December 12, 2025 • 37 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- Judge Larry Goodman talks to A&G about cameras in the courtroom
- Epstein news & Walmart removing dyes
- Obamacare & costs
- Patient records doctor while going through procedure
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):
I'm strong and Kataki and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
There were cameras all over my husband when he was murdered.
There have been cameras all over my friends and family morning.
There have been cameras all over me, analyzing my every move,
analyzing my every smile.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
My every tear.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
We deserve to have cameras in there.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
Oh boy, that's a wife of Charlie kirk. Uh That
has got to be quite the lifestyle. Your husband's dead
and you got two little kids to raise is a
lot to deal with without anything else.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Being at the center of a media slash, social media,
internet hoax conspiracy circus, good lord. Nobody should have to
endure that. Just crazy. But what she was referring to, obviously,
is the question of cameras in the courtroom, which is
one of the matters being wrestled with in some of
the preliminary hearings for the young man who's accused of
(01:18):
murdering Charlie kirk in cold blood in Utah, who I
saw smiling in the courtroom yesterday are you smiling about?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
You scumbag?
Speaker 1 (01:28):
To discuss that in other matters, how nice it is
to welcome back Larry Goodman, retired judge for the Superior
Court in Alameda County in California, and also Katie's dad. Hello,
Judge Larry, how are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:42):
I'm doing well? How about you?
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Pretty good?
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Let's start there though, like some scumbag murderer gets let
in there and obviously they're innocent until proven guilty. This
guy's guilty and they're smiling. Does that have any effect
on the judge or the jury or anything like that.
It would certainly have an effect on me emotionally.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
You smiling about Well, that's one of the reasons you
don't want cameras in the courtroom. I mean, it's already
created an issue, and then you have to now ask
all the potential jurors did you see this dependence smirking
in the courtroom before the trial started. It's just a
bad I kind of get the widow's position, as she
(02:20):
wants him to be scrutinized the same way she is,
but it never ends well when you have a camera
in the.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Courtroom, right, and I want to drill down on that
a little bit more, but not in the well kind
of in this guy's defense. And you know, may God
forgive me for defending this guy at all, having been
a court watcher for a while when I had more time,
Especially the hearings go on for hours and hours and
(02:46):
hours for days and days and days, and occasionally somebody
says something funny and the defendant smiles or laughs, and
if the jury the end the jury pool sees that
and reacts the way Jack did, it's probably not good
for the justice system.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
Well, it's not for the it makes this case is,
Jonathan Turley said yesterday. This case has so much evidence
that it shouldn't be difficult to get a conviction unless
something goes wrong. And the unless something goes wrong certainly
leads into having a camera there and letting him play
(03:25):
to a camera. And maybe he doesn't. It's not so
much about affecting the jury. But maybe he's the kind
of person that likes to smirk because he knows it's
going to hurt the victim's family, or maybe he just
wants to have the notoriety, And why give him the
notoriety of having him beyond television every day? It's just
(03:46):
and then something goes wrong in the courtroom. Everybody knows it.
It becomes an appellate issue, and the case either gets
thrown out or gets reversed, or you have to start again.
It just doesn't make good sense.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
I get Joe's point about it's a long day, goes
for days, weeks, months, and all that sort of stuff. Man,
if I'm falsely accused of murdering a guy, man, I
don't know if I'd find anything funny ever for a
very long time.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So you said you've seen, you've seen seen it go
ahead accused.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
Well, I assumes you're falsely accused, and I don't think
that's necessarily the situation, right.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Well, and he's a crazy person who just got to
do with him murdering somebody.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Yeah, so that's that's interesting.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
I think a lot of us who are old enough
or watched various documentaries are aware of all the ways
that the cameras in the courtroom perverted the O. J.
Simpson trial, where just everybody was grand standing and playing
to the cameras and stuff like that. Have you ever
presided over a case or been in the situation where
there were cameras in the courtroom.
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Larry, I never let cameras. I had cameras in the
courtroom for a sentencing proceeding and and maybe a post
conviction motion, but I never let cameras in to the
courtroom pre trial hearings or during the trial itself. For
that very reason that even the good lawyers that try
(05:14):
as they might not to play to the cameras, they
end up playing to the cameras in a opening a
statement that might be twenty minutes now becomes forty minutes
because they try to be too clever. Or it's like
I said, I've never seen it work to the advantage
of the justice system.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Well, that's an interesting statement right there.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
You've never seen it work to the advantage of the
justice system, which is the whole point of any of this,
right Certainly, I find it interesting that it's the judge's discretion.
Why is that a better idea than a blanket policy
or is.
Speaker 4 (05:45):
It Well, because the judge is responsible for maintaining order
in the court room, it's that's kind of like the
judges little fight them. You're responsible for everything that happens there,
and you're also responsible to ensure that you process is
protected from both the defendant and the prosecution. And if
your determination is that having a camera there will interfere
(06:09):
with that judicial proceeding in the due process, then it's
your right in your courtroom to say no, you're not
going to do it. They have forms they submit it
for every trial. I think I did that. We would
get something from one of the local TV stations and
who they want to put a camera, and we just
signed deny and we never heard nobody ever really thought
about it after we denied it. But they always throw
(06:31):
them out there just to see if they can get in.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
Wait.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
So Erica Kirk making the argument, I want this guy
scrutinized everything he wears, every facial expression, every nod, the
way people have been doing to me.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
And I get that.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
The problem is everybody else that didn't do anything wrong
gets scrutinized the same way. Every single cop, witness, lawyer,
everybody that's not guilty of anything gets scrutinized exactly the
same way, which is not very fair.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Yeah, I mean I would I would caution Eric, be
careful what you wish for. You know, it could it
could take a case of your husband's murder and turn
it into a circus and cause more pain than before
the trial, and it also may screw up the proceeding
and the results might not be what everybody thinks they
should be.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
Well, if you're of a certain age, you're you're touchstone
for everything.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Court room is always the OJ case.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
But think of all the people whose lives were changed
who didn't do any Kaylin didn't do anything wrong. But
I mean, he got he he became a little and
half wit is not a crime. He exactly he could
become a laughing stock of the country just because he
knew a guy who committed a horrible crime. Because there
cameras in the court and otherwise we wouldn't wouldn't have
known what he looked like or ever thought about him.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Right, Yeah, Well, I mean some people think would would
the outcome of OJ Simpson been the same with their
head and in cameras.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
That's a good question. I'd love to run that through
a parallel universe.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Right.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Larry Goodman, say, retired Superior court judge from California, talking
about the trial of the monstrous confused young man who
allegedly murdered Charlie Kirk and cameras in the courtroom and
that sort of thing. Yeah, yeah, I think somebody needs
to set Erica down and just explain no, this will
make it much, much, much more difficult to convict this
(08:16):
guy swiftly and justly and put him into the stripey
hole forever. So huh, So you said you've never seen
it end, Well, do you have other like concrete examples
of something, you know, somebody that was damaged or something
that went wrong from emmeron a courtroom other than oy just.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
Not personally the experience, just from seeing it in other
cases where there's always something happens and it's always the
top headline on the evening news or in the next
day in the paper, and it's the kind of thing
that as a judge when you're trying to protect a
proceeding and you go like, oh, we didn't need to
see that on the front page of the newspaper this morning,
or oh I didn't need to hear that when I
(08:55):
sat down for dinner and listened to the local news station,
and it just it just creates issues that you just
don't need to deal with and don't want to have
to deal with.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Yeah, and whether it's you know, a person who's innocent
of anything, like they're just you know, a person involved
in the trial, or the defendant who's a scumbag murderer
like that Luigi, who I think is a scumbag murderer.
But the lead story, what was it Monday night, was
smirking in the courtroom. I mean, that's not part of
the system. Yeah, you know, you're supposed to be found
guilty and it's based on smirks. Right, there's a lead
(09:27):
story on the evening news because.
