This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human. Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio at the George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. Armstrong and Getty. And now, here's Armstrong and Getty. On Chinese social media, AI generated video. You roll up here dressed like a damn robot. Robot dogs and soldiers liberating a backward, impoverished United States. Seizing guns, commandeering churches. A dystopian vision of a future America under Chinese control. Powered by drones and AI tech made in China. For the record, I am backward, but I'm not impoverished. That's on Chinese social media, which, of course, nothing gets to make the rounds on Chinese social media without approval of the Communist Party. Just like TikTok. And, of course, it was a big benefit to them to have this American skater skating for the Chinese Communist Party. Skier? Skier, sorry. making the argument that she wasn't making the argument, but they can couch it around a profile of her skating, skiing for China, as this is why she's skiing for us, because they're an impoverished, backward country, and their biggest, brightest stars want to be on our side. Meanwhile, the Chinese-American young lady whose father told the communists to F off when they came with their money just won the gold medal. Yeah. Ms. Wu, or I'm sorry, That's you. So our slogan today is woo you, boo, goo. That's such a ready-made great story. It's too bad the media doesn't have any interest in it. You got one grew up in Oakland, one grew up in San Francisco, both approached by the communists to compete for their team. One said, screw you, wins a gold medal. The other one, also a gold medal winner, decides to help support the Communist Party. It's such an interesting story But the media has no interest in it No, they're terrible They hate America and I hate them So there we go We do have breaking news I need to hit you with real quick More breaking news This isn't even the Supreme Court has said no to the tariffs We're going to talk more about that Later this hour This is about the Iran strike President Trump just told reporters That he's considering a limited military strike in Iran To pressure it into a deal so hit him a little bit for a day and say okay you you want more or what i am not joking exactly yeah it might not be a bad idea he's been hinting around that for a little while now yeah i don't he's probably actually thinking you morons we're gonna destroy you we're gonna destroy everything we're gonna kill you all we're gonna destroy everything you've built What are you going to get out of this, you idiots? Yeah. Which is a good question. Yeah, please grab our discussion with Mike Lyons from last hour via podcast, Armstrong and Getty on Demand. As I said, if I'm the Iranians or I'm advising them, number one, I've lost my soul. Kill me if you see me. Secondly, I would say agree to anything. Absolutely anything. We'll start cheating next week. We'll, you know, we'll string it along. We'll wait until there's a Democrat in the White House. then we'll cry that our people are being starved and AOC will come to our aid and we'll get a better agreement then we'll go back to getting our nukes together. We just got to bide our time for a while. Why they're not doing that really both fascinates me and perplexes me. Or even if they sincerely decided, we got to give up on this nuclear weapon thing. I wish we could have gotten one, but we can't. And so our choice now is either we all die and everything gets demolished in this country or we agree to this stuff. So let's agree. I mean, that wouldn't be a crazy thing to do. No, not at all. In fact, anything else would be a crazy thing to do. I don't know what they're thinking. What I wonder is politically, what would a sustained military campaign against Iran, you're going to have videos coming out of civilians dying because it's going to be hard to drop a whole bunch of bombs and blow up all that sort of stuff without having civilians die. What's the political mood going to be in this country? Well, and the only thing, as they say, Hamas or Iran likes better than a dead Jewish child is a dead Palestinian child or a dead Iranian child. Since they have no problem killing their own people, killed 30,000 just a couple of weekends ago. Yeah, moat them down the streets. They'll kill a bunch of people and put out video of, look what the Americans are doing. Yeah, their most talented filmmakers are gearing up right now to do that very thing. That's ugly. Oh, these are enjoyable times. So we need to take a break in at least a couple of minutes, then come back if we're going to discuss the fact that everything, everything, everything is downstream of culture. Nobody ever talks about it. Or one of the worst things she's ever said, AOC, normally just a cute dope. She denigrated the very idea that there is such a thing as Western culture or Judeo-Christian culture. I am going to fight back against that moronic, dangerous, self-hating notion in a couple of months. Okay, then quick poll before we go to break. And complete honest answer, Michael, Katie, everyone. I swore off desserts as a New Year's resolution. My birthday is tomorrow. Can I have a piece of cake on my birthday as an exception or not? Yes, Michael. Yes. Okay, Katie. Yeah, absolutely. Really interesting. Okay, Joe is a... No. Joe's a no. No, get a great substitute. You'll give yourself a $100 budget at the bookstore. Go buy a couple of really special books. That doesn't taste like cake. If they're the right books, it does. It's his birthday. Both of my nieces, I texted them, and they were like, yeah, your birthday one day, that's no big deal. Of course you can have cake. Both my brothers, they're my nieces' fathers, were like, hell no, absolutely not. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game. I'm your brother with another mother. I'm saying the same thing. No, you must be strong. New Year's resolutions are funny this way. People are so all or nothing about them. I mean, the point is really to eat better. Yes. And one day is not going to change that. So you're a liar. Okay, that's fine. If you can live with that. If you can sleep at night. having had a piece of cake. Monster that you are? No, I wish you had said, the only cake I will eat, the only desserts I will eat, are my birthday, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. But I had to announce it ahead of time or I've committed a crime or something? Yes, it was an implied contract. I know the law. Oh my God, it's hilarious. Oh, well. Hanson wants to know if you won a trophy just for showing up for work today. That's pretty funny. All set. I would like... WWJE, what would Jesus eat? We'll discuss that perhaps coming up. I would like a participation certificate for having just appeared at work today. Okay, we'll get to that other stuff Joe mentioned next. Armstrong and Getty. They just released a trailer for Toy Story 5. Does it have all the original stars in it? I don't know, but... Is Tom Hanks still there? I don't know. I'll have to look into that. Yeah, stringing out a beloved short little string of movies for obvious profit. That's the business they're in. They've been good, though. All the ones I've seen, as opposed to a lot of other sequels which just fall off a cliff. Right, right. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen are in it. Okay, cool. All right, for goodness sakes. Are we going to talk about children's movies here? No, we're done. Cartoons? We're done. For children? We're done. All right. So the other day, AOC said and did one of the worst things she ever has, not that it matters. She used finger quotes when she described Western values, which was an idiotic thing to do. But she's an idiot, so I'm not surprised. There have been a couple of, well, there have been many, many stories lately that have to do with the culture wars and, you know, the universities and just that whole realm of news. that are essentially a denial that Western values, Judeo-Christian principles, are valuable and great. In fact, they're usually portrayed as evil or exclusionary or bigoted or something like that. And then it's fallen to the halfwits and white supremacists and Nick Fuentes of the world to defend quote Western values which is not a good way to go Which is why it was so gratifying to hear Marco Rubio in his well speech over there in Munich talking about that very thing. As Barton Swain points out, and I wish we had time for the whole thing, but we don't. He said, the world's least Christianized societies are the least open and tolerant, in short, the least liberal. if any of you atheists were to list 10 nations in which you would agree to live permanently there's a good chance all 10 would bear the indelible marks of Christian belief and practice yeah well this reminds me of that Tom Holland book we were talking about a couple weeks back Dominion I think it's called about the importance of Christian values and how we're all living in Christian culture whether you realize it or not whether you go to church or believe or anything or not, you're benefiting from Christian culture. Yeah, the discussion we're having right now really has nothing to do with accepting Jesus as the divine made human and the son of God and the savior or whatever else. It has to do with, well, for instance, you know, the key, the core thesis of dominion is that most Westerners, including liberals and atheists and progressives, are far more Christian in their moral instincts than they realize. The values they hold most dear, I'm quoting now, human rights, compassion for the weak, opposition to cruelty, love of equality, the idea that the powerful should be accountable. Those did not emerge from neutral reason or natural human sentiment. They're specific inheritances of Christianity. One of the things Tom Holland talks a lot about in his book is how prior to the Christian revolution or philosophy or whatever come along, the strong beating up on the weak was accepted as good, cool, like the way things should be. If you went into a town and you could, you killed all the men and raped all the women and they had it coming because they were weak and couldn't stop it. Right. And it was... You okay with that, progressives? Christianity that brought about the idea of, no, no, no, the weak need to be defended and supported against the strong trying to do whatever they want, blah, blah, blah. That is a great, for instance, for our progressive friends. Here's a short list of the underpinnings of Western values and democracy in general that flow directly from Judeo-Christian values. Human dignity and equality. This is to Jack's point. The idea that every person is made in the image of God laid a theological foundation for the belief that each individual has inherent worth, which later translated into natural rights theory equals standing before the law in universal human rights. Jewish and Christian values. Limited government and the rule of law. The Bible, the Old Testament, established that even kings were subject to God's law, a radical idea for the ancient world. The prophetic tradition meant rulers could be publicly rebuked. This contributed to the concept that no human authority is absolute, which underpins constitutional limits on power. How about individual conscience and moral accountability? Emphasizes a direct relationