it outraged me deeply to hear
9-11 vilified by far-left Democratic twitch mouthpiece Hassan Piker, who's
casually declared that America deserved 9-11. He's trying to backtrack
(25:27):
on his comments just in time for the 25th anniversary
of those heinous attacks. As a Muslim who rejects Islamism,
I must speak out against this venom. And she goes
into the absolute horrific toll on Americans during the event
and after. She goes into the long list of cancers.
and other maladies, breathing. I mean, if the number were
(25:49):
merely breathing troubles, diseases, and not cancer, it would still
be absolutely horrifying. And she, you know, her takeaway is
that Islamism is a threat for Moderate Muslims, too.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:12):
And they need to speak out against it or the
wave is going to crest over all of us. I
think it's a very brave piece to write. There is
a price on her head for sure.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
Oh, absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:21):
There's also a price on the head of, I said
I was going to remember it, Danny Burmawi, who left
the religion of Islam. And so he's an apostate. He
is dead, according to fundamentalist Islam, too. But he writes,
(26:42):
are bad Muslims bad because of Islam? And he says,
the answer is yes. You can read much of my work,
which proves beyond a shred of doubt that the worst
acts committed by Muslims from the Beheadings of infidels to lying, rape, exploitation, corruption, dictatorship,
the oppression of women, child abuse, and so forth are
rooted in Islamic teachings. Not merely in descriptive passages, but
(27:03):
in prescriptive ones. Yes, all humans have the capacity for evil.
We all have within us the ability to justify unspeakable horrors.
But most religions restrain human evil. They set moral boundaries
condemning acts of violence, injustice, and cruelty. Christianity commands its
followers to love their enemies, forgive those who harm them,
and refuse vengeance. Judaism, despite its history of persecution, never
(27:24):
formed a doctrine commanding global conquest or the extermination of non-Jews.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
Islam, however, does the opposite.
Speaker 4 (27:34):
And he makes a rather compelling case, paragraph after paragraph
after paragraph, trying to alert the West that these people
are serious, they are willing to kill, they are willing
to die, they are well organized, and they're coming. And
it's not paranoia, it's not xenophobia, it's not bigotry. It's
a political movement. You're worried about communism?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
You should be.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
If you're on the left and you're worried about fascism,
there could be no more strict and brutal form of
fascism than this.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
I suppose we'll be talking about this more on Friday
is the anniversary of 9-11, and we like round numbers
and quarters and three quarters for some reason.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
But how about the week after 9-11, and you just said,
25 years later, the Taliban will still be in charge
of Afghanistan. And I thought, how would that be possible?
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
So the great God Saad, I wish he had a
different name because it sounds like I'm rapping or something
in the way it's spelled. He's a Middle Eastern Christian
who became a Canadian academic, but Canada's so woke he's
now in America, and welcome, doctor. But he's written a
book recently called Suicidal Empathy, and that's the tendency of
(28:57):
the West to believe if we judge anyone or don't
permit anyone to come in, or if we don't, you know,
extend all of our rights and openness to everyone that
we're bad people.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
We should empathize with them. Here's a great example of it.
Speaker 4 (29:10):
Columbia University's prestigious Knight First Amendment Institute is holding a
symposium on the eve of the 25th anniversary of 9-11.
And the symposium will feature Mohsen Madawi, the Palestinian student
protest leader, who was recently exposed for championing the annihilation
of all Jews worldwide and supporting terrorist organizations. He and
(29:34):
others will examine how post 9-11, the war on terror,
the forever war has stifled free speech. It will also
provide a sympathetic platform to a man facing a deportation
order who once promised to annihilate the Jews.
Speaker 9 (29:48):
Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
Columbia.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
So, uh, mom, Donnie is going to show up on
Friday to something. He has to.
Speaker 9 (29:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
As you made the point.
Speaker 9 (29:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
Boy, if he gets booed, that's going to be quite
the deal, quite the scene.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
Yeah, and.
Speaker 4 (30:11):
The final note in Lauren Green's report was another 9-11
commemorative group said, look, anybody who wants to come with
an open heart and mourn the death and destruction, we'll.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Have them there. I like that spirit. That's a nice spirit.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
But when empathy becomes suicidal empathy, then you're making a terrible,
terrible mistake. So we'll have to see what happens Friday.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
I'll tell you what, if you've never read it, the
9-11 commission report, when they put that book out, it
reads like a thriller. I mean, you don't want to
get through the whole thing because it gets really, unless
you're a real super into it. But that first chapter
of just that day, And what went down, the way
they wrote it, it's thrilling. In fact, I will. I'll
(30:57):
reread it before Friday and bring you some of the
highlights in case you've forgotten them. It's something else.
Speaker 4 (31:05):
My other favorite book on that topic is The Looming Tower,
Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9-11 by Lawrence Wright. And
I know we should have a list of recommended books.