Speaker 4 (09:29):
Of cameras exactly. And you know, and there are defendants
and I did have some of those in my courtroom
who are so vile that they want to inflict as
much pain as they can, so they look at those
victims fans smirk and say things. And if that's on
the camera, and they do it pre trial, then you've
(09:50):
got to deal with that during jury selection, or if
they do it during the trial because they know it's
going to be on the camera, then you have to
deal with it with a jury. If they were prejudiced
because the guy I turned around and you know, blew
a kiss at the victim's mother.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Oh my god.
Speaker 4 (10:04):
It's just all kinds of stupid stuff that they do.
Sometimes you just don't need publicides.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
You know, what one more thought. I've witnessed low double
digit trials. You've witnessed hundreds and hundreds, But as a jury,
you are you are there for every single second of
the admissible stuff, not the you know, they need to
talk to the lawyers to judge whatever. And so you
see the witness walking, you see them sworn in, You
(10:33):
see every single second of their testimony. And maybe they
have a nervous laugh, for instance, and when they you know,
the little chuck a little lot of people have, but
you've seen the totality of their testimony. So the fact
that they chuckled a little bit while saying something, you think, oh,
that's just the way that guy communicates snow.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Big deal.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
But if you isolate that to a clip on the news,
it looks weird and troubling and it leads to all
sorts of stupid, blanking Internet speculation and Candace Owens next
two hours of content. And so just I don't know
any comment, Larry, you're on the other side of the
bench from me.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
When you see that. Let's say you have somebody that
has a little snicker or they have a stutter and
they can't talk like a normal person would when they're
under stressed. You can take that and you can tell
the jury before they testify. Now, mister Smith has a
speech impediment, and he may find that it's not as
clear as everybody else. You're not to infer anything by it.
(11:34):
He's not being disrespectful, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
C that's pretty good. That's interesting.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
You look at the news, all you're going to get
is the snicker or the smirt, right, and they're not
going to admonition on the news story.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
All right, all right, you've convinced us. Thank you, Judge
Larry Goodman, Superior Court. Always a pleasure, always enlightening. Thanks
so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Thanks Joe and Jack, you guys take care.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
All right, I was already convent. Body reconvinced me or
further pays perspective. It's kind of handy once in a while,
isn't it, when you're talking about issues. So Omaha, steaks deliciousness.
It's it's about delicious, yummy food, particularly steaks and burghers,
and for the best francs I've ever had, and all
(12:18):
sorts of other options.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
And it's about being a great, great gift this time
of year.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Grass fed grain finished beef, the marbling, my god, the
marbling exceptional flavor. And right now at the Sizzle All
the Way sail, you can get fifty percent off site
wide at Omaha Steaks dot com plus our listeners because
we like you get an extra thirty five dollars off
with the promo coat Armstrong. And for that person in
your life who would love this, doesn't need more stuff
(12:44):
to put in a closet, there's great. There is a
great variety of packages that you can order no matter
your budget at Omaha Steaks.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Which I love.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Say big on gourmet gifts and more holiday favorites with
Omaha Steaks. Visit Omaha Steaks dot com for fifty percent
off site white during their Sizzle All the Way sale,
and for an extra thirty five bucks off, use the
promo code Armstrong at checkout terms apply seaside for details.
That's Omaha Steaks dot com and use that code Armstrong
to knock another thirty five bucks off at checkout.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
You got some, They're gonna bring some. That was an
evil chuckle there. I just thought, I'm that was like
bad Santa.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
I just thought I'm going to bring such hate upon me. Oh,
we have some breaking news around the Epstein story.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
You're the best. Yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
No, no, we don't, then we don't. This will be
utterly insignificant. That is where my money is, and I
don't even know what it is. It's slightly more significant
than the seeing the picture of his bathroom that came
out last week.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
But uh, other stuff on the way to stay here.
Speaker 5 (13:47):
Armstrong, a California woman recently gave birth in a self
driving Waimo taxi. Then to even things out, the Waimo
ran over a pedestrian.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
In San Francis. Let's go.
Speaker 5 (14:00):
On Monday, a woman gave birth inside a way Mo
self driving car.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Both mother and baby are.
Speaker 5 (14:07):
Still circling the parking lot of a Joanne Fabric.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Those are both good jokes.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
I like them.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Ran over a pedestrian to even things out.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Wow, ah, it's funny how the they're not really safe
for very good jokes are so popular at the same
time that were squeezed screaming toward they're going to take
away our right to drive because they're better at it
than us.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Very right.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Well, and according to Waymos statistics, they have ninety six
percent fewer accidents at intersections than humans do.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Here's your dumb breaking news story.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
So last week, breaking news pictures came out of the
Epstein something or other, and it was a bunch of
pictures of his estate. That didn't mean a freaking thing,
although it was somewhat interesting to me to see his
island and think, Wow, it'd be crazy to have that
lifestyle that's yours. The whole damned island, that little lagoon
in the view, and the beach and the trees and
the house, and the whole thing is yours, and the
(15:06):
airstrip where you land. I mean, that's incredible. What a lifestyle. Wow,
that would spin your head around. You know, if he
is trying to get you to court you, to get
you to go along with a business deal or whatever
he's wanting to do, whyever, he's currying your favorite You
land me at your island saying knock yourself out, places
of mine, have a good time. Everything's on the house. Wow,
(15:29):
I'd make an impression on you anyway.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
House.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
Democrats have released more photos from Jeffrey Epstein's estate, but
this time featuring pictures of humans, including Trump, Bill Clinton
and other prominent figures. So this will be this will
have tongues wagging all day long. If there are pictures
we haven't already seen before, and at least one of
them are looking here at here looks like a Trump
Epstein picture I had never seen.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Before, still doesn't mean anything. We're prove it, So I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Are they from the island necessarily or just with Epstein?
Speaker 2 (15:58):
Just with Epstein? Oh?
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Forgot, this is nothing pictures I've never seen before, so
they will No, No, it doesn't mean anything, of course not.
Walmart's removing synthetic dyes from its food. So the picture
I just saw on the news when they said that
was the meat case, now I get it. Like they
also showed some Christmas cookies. Okay, there's all kinds of
(16:21):
coloring dyes in the frosting and stuff like that, and
you're gonna get rid of them or substitute something else
that gives you the color. But the meat case, we're
gonna get gray meat. Are they redding up our meat
a little bit there at Walmart? And you take that
colors out of there, and all of a sudden, your
shrimp and everything is gray.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
It'll be a little off putting. I remember hearing about
that years.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
And years ago, but I can't remember how commonplace it is.
I feel like that was a big thing years ago.
Also that that's particularly with seafood, they'd make it look
more red because it turns gray very quickly.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Yeah, well, and I remember that. Well.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
I know that Americans are so obsessed with the appearance
of food. There are varieties of apples and pairs and
whatever else that just don't sell in the United States
because their peels don't look perfect. They taste way better,
but because they don't look like they're out of a
food ad, Americans generally.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Won't buy them as much.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
So yeah, yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all that
our steaks are getting tarted up. It's what you grow
up with and you get used to, which is everything
looking like it came off the cover of a magazine.
But like I've been in other countries where you go
you're going to a grocery store and like the produce particularly,
it's like, what this is what you're selling here? People
buying this bruises and danse and off putting shapes.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
But yeah, it's fine, Yeah, just we expect perfection. Oh.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
I was reminded Jack that yesterday, I believe it was
you brought us a fabulous witticism about a cow with
no legs?
Speaker 2 (17:47):
What do you call it? Ground beef?
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Bruce says Jack should have asked and said, what do
you call a cow with two legs?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
The answer is lean beef?
Speaker 1 (17:56):
There you go, which is better for you? Where do
you find a cow with no legs? Exactly where you
left it? I don't know. Trump with an executive order
around AI. That got a lot of attention yesterday in
the afternoon. We can talk a little bit about that,
among other things. Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Poor.
Speaker 5 (18:19):
Check Time magazine announced today that it's person of the
Year are the quote individuals who imagined, designed, and built AI.
Just think thanks to them, next year we won't need
a person of the year.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
That's pretty interesting. How many Yeah?
Speaker 1 (18:34):
What if the person of the year for ten years
running is Ai chat bott Evron who cured lung cancer.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
I think we got to shut it down at that point.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
So, speaking of AI, Trump with a big order yesterday
to try to deregulate AI. Why this year alone, twenty
twenty five, which is coming to a close. All fifty
states and territories, even our territories, you too, GWAM, All
fifty states and territories introduced AI legislation. Thirty eight states
(19:07):
adopted about one hundred laws, and because of that, Trump
signed an executive order denuter state AI laws, saying it's
important for America to dominate AI. Any state that does
not overturn their laws or support the United States that
(19:28):
this is in the quotes United States Global AI Dominance Act,
putting dozens of AI safety and consumer protection laws at
risk if states keep their laws in place that they
already passed. Trump said he's going to direct regulators to
withhold funds for broadband and other projects. That's the way
the federal government forces.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
You to do things. They withhold funds. Right, what do
you call it? Act? That you just refer to? The
United States Global AI Dominance?
Speaker 1 (19:56):
What status is that at? Does it exist? Has it
been written as well for Congress? We're about to find out. No,
it's not before Congress. It's a president thing. The order yesterday,
which has sparked broad bipartisan opposition lots of people both
parties don't like it, is likely to be challenged in
(20:19):
court by states and consumer groups on the grounds that
only Congress as the authority to override state laws. Legal
experts said this is gonna be damned interesting though. Ah,
how much if we had done this around automobiles or
(20:41):
the internet at the very beginning, or whatever else, how
much would have it have slowed down us being the
global leader on those things. Yes, I think and I
absolutely stand ready to be corrected on this, but I
think this is a great example of you know, the
same situation is people are very very worried about AI
(21:03):
and they are looking to government to solve the problem,
which in some cases is appropriate, often not, but and
their representative in the government are like, I have no
idea what to do, so we'll just do this.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Neither do they pass stuff that is half ridiculous, well.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
Right, and is probably going to only handcuff us and
actually accomplish nothing in terms of making you safer, your
money safer, the internet safer. Well, however you want to
look at it. So I follow a lot of conversations
between doomers, which I'm one of an accelerationists, who say
we need to go full speed ahead to make sure
we stay ahead of China and just because it's going
to be so.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Great for everybody.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
But one of the arguments of the accelerations is accelerationists.
Is there there are no laws you can pass that
doesn't that make any sense? Certainly not yet. Nobody has
any idea what we're even talking about yet, right yeah, well,
plus you can pass every law you want. I'm going
to ask my chat gpt, Hey, how do I get
around this law? Great question, Joe, you're so curious. Here's
(22:04):
how you get around it. Just route your saying through
a blankety blanket.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
You know it is. It's all performative. I think I
think it is too.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
I think the broad bipartisan opposition is mostly like you said,
it's scared voters who have no idea what they're even
scared of, or any the slightest inkling, and nobody does
how you would regulate it, right, which is not to
discount people's concern for what I'm a doer.
Speaker 2 (22:29):
Right right? Yeah? Well okay, So you know it's funny.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
I just happened to read a piece by the brilliant
you've all Levin about why Republicans lose every argument about
health care costs, and it's ironically convinced me that it's
time to pull the plug on the American Democratic experiment
while the patient is dead. Wow, you're gonna put a
pill over the face of democracy. Oh, no, need to, no,
need to. It's it's dead. It's just being supported by machines.
(22:55):
I'm sorry to break the news to you, missus America. No, yeah, yeah,
you're your country is dead. Not really, not really, who
knows twists and turns keep on coming. But he actually
have stats on that, percentages of people that think that
we're more or less over versus dying, versus doing Okay,
(23:15):
I have stats on that coming up from a new poll. Yeah,
I'll just hit you with a couple of sentences from
that piece about healthcare, which is I was just reminded
of confusing and frightening but very important political discussions that
end up being really dumb. Is our theme you've all writes,
(23:37):
this is where politics gum things up talking about Well, anyway,
the fact is most of us don't actually want a
lot of choice when it comes to healthcare. We just
want to believe that everything is paid for. That creates
an incentive to hide costs by routing most payments through
insurers or government, which sustains the illusion that everything is
free to the consumer. This has yielded a healthcare system
(23:57):
without real prices, which is something we've talked about.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
That sentence in there. I realize that's true.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
But if people think stuff, anything you get is free,
well then we just have a dumb populace.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
You can't get past that. That's the problem. How do
you think anything could be free if I was going
to be more charitable for once in my life, yeah,
I would say the practically the entire political structure of
our country at this point, both parties have convinced people
(24:30):
that to what comes from the government is free and
that they have a right to it. Or there are
just enough billionaires to fund all of this if they
pay there But anyway, so back to Levin's point that
this sustains the illusion that everything is free to the consumer.
This has yielded a healthcare system without real prices and
therefore without enough pressure to restrain spending. In turn, that's
(24:51):
led to ever rising costs paid for by ever rising subsidies.
It's one of the main reasons we're so deep in debt. Anyway,
he writes. For decades, this is that health policy proposals
that make economic sense do not make political sense, and
vice versa. And so Democrats have responded to the problem
by leaning into the political logic and proposing endless subsidies,
(25:14):
and it is much more appealing to voters than saying whoa, whoa, Well,
here are the problems with this model. Here's why we
need reform at bluff. But it just you can't get
it through a democracy, which I realized is incredibly discouraging.
Sometimes realism is discouraging. But yeah, oof oof, where do.
Speaker 2 (25:33):
We go from here?
Speaker 1 (25:34):
We do need to get Craig the healthcare guru on
in the new year to talk about the status and
things I think because it's intimidating and confusing and depressing
and discouraging, but it's something we all are involved in.
It's not like hearing some sort of legislation about oil
rigs in the Gulf of America. I mean, you think, yeah,
(25:57):
I get oil, and no. Everybody's funly involved in healthcare.
So it's very very important to I have, like the
majority of Americans have healthcare through my employer, and uh,
once you get past the deductible, I'm pretty happy with it.
Like I picked up a whole bunch of prescriptions at
the pharmacy the other day and the total was like
(26:18):
two dollars and forty cents for like six things. I
always say, that's outrageous, and I get a laugh out
of the hilarious pharmacist girl.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
But it's amazed by that.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
But here in a couple of weeks, it'll be January first,
and we all get to experience that hole. You go
to the pharmacy or the first doctor appointment and you
get hit with this insane bill. It's like, oh, that's right,
my five thousand dollars deductible hasn't been met yet for
the year, right, And plenty of employers are out there saying,
uh yeah, and I'm kicking in X amount every single
month on.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Your healthcare that that prescription wasn't two dollars and forty
cents of three hundred seventy five dollars.
Speaker 4 (26:53):
Idiot?
Speaker 1 (26:54):
Why slapsticks anyway, because nobody sees the prices.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
I get so every year when I go to pick
up one prescription for my son and it's like one
hundred and eighty dollars. What you haven't hit your deductible yet?
And so here's a question for you on air meeting.
I'm gonna phrase this in.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
One of the one of the.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Ways I hate the most take the Joe Getty challenge.
Do you have the guts to take on these stories?
Oh my god, I know how annoying is that?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
That was adding?
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Yeah, so headline from the Free Press the base is
done with Maga. It wants America.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
First.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
She went to Marjorie Taylor Green's district in Georgia and
talked to lots and lots of voters and they are
over Donald j.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
Yeah. Well did you read or maybe you were about
to say that, ah.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Peggy Newman, Yeah, yeah, Dan Trump may be losing his
touch at the end of his eleventh month. He's surrounded
by mood shifts, challenges, an ominous sign well, particularly her
talking about how Marjorie Taylor Green may have signaled to everybody.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
You can challenge the king and survive.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
She's doing better for herself than she probably ever has.
Got the sixty minutes piece. She's getting lots of news
coverage and all that sort of stuff. She hasn't been
you know, ruined. Oh no, no, yeah. Peggy refers to
it as a jail break moment. Yeah, when everybody realized,
oh my gosh, you can defy the warden, right, yeah, exactly,
(28:33):
So why don't we get into that next hour. And
here's you know, just in case that concerns you. We
I are here neither to lavish praise and lick the
boots of Donald J. Trump, nor automatically run down everything
he does. It's it's life is much more interesting if
(28:57):
you just try to take in reality and understand what's
in my opinion, and I think his ship is headed
for the shoals, I really do. Is that only a
figure of speech or was there a point where you
had to lick people's boots. It's got to have come
from something that'd be Ah, I hate to have to
do that. H Yeah, if you are ordered to lick
(29:18):
my boots clean, I would say that's a bit of
a statement of donal. Wow, that is a bit of
a humiliation. Yes, wow, indeed you it was right. Wake
up and smell the leather. Hey, here's some really great
advice for you. No matter what you think of Donald
JA or Marjorie Taylor or anything else in the world,
(29:38):
you don't want scumbag.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Junkie A holes stealing your stuff.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Scumbag junkie A holes, what if they're just lurking around
your house. A lot of security systems, wait, till they
break in. Then they alert the cops. How about you, whoop, whoop, whoop,
you've had a break in? They tell you, how about
you catch these scumbag junkie a holes before they break
in with the AI technology that simply Safe has.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Yeah, the AI cameras detect threats early.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Then they alert to live agents, real people who speak
to the intruders directly.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
Hey, what are you doing there? You're being watched. Get out.
The cops are on their way.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
It's fantastic and it's less much less than the old
schools security systems. No long term contracts, are hidden fees,
you can cancel any time. They earn your business every
minute of every day.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
This is so so good.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
I feel good every time I drive away from my
house seeing the simply Safe sign in the yard.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
And knowing what I've got.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
And this month you can take fifty percent off any
new system. That's one of the best prices you'll ever
see for simply Safe. Do not miss it. Hit simply
safe dot com slash armstrong again. That's simply safe dot
com slash armstrong. Lock in your discount. There's no safe
like simply Safe. Got an update on that Michigan football coach.
That's a heck of a story. He had one of
the best coaching jobs in the world, I mean, of
(30:55):
any sport at any level.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
And you know what I hadn't heard until this morning
or late last night. Married three kids. Yeah, I was
just he had an inappropriate relationship with the staffer. Those
stiff rules. But no, I was a dad and a
husband's that's out of bounds. Yeah, okay, but not Yeah, Okay,
got ugly.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
We can tell you all about that. I want to
check in on that woman.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
She a trans woman, gets cancer surgery, secretly records the
doctor's story from the New York Times. That's an interesting one.
Among other things we got to get to coming up.
Can I begin with This story has no real point
to me. I'm not trying to make a point of
any kind, because you might be listening trying to figure
(31:41):
out what's the point. I'm not trying to make a point.
I just find this interesting, this whole story about this
trans woman who secretly recorded her cancer surgery.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
It's just interesting.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
She's filing a lawsuit against what the people said while
she was under which is again interesting. Every story as
a point, whether you want it to or not. I'm
not trying to make the nature of stories. I'm not
trying to make a major point about trans or anything
like that. So if you're waiting for that.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
It's it's.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
It is unusual for patients to record their own surgeries,
but not completely unheard of. I don't remember if we
talked about this lawsuit back in twenty thirteen.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Maybe we did.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
A man recorded audio secretly while he was sedated and
sued during a colonoscopy because of antsegiologists remarks. The doctor
told other medical staff members that she thought.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
It breaks yourself. I have no idea what the next sentence.
So this gets to what Joe was talking about earlier.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
We all say things among friends or or you know,
text friends or family members or whatever, things that you know,
we wouldn't say ill loud anyone else. And in this
case he got anesthesiologists or doctors or whatever.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
They don't think the patient's listening.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
So the doctor told other medical staff members she found
the patient so annoying she felt like punching him. She
said a rash on the patient's genitals was probably penis
of bola.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
Wow, you don't want that.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
The patient who was awarded a half million dollars by
a jury. Said he had hit record on his phone
because he wanted documentation of what the doctor said. Why
he worried that the sedation would leave him too groggy
to remember.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
What are you worried about? What?
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Yeah, wait a minute, that sounds like a cart before
a horse. Or you weren't concerned. You were trying, you
were hoping for something like this. Anyway, Well, what they
were claiming, and it's the same thing that this woman
I'm you saying. Woman, this is what the New York
Times is calling this person even though they have a
penis that they were recording it. And I had this
experience when I was doing cancer treatment. You're so drugged up,
and they're telling me all these things you gotta do.
(33:48):
If I hadn't had somebody there with me some of
the time to like write it down, you're giving me
all these instructions of what I can eat and how
many pills to take, and I'm half out of my
mind on pills. And so that's why this person said
they were recording the conversation.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
It might be true, but you did it secretly.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
You could like say, hey, I'm going to record you
just so I don't forget this as opposed to secretly
hit your phone and then stash it when they put
you under.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
That makes it sound to me like you're trying to
catch them at something.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
Yeah, getting someone's consent is and letting them know they're
being recorded is just common decency. Jennifer Caspasso, a forty
two year old transgender woman, figured she was going to
be dead in eighteen months. She had been diagnosed with
cancer and was going to undergo some surgery. Uh, she
decided to secretly record her surgeons. I'll skip all the
other stuff. I wanted to know what's going on, she said,
(34:38):
Knowledge is power. Okay, fine. The surgery moved part of
her lung, did not getting around to playing the recording
until a few weeks later. Well that makes me feel
like you weren't that interested in what they said about
your instructions. Though the audio was muffled, she could follow
some of what the surgical team was saying before the
procedure began. Again, this is a transwoman that she has
a penis in this story, it's a man. God, Why
(35:00):
why do you allow the New York Times to order
you to pervert the language? Chicken makes it easier to
follow the story. But anyway, someone was going out for coffee.
Did anyone want something from Starbucks? That's one of the
things they got recorded during this star Jay. The conversation
just shifted, then shifted, still has man parts. It seemed
to Miss Capasso that they were talking about her genitalia.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Wow, you are Sherlock Holmes there.
Speaker 1 (35:24):
On the recording, the healthcare workers expressed a variety of
opinions about transgender identity, more generally not that it's not right.
But one person can be heard saying and another said,
I don't get any of it. And in the middle
of the conversation, one person suggested updating the medical file. Yeah,
it needs to say mail on here. The person said.
When Miss Capasso woke up, she found out that her
(35:47):
electronic medical records had been changed to M for male,
and now she's fighting to get it changed back and
suing the hospital for misgendering her while she was asleep
or whatever the hell. I would think you gotta have
male on there, since male bodies require different care and
maybe doses of drugs or whatever.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
And react to drugs differently.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
There are a hundred or more differences in medical care
between men and women.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
It's incredibly important.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
By the way, this particular woman had had a half
dozen procedures to feminize her face, all the while undergoing
cancer surgery. Her browbridge, her brow ridge was sanded down.
That sounds pleasant. Her orbital bone was shaved to give
her eyes an upward tilt. Her square chin was softened.
(36:41):
There were cheek implants and a change to her nose too.
I needed radical surgical intervention, she said. The clock was ticking.
I didn't know how much longer I was going to
be alive. I wasn't going to die looking the way
I looked. I wanted to die leaving a pretty female corpse.
This is a story about a mentally ill man. It's
a shame. That's what I told you.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
I said. I don't really have a point other than
I thought this was all interesting. Browridge sanded down.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Orbital bone shaved to give your eyes an upward tilt.
I can't believe doctors even do that. It's kind of
the looking like a girl package. Yeah, wow, you're right.