We've never been able to get our act together. We'll
work on it. I've said for the 500th time.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
The 9-11 report is basically just a news account of
what happened after doing all the research. And it's, again,
written like a thriller. I'll get into some of the
highlights from that on Friday, including my favorite part. What's
the current CIA director at the time said as soon
as he heard the news? I love that part. Anyway,
(31:41):
Apple's having one of their big events today, as they
usually do in September. Biggest one they've had in a very,
very long time for one of the most valuable companies
in the world. Tell you why next.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Armstrong and Getty. Some business news tomorrow.
Speaker 11 (31:59):
Apple is set to debut its first foldable phone, and
it costs up to.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
$ 3, 000.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
Ooh.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Or $ 6, 000 if you forget which way it folds.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
So, yeah, Apple's doing their usual September thing. They haven't
launched anything that was a wow in many, many years.
So two things today, and this will have an effect
on your 401k. because it's one of the most valuable
companies in the world, driving the stock market's crazy rise
over the last several years. They got their new CEO
(32:32):
and the foldable phone coming out, which is the biggest
new product thing they've had in a very, very long time,
is they've just been tweaking phones for quite some time. Anyway,
the other companies already have some foldable phones. We'll see
what Apple's is like. I don't know where he got
upward to $ 3, 000. I do a lot of the Apple
rumor sites for this stuff, and it's supposed to be
around $ 2, 000, which is plenty. I mean, that's a lot.
(32:55):
That's a lot for a phone. You're already paying $ 1, 200
if you're getting a Pro Max over the past several years.
I bought the very first iPhone the week it came out,
and I think it was $ 400 in those dollars, 2007. 2007.
(33:16):
But still, man, they've gotten a $ 2, 000 phone.
Speaker 7 (33:19):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
The advantage of folding it would be it's smaller?
Speaker 4 (33:23):
No, you can fold it out and it has a
super big screen.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
That and it's small.
Speaker 4 (33:31):
Oh, yeah, you fold it in your pocket. It's an
iPad you can fit in your pocket. Or women can
fit in their clutches, I heard. There's a cute little
blonde chick on Fox and Friends.
Speaker 1 (33:43):
Ainsley?
Speaker 2 (33:44):
I heard Ainsley say, and I can fit it in
my little purse.
Speaker 9 (33:47):
It's lovely.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Is that appealing to you, Katie? Very important. This brick
fits in nothing right now. Yeah, yeah. You see women
walking around with their tight jeans with their little pockets
and their big phone just sticking out just about to
fall out and smash onto the sidewalk. Or we have
these dumb wristlet things wrapped around so we can just
carry them this way now because they don't fit in pockets.
(34:09):
I'm surprised it hasn't caught on the neck lanyard that
I see some people wear just since everyone's carrying a phone.
I'm surprised that just hasn't become a part of life.
Speaker 4 (34:17):
Why don't you tuck it into your brassiere like I
see in old westerns? You know, you tuck the little
thing down there.
Speaker 2 (34:28):
Nerd. It's funny. I heard our conversation about man bags,
which have become popular and that kind of slung over
your shoulder, one shoulder. and I see lots of cool
hipster sort of dudes using them or whatever, but my son,
when we were in New Orleans, I told this story
(34:49):
at the time, he saw one kind of like it,
and I said, yeah, I see lots of them in
their magazines, and cool guys wear them, and Tom Brady
has one, blah, blah, blah. He got one, really liked it,
everything like that. Within an hour, we're in New Orleans.
They're having a college football game that day, a bunch
of drunk college guys around. Henry gets on the elevator.
Some college kid says, nice purse. And that was the
(35:09):
end of that. He's never used it since.
Speaker 4 (35:11):
It's an honorary man bun, please. I was at that
wedding over the weekend with a bunch of friends, and
one of our friends was carrying a man bag. And
there were a couple of wry comments made about it.
And then as he wandered away, we were all like,
what's he got in there anyway?
Speaker 1 (35:26):
The hell you need that for? You got pockets.
Speaker 2 (35:28):
It's tampons.
Speaker 4 (35:30):
Oh, boy.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
That's just.
Speaker 9 (35:32):
Huh?
Speaker 2 (35:33):
Made Katie laugh. Yeah, because that's all we carry in
our purses. Tampons. Copious amounts of tampons.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Cases, yes.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
What's your hat say? We talked about this earlier. Very funny.
Your hat is? Hold my drink. I gotta pet this dog.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
Yeah, which is very, very funny.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
And it reminded me, I had screen captured a t-shirt
that I liked from a guy that said, Undiagnosed, but
something ain't right. Which I also thought was funny.
Speaker 9 (35:59):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (36:00):
Um.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
I thought Joe Scarborough said something really ridiculous this morning
as he was talking about the big tennis match last night.
You know what I'm talking about? If you watched it,
it was one of the great tennis matches of all time.
Just ridiculous about immigration. And a bunch of other stuff
that we'll get into, including that AI expert who said
we're all going to die and they know it at Anthropic.
(36:22):
And why aren't we talking about this more? If you
missed the segment, get the podcast. Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 1 (36:31):
Armstrong and Getty.
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!