They were referring to your genitalia. Very clever for you
to catch on the 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):
I'm strong and Kataki and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
There were cameras all over my husband when he was murdered.
There have been cameras all over my friends and family morning.
There have been cameras all over me, analyzing my every move,
analyzing my every smile.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
My every tear.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
We deserve to have cameras in there.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
Oh boy, that's a wife of Charlie kirk. Uh That
has got to be quite the lifestyle. Your husband's dead
and you got two little kids to raise is a
lot to deal with without anything else.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Being at the center of a media slash, social media,
internet hoax conspiracy circus, good lord. Nobody should have to
endure that. Just crazy. But what she was referring to, obviously,
is the question of cameras in the courtroom, which is
one of the matters being wrestled with in some of
the preliminary hearings for the young man who's accused of
(01:18):
murdering Charlie kirk in cold blood in Utah, who I
saw smiling in the courtroom yesterday are you smiling about?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
You scumbag?
Speaker 1 (01:28):
To discuss that in other matters, how nice it is
to welcome back Larry Goodman, retired judge for the Superior
Court in Alameda County in California, and also Katie's dad. Hello,
Judge Larry, how are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:42):
I'm doing well? How about you?
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Pretty good?
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Let's start there though, like some scumbag murderer gets let
in there and obviously they're innocent until proven guilty. This
guy's guilty and they're smiling. Does that have any effect
on the judge or the jury or anything like that.
It would certainly have an effect on me emotionally.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
You smiling about Well, that's one of the reasons you
don't want cameras in the courtroom. I mean, it's already
created an issue, and then you have to now ask
all the potential jurors did you see this dependence smirking
in the courtroom before the trial started. It's just a
bad I kind of get the widow's position, as she
(02:20):
wants him to be scrutinized the same way she is,
but it never ends well when you have a camera
in the.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Courtroom, right, and I want to drill down on that
a little bit more, but not in the well kind
of in this guy's defense. And you know, may God
forgive me for defending this guy at all, having been
a court watcher for a while when I had more time,
Especially the hearings go on for hours and hours and
(02:46):
hours for days and days and days, and occasionally somebody
says something funny and the defendant smiles or laughs, and
if the jury the end the jury pool sees that
and reacts the way Jack did, it's probably not good
for the justice system.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
Well, it's not for the it makes this case is,
Jonathan Turley said yesterday. This case has so much evidence
that it shouldn't be difficult to get a conviction unless
something goes wrong. And the unless something goes wrong certainly
leads into having a camera there and letting him play
(03:25):
to a camera. And maybe he doesn't. It's not so
much about affecting the jury. But maybe he's the kind
of person that likes to smirk because he knows it's
going to hurt the victim's family, or maybe he just
wants to have the notoriety, And why give him the
notoriety of having him beyond television every day? It's just
(03:46):
and then something goes wrong in the courtroom. Everybody knows it.
It becomes an appellate issue, and the case either gets
thrown out or gets reversed, or you have to start again.
It just doesn't make good sense.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
I get Joe's point about it's a long day, goes
for days, weeks, months, and all that sort of stuff. Man,
if I'm falsely accused of murdering a guy, man, I
don't know if I'd find anything funny ever for a
very long time.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So you said you've seen, you've seen seen it go
ahead accused.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
Well, I assumes you're falsely accused, and I don't think
that's necessarily the situation, right.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Well, and he's a crazy person who just got to
do with him murdering somebody.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Yeah, so that's that's interesting.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
I think a lot of us who are old enough
or watched various documentaries are aware of all the ways
that the cameras in the courtroom perverted the O. J.
Simpson trial, where just everybody was grand standing and playing
to the cameras and stuff like that. Have you ever
presided over a case or been in the situation where
there were cameras in the courtroom.
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Larry, I never let cameras. I had cameras in the
courtroom for a sentencing proceeding and and maybe a post
conviction motion, but I never let cameras in to the
courtroom pre trial hearings or during the trial itself. For
that very reason that even the good lawyers that try
(05:14):
as they might not to play to the cameras, they
end up playing to the cameras in a opening a
statement that might be twenty minutes now becomes forty minutes
because they try to be too clever. Or it's like
I said, I've never seen it work to the advantage
of the justice system.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Well, that's an interesting statement right there.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
You've never seen it work to the advantage of the
justice system, which is the whole point of any of this,
right Certainly, I find it interesting that it's the judge's discretion.
Why is that a better idea than a blanket policy
or is.
Speaker 4 (05:45):
It Well, because the judge is responsible for maintaining order
in the court room, it's that's kind of like the
judges little fight them. You're responsible for everything that happens there,
and you're also responsible to ensure that you process is
protected from both the defendant and the prosecution. And if
your determination is that having a camera there will interfere
(06:09):
with that judicial proceeding in the due process, then it's
your right in your courtroom to say no, you're not
going to do it. They have forms they submit it
for every trial. I think I did that. We would
get something from one of the local TV stations and
who they want to put a camera, and we just
signed deny and we never heard nobody ever really thought
about it after we denied it. But they always throw
(06:31):
them out there just to see if they can get in.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
Wait.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
So Erica Kirk making the argument, I want this guy
scrutinized everything he wears, every facial expression, every nod, the
way people have been doing to me.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
And I get that.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
The problem is everybody else that didn't do anything wrong
gets scrutinized the same way. Every single cop, witness, lawyer,
everybody that's not guilty of anything gets scrutinized exactly the
same way, which is not very fair.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Yeah, I mean I would I would caution Eric, be
careful what you wish for. You know, it could it
could take a case of your husband's murder and turn
it into a circus and cause more pain than before
the trial, and it also may screw up the proceeding
and the results might not be what everybody thinks they
should be.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
Well, if you're of a certain age, you're you're touchstone
for everything.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Court room is always the OJ case.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
But think of all the people whose lives were changed
who didn't do any Kaylin didn't do anything wrong. But
I mean, he got he he became a little and
half wit is not a crime. He exactly he could
become a laughing stock of the country just because he
knew a guy who committed a horrible crime. Because there
cameras in the court and otherwise we wouldn't wouldn't have
known what he looked like or ever thought about him.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Right, Yeah, Well, I mean some people think would would
the outcome of OJ Simpson been the same with their
head and in cameras.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
That's a good question. I'd love to run that through
a parallel universe.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Right.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Larry Goodman, say, retired Superior court judge from California, talking
about the trial of the monstrous confused young man who
allegedly murdered Charlie Kirk and cameras in the courtroom and
that sort of thing. Yeah, yeah, I think somebody needs
to set Erica down and just explain no, this will
make it much, much, much more difficult to convict this
(08:16):
guy swiftly and justly and put him into the stripey
hole forever. So huh, So you said you've never seen
it end, Well, do you have other like concrete examples
of something, you know, somebody that was damaged or something
that went wrong from emmeron a courtroom other than oy just.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
Not personally the experience, just from seeing it in other
cases where there's always something happens and it's always the
top headline on the evening news or in the next
day in the paper, and it's the kind of thing
that as a judge when you're trying to protect a
proceeding and you go like, oh, we didn't need to
see that on the front page of the newspaper this morning,
or oh I didn't need to hear that when I
(08:55):
sat down for dinner and listened to the local news station,
and it just it just creates issues that you just
don't need to deal with and don't want to have
to deal with.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Yeah, and whether it's you know, a person who's innocent
of anything, like they're just you know, a person involved
in the trial, or the defendant who's a scumbag murderer
like that Luigi, who I think is a scumbag murderer.
But the lead story, what was it Monday night, was
smirking in the courtroom. I mean, that's not part of
the system. Yeah, you know, you're supposed to be found
guilty and it's based on smirks. Right, there's a lead
(09:27):
story on the evening news because.
Speaker 4 (09:29):
Of cameras exactly. And you know, and there are defendants
and I did have some of those in my courtroom
who are so vile that they want to inflict as
much pain as they can, so they look at those
victims fans smirk and say things. And if that's on
the camera, and they do it pre trial, then you've
(09:50):
got to deal with that during jury selection, or if
they do it during the trial because they know it's
going to be on the camera, then you have to
deal with it with a jury. If they were prejudiced
because the guy I turned around and you know, blew
a kiss at the victim's mother.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Oh my god.
Speaker 4 (10:04):
It's just all kinds of stupid stuff that they do.
Sometimes you just don't need publicides.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
You know, what one more thought. I've witnessed low double
digit trials. You've witnessed hundreds and hundreds, But as a jury,
you are you are there for every single second of
the admissible stuff, not the you know, they need to
talk to the lawyers to judge whatever. And so you
see the witness walking, you see them sworn in, You
(10:33):
see every single second of their testimony. And maybe they
have a nervous laugh, for instance, and when they you know,
the little chuck a little lot of people have, but
you've seen the totality of their testimony. So the fact
that they chuckled a little bit while saying something, you think, oh,
that's just the way that guy communicates snow.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Big deal.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
But if you isolate that to a clip on the news,
it looks weird and troubling and it leads to all
sorts of stupid, blanking Internet speculation and Candace Owens next
two hours of content. And so just I don't know
any comment, Larry, you're on the other side of the
bench from me.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
When you see that. Let's say you have somebody that
has a little snicker or they have a stutter and
they can't talk like a normal person would when they're
under stressed. You can take that and you can tell
the jury before they testify. Now, mister Smith has a
speech impediment, and he may find that it's not as
clear as everybody else. You're not to infer anything by it.
(11:34):
He's not being disrespectful, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
C that's pretty good. That's interesting.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
You look at the news, all you're going to get
is the snicker or the smirt, right, and they're not
going to admonition on the news story.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
All right, all right, you've convinced us. Thank you, Judge
Larry Goodman, Superior Court. Always a pleasure, always enlightening. Thanks
so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Thanks Joe and Jack, you guys take care.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
All right, I was already convent. Body reconvinced me or
further pays perspective. It's kind of handy once in a while,
isn't it, when you're talking about issues. So Omaha, steaks deliciousness.
It's it's about delicious, yummy food, particularly steaks and burghers,
and for the best francs I've ever had, and all
(12:18):
sorts of other options.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
And it's about being a great, great gift this time
of year.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Grass fed grain finished beef, the marbling, my god, the
marbling exceptional flavor. And right now at the Sizzle All
the Way sail, you can get fifty percent off site
wide at Omaha Steaks dot com plus our listeners because
we like you get an extra thirty five dollars off
with the promo coat Armstrong. And for that person in
your life who would love this, doesn't need more stuff
(12:44):
to put in a closet, there's great. There is a
great variety of packages that you can order no matter
your budget at Omaha Steaks.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Which I love.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Say big on gourmet gifts and more holiday favorites with
Omaha Steaks. Visit Omaha Steaks dot com for fifty percent
off site white during their Sizzle All the Way sale,
and for an extra thirty five bucks off, use the
promo code Armstrong at checkout terms apply seaside for details.
That's Omaha Steaks dot com and use that code Armstrong
to knock another thirty five bucks off at checkout.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
You got some, They're gonna bring some. That was an
evil chuckle there. I just thought, I'm that was like
bad Santa.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
I just thought I'm going to bring such hate upon me. Oh,
we have some breaking news around the Epstein story.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
You're the best. Yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
No, no, we don't, then we don't. This will be
utterly insignificant. That is where my money is, and I
don't even know what it is. It's slightly more significant
than the seeing the picture of his bathroom that came
out last week.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
But uh, other stuff on the way to stay here.
Speaker 5 (13:47):
Armstrong, a California woman recently gave birth in a self
driving Waimo taxi. Then to even things out, the Waimo
ran over a pedestrian.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
In San Francis. Let's go.
Speaker 5 (14:00):
On Monday, a woman gave birth inside a way Mo
self driving car.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Both mother and baby are.
Speaker 5 (14:07):
Still circling the parking lot of a Joanne Fabric.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Those are both good jokes.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
I like them.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Ran over a pedestrian to even things out.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Wow, ah, it's funny how the they're not really safe
for very good jokes are so popular at the same
time that were squeezed screaming toward they're going to take
away our right to drive because they're better at it
than us.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Very right.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Well, and according to Waymos statistics, they have ninety six
percent fewer accidents at intersections than humans do.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Here's your dumb breaking news story.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
So last week, breaking news pictures came out of the
Epstein something or other, and it was a bunch of
pictures of his estate. That didn't mean a freaking thing,
although it was somewhat interesting to me to see his
island and think, Wow, it'd be crazy to have that
lifestyle that's yours. The whole damned island, that little lagoon
in the view, and the beach and the trees and
the house, and the whole thing is yours, and the
(15:06):
airstrip where you land. I mean, that's incredible. What a lifestyle. Wow,
that would spin your head around. You know, if he
is trying to get you to court you, to get
you to go along with a business deal or whatever
he's wanting to do, whyever, he's currying your favorite You
land me at your island saying knock yourself out, places
of mine, have a good time. Everything's on the house. Wow,
(15:29):
I'd make an impression on you anyway.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
House.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
Democrats have released more photos from Jeffrey Epstein's estate, but
this time featuring pictures of humans, including Trump, Bill Clinton
and other prominent figures. So this will be this will
have tongues wagging all day long. If there are pictures
we haven't already seen before, and at least one of
them are looking here at here looks like a Trump
Epstein picture I had never seen.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Before, still doesn't mean anything. We're prove it, So I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Are they from the island necessarily or just with Epstein?
Speaker 2 (15:58):
Just with Epstein? Oh?
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Forgot, this is nothing pictures I've never seen before, so
they will No, No, it doesn't mean anything, of course not.
Walmart's removing synthetic dyes from its food. So the picture
I just saw on the news when they said that
was the meat case, now I get it. Like they
also showed some Christmas cookies. Okay, there's all kinds of
(16:21):
coloring dyes in the frosting and stuff like that, and
you're gonna get rid of them or substitute something else
that gives you the color. But the meat case, we're
gonna get gray meat. Are they redding up our meat
a little bit there at Walmart? And you take that
colors out of there, and all of a sudden, your
shrimp and everything is gray.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
It'll be a little off putting. I remember hearing about
that years.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
And years ago, but I can't remember how commonplace it is.
I feel like that was a big thing years ago.
Also that that's particularly with seafood, they'd make it look
more red because it turns gray very quickly.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Yeah, well, and I remember that. Well.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
I know that Americans are so obsessed with the appearance
of food. There are varieties of apples and pairs and
whatever else that just don't sell in the United States
because their peels don't look perfect. They taste way better,
but because they don't look like they're out of a
food ad, Americans generally.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Won't buy them as much.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
So yeah, yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all that
our steaks are getting tarted up. It's what you grow
up with and you get used to, which is everything
looking like it came off the cover of a magazine.
But like I've been in other countries where you go
you're going to a grocery store and like the produce particularly,
it's like, what this is what you're selling here? People
buying this bruises and danse and off putting shapes.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
But yeah, it's fine, Yeah, just we expect perfection. Oh.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
I was reminded Jack that yesterday, I believe it was
you brought us a fabulous witticism about a cow with
no legs?
Speaker 2 (17:47):
What do you call it? Ground beef?
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Bruce says Jack should have asked and said, what do
you call a cow with two legs?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
The answer is lean beef?
Speaker 1 (17:56):
There you go, which is better for you? Where do
you find a cow with no legs? Exactly where you
left it? I don't know. Trump with an executive order
around AI. That got a lot of attention yesterday in
the afternoon. We can talk a little bit about that,
among other things. Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Poor.
Speaker 5 (18:19):
Check Time magazine announced today that it's person of the
Year are the quote individuals who imagined, designed, and built AI.
Just think thanks to them, next year we won't need
a person of the year.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
That's pretty interesting. How many Yeah?
Speaker 1 (18:34):
What if the person of the year for ten years
running is Ai chat bott Evron who cured lung cancer.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
I think we got to shut it down at that point.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
So, speaking of AI, Trump with a big order yesterday
to try to deregulate AI. Why this year alone, twenty
twenty five, which is coming to a close. All fifty
states and territories, even our territories, you too, GWAM, All
fifty states and territories introduced AI legislation. Thirty eight states
(19:07):
adopted about one hundred laws, and because of that, Trump
signed an executive order denuter state AI laws, saying it's
important for America to dominate AI. Any state that does
not overturn their laws or support the United States that
(19:28):
this is in the quotes United States Global AI Dominance Act,
putting dozens of AI safety and consumer protection laws at
risk if states keep their laws in place that they
already passed. Trump said he's going to direct regulators to
withhold funds for broadband and other projects. That's the way
the federal government forces.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
You to do things. They withhold funds. Right, what do
you call it? Act? That you just refer to? The
United States Global AI Dominance?
Speaker 1 (19:56):
What status is that at? Does it exist? Has it
been written as well for Congress? We're about to find out. No,
it's not before Congress. It's a president thing. The order yesterday,
which has sparked broad bipartisan opposition lots of people both
parties don't like it, is likely to be challenged in
(20:19):
court by states and consumer groups on the grounds that
only Congress as the authority to override state laws. Legal
experts said this is gonna be damned interesting though. Ah,
how much if we had done this around automobiles or
(20:41):
the internet at the very beginning, or whatever else, how
much would have it have slowed down us being the
global leader on those things. Yes, I think and I
absolutely stand ready to be corrected on this, but I
think this is a great example of you know, the
same situation is people are very very worried about AI
(21:03):
and they are looking to government to solve the problem,
which in some cases is appropriate, often not, but and
their representative in the government are like, I have no
idea what to do, so we'll just do this.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Neither do they pass stuff that is half ridiculous, well.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
Right, and is probably going to only handcuff us and
actually accomplish nothing in terms of making you safer, your
money safer, the internet safer. Well, however you want to
look at it. So I follow a lot of conversations
between doomers, which I'm one of an accelerationists, who say
we need to go full speed ahead to make sure
we stay ahead of China and just because it's going
to be so.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Great for everybody.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
But one of the arguments of the accelerations is accelerationists.
Is there there are no laws you can pass that
doesn't that make any sense? Certainly not yet. Nobody has
any idea what we're even talking about yet, right yeah, well,
plus you can pass every law you want. I'm going
to ask my chat gpt, Hey, how do I get
around this law? Great question, Joe, you're so curious. Here's
(22:04):
how you get around it. Just route your saying through
a blankety blanket.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
You know it is. It's all performative. I think I
think it is too.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
I think the broad bipartisan opposition is mostly like you said,
it's scared voters who have no idea what they're even
scared of, or any the slightest inkling, and nobody does
how you would regulate it, right, which is not to
discount people's concern for what I'm a doer.
Speaker 2 (22:29):
Right right? Yeah? Well okay, So you know it's funny.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
I just happened to read a piece by the brilliant
you've all Levin about why Republicans lose every argument about
health care costs, and it's ironically convinced me that it's
time to pull the plug on the American Democratic experiment
while the patient is dead. Wow, you're gonna put a
pill over the face of democracy. Oh, no, need to, no,
need to. It's it's dead. It's just being supported by machines.
(22:55):
I'm sorry to break the news to you, missus America. No, yeah, yeah,
you're your country is dead. Not really, not really, who
knows twists and turns keep on coming. But he actually
have stats on that, percentages of people that think that
we're more or less over versus dying, versus doing Okay,
(23:15):
I have stats on that coming up from a new poll. Yeah,
I'll just hit you with a couple of sentences from
that piece about healthcare, which is I was just reminded
of confusing and frightening but very important political discussions that
end up being really dumb. Is our theme you've all writes,
(23:37):
this is where politics gum things up talking about Well, anyway,
the fact is most of us don't actually want a
lot of choice when it comes to healthcare. We just
want to believe that everything is paid for. That creates
an incentive to hide costs by routing most payments through
insurers or government, which sustains the illusion that everything is
free to the consumer. This has yielded a healthcare system
(23:57):
without real prices, which is something we've talked about.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
That sentence in there. I realize that's true.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
But if people think stuff, anything you get is free,
well then we just have a dumb populace.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
You can't get past that. That's the problem. How do
you think anything could be free if I was going
to be more charitable for once in my life, yeah,
I would say the practically the entire political structure of
our country at this point, both parties have convinced people
(24:30):
that to what comes from the government is free and
that they have a right to it. Or there are
just enough billionaires to fund all of this if they
pay there But anyway, so back to Levin's point that
this sustains the illusion that everything is free to the consumer.
This has yielded a healthcare system without real prices and
therefore without enough pressure to restrain spending. In turn, that's
(24:51):
led to ever rising costs paid for by ever rising subsidies.
It's one of the main reasons we're so deep in debt. Anyway,
he writes. For decades, this is that health policy proposals
that make economic sense do not make political sense, and
vice versa. And so Democrats have responded to the problem
by leaning into the political logic and proposing endless subsidies,
(25:14):
and it is much more appealing to voters than saying whoa, whoa, Well,
here are the problems with this model. Here's why we
need reform at bluff. But it just you can't get
it through a democracy, which I realized is incredibly discouraging.
Sometimes realism is discouraging. But yeah, oof oof, where do.
Speaker 2 (25:33):
We go from here?
Speaker 1 (25:34):
We do need to get Craig the healthcare guru on
in the new year to talk about the status and
things I think because it's intimidating and confusing and depressing
and discouraging, but it's something we all are involved in.
It's not like hearing some sort of legislation about oil
rigs in the Gulf of America. I mean, you think, yeah,
(25:57):
I get oil, and no. Everybody's funly involved in healthcare.
So it's very very important to I have, like the
majority of Americans have healthcare through my employer, and uh,
once you get past the deductible, I'm pretty happy with it.
Like I picked up a whole bunch of prescriptions at
the pharmacy the other day and the total was like
(26:18):
two dollars and forty cents for like six things. I
always say, that's outrageous, and I get a laugh out
of the hilarious pharmacist girl.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
But it's amazed by that.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
But here in a couple of weeks, it'll be January first,
and we all get to experience that hole. You go
to the pharmacy or the first doctor appointment and you
get hit with this insane bill. It's like, oh, that's right,
my five thousand dollars deductible hasn't been met yet for
the year, right, And plenty of employers are out there saying,
uh yeah, and I'm kicking in X amount every single
month on.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Your healthcare that that prescription wasn't two dollars and forty
cents of three hundred seventy five dollars.
Speaker 4 (26:53):
Idiot?
Speaker 1 (26:54):
Why slapsticks anyway, because nobody sees the prices.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
I get so every year when I go to pick
up one prescription for my son and it's like one
hundred and eighty dollars. What you haven't hit your deductible yet?
And so here's a question for you on air meeting.
I'm gonna phrase this in.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
One of the one of the.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Ways I hate the most take the Joe Getty challenge.
Do you have the guts to take on these stories?
Oh my god, I know how annoying is that?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
That was adding?
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Yeah, so headline from the Free Press the base is
done with Maga. It wants America.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
First.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
She went to Marjorie Taylor Green's district in Georgia and
talked to lots and lots of voters and they are
over Donald j.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
Yeah. Well did you read or maybe you were about
to say that, ah.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Peggy Newman, Yeah, yeah, Dan Trump may be losing his
touch at the end of his eleventh month. He's surrounded
by mood shifts, challenges, an ominous sign well, particularly her
talking about how Marjorie Taylor Green may have signaled to everybody.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
You can challenge the king and survive.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
She's doing better for herself than she probably ever has.
Got the sixty minutes piece. She's getting lots of news
coverage and all that sort of stuff. She hasn't been
you know, ruined. Oh no, no, yeah. Peggy refers to
it as a jail break moment. Yeah, when everybody realized,
oh my gosh, you can defy the warden, right, yeah, exactly,
(28:33):
So why don't we get into that next hour. And
here's you know, just in case that concerns you. We
I are here neither to lavish praise and lick the
boots of Donald J. Trump, nor automatically run down everything
he does. It's it's life is much more interesting if
(28:57):
you just try to take in reality and understand what's
in my opinion, and I think his ship is headed
for the shoals, I really do. Is that only a
figure of speech or was there a point where you
had to lick people's boots. It's got to have come
from something that'd be Ah, I hate to have to
do that. H Yeah, if you are ordered to lick
(29:18):
my boots clean, I would say that's a bit of
a statement of donal. Wow, that is a bit of
a humiliation. Yes, wow, indeed you it was right. Wake
up and smell the leather. Hey, here's some really great
advice for you. No matter what you think of Donald
JA or Marjorie Taylor or anything else in the world,
(29:38):
you don't want scumbag.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Junkie A holes stealing your stuff.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Scumbag junkie A holes, what if they're just lurking around
your house. A lot of security systems, wait, till they
break in. Then they alert the cops. How about you, whoop, whoop, whoop,
you've had a break in? They tell you, how about
you catch these scumbag junkie a holes before they break
in with the AI technology that simply Safe has.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Yeah, the AI cameras detect threats early.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Then they alert to live agents, real people who speak
to the intruders directly.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
Hey, what are you doing there? You're being watched. Get out.
The cops are on their way.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
It's fantastic and it's less much less than the old
schools security systems. No long term contracts, are hidden fees,
you can cancel any time. They earn your business every
minute of every day.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
This is so so good.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
I feel good every time I drive away from my
house seeing the simply Safe sign in the yard.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
And knowing what I've got.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
And this month you can take fifty percent off any
new system. That's one of the best prices you'll ever
see for simply Safe. Do not miss it. Hit simply
safe dot com slash armstrong again. That's simply safe dot
com slash armstrong. Lock in your discount. There's no safe
like simply Safe. Got an update on that Michigan football coach.
That's a heck of a story. He had one of
the best coaching jobs in the world, I mean, of
(30:55):
any sport at any level.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
And you know what I hadn't heard until this morning
or late last night. Married three kids. Yeah, I was
just he had an inappropriate relationship with the staffer. Those
stiff rules. But no, I was a dad and a
husband's that's out of bounds. Yeah, okay, but not Yeah, Okay,
got ugly.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
We can tell you all about that. I want to
check in on that woman.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
She a trans woman, gets cancer surgery, secretly records the
doctor's story from the New York Times. That's an interesting one.
Among other things we got to get to coming up.
Can I begin with This story has no real point
to me. I'm not trying to make a point of
any kind, because you might be listening trying to figure
(31:41):
out what's the point. I'm not trying to make a point.
I just find this interesting, this whole story about this
trans woman who secretly recorded her cancer surgery.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
It's just interesting.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
She's filing a lawsuit against what the people said while
she was under which is again interesting. Every story as
a point, whether you want it to or not. I'm
not trying to make the nature of stories. I'm not
trying to make a major point about trans or anything
like that. So if you're waiting for that.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
It's it's.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
It is unusual for patients to record their own surgeries,
but not completely unheard of. I don't remember if we
talked about this lawsuit back in twenty thirteen.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Maybe we did.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
A man recorded audio secretly while he was sedated and
sued during a colonoscopy because of antsegiologists remarks. The doctor
told other medical staff members that she thought.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
It breaks yourself. I have no idea what the next sentence.
So this gets to what Joe was talking about earlier.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
We all say things among friends or or you know,
text friends or family members or whatever, things that you know,
we wouldn't say ill loud anyone else. And in this
case he got anesthesiologists or doctors or whatever.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
They don't think the patient's listening.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
So the doctor told other medical staff members she found
the patient so annoying she felt like punching him. She
said a rash on the patient's genitals was probably penis
of bola.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
Wow, you don't want that.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
The patient who was awarded a half million dollars by
a jury. Said he had hit record on his phone
because he wanted documentation of what the doctor said. Why
he worried that the sedation would leave him too groggy
to remember.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
What are you worried about? What?
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Yeah, wait a minute, that sounds like a cart before
a horse. Or you weren't concerned. You were trying, you
were hoping for something like this. Anyway, Well, what they
were claiming, and it's the same thing that this woman
I'm you saying. Woman, this is what the New York
Times is calling this person even though they have a
penis that they were recording it. And I had this
experience when I was doing cancer treatment. You're so drugged up,
and they're telling me all these things you gotta do.
(33:48):
If I hadn't had somebody there with me some of
the time to like write it down, you're giving me
all these instructions of what I can eat and how
many pills to take, and I'm half out of my
mind on pills. And so that's why this person said
they were recording the conversation.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
It might be true, but you did it secretly.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
You could like say, hey, I'm going to record you
just so I don't forget this as opposed to secretly
hit your phone and then stash it when they put
you under.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
That makes it sound to me like you're trying to
catch them at something.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
Yeah, getting someone's consent is and letting them know they're
being recorded is just common decency. Jennifer Caspasso, a forty
two year old transgender woman, figured she was going to
be dead in eighteen months. She had been diagnosed with
cancer and was going to undergo some surgery. Uh, she
decided to secretly record her surgeons. I'll skip all the
other stuff. I wanted to know what's going on, she said,
(34:38):
Knowledge is power. Okay, fine. The surgery moved part of
her lung, did not getting around to playing the recording
until a few weeks later. Well that makes me feel
like you weren't that interested in what they said about
your instructions. Though the audio was muffled, she could follow
some of what the surgical team was saying before the
procedure began. Again, this is a transwoman that she has
a penis in this story, it's a man. God, Why
(35:00):
why do you allow the New York Times to order
you to pervert the language? Chicken makes it easier to
follow the story. But anyway, someone was going out for coffee.
Did anyone want something from Starbucks? That's one of the
things they got recorded during this star Jay. The conversation
just shifted, then shifted, still has man parts. It seemed
to Miss Capasso that they were talking about her genitalia.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Wow, you are Sherlock Holmes there.
Speaker 1 (35:24):
On the recording, the healthcare workers expressed a variety of
opinions about transgender identity, more generally not that it's not right.
But one person can be heard saying and another said,
I don't get any of it. And in the middle
of the conversation, one person suggested updating the medical file. Yeah,
it needs to say mail on here. The person said.
When Miss Capasso woke up, she found out that her
(35:47):
electronic medical records had been changed to M for male,
and now she's fighting to get it changed back and
suing the hospital for misgendering her while she was asleep
or whatever the hell. I would think you gotta have
male on there, since male bodies require different care and
maybe doses of drugs or whatever.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
And react to drugs differently.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
There are a hundred or more differences in medical care
between men and women.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
It's incredibly important.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
By the way, this particular woman had had a half
dozen procedures to feminize her face, all the while undergoing
cancer surgery. Her browbridge, her brow ridge was sanded down.
That sounds pleasant. Her orbital bone was shaved to give
her eyes an upward tilt. Her square chin was softened.
(36:41):
There were cheek implants and a change to her nose too.
I needed radical surgical intervention, she said. The clock was ticking.
I didn't know how much longer I was going to
be alive. I wasn't going to die looking the way
I looked. I wanted to die leaving a pretty female corpse.
This is a story about a mentally ill man. It's
a shame. That's what I told you.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
I said. I don't really have a point other than
I thought this was all interesting. Browridge sanded down.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Orbital bone shaved to give your eyes an upward tilt.
I can't believe doctors even do that. It's kind of
the looking like a girl package. Yeah, wow, you're right.
They were referring to your genitalia. Very clever for you
to catch on the Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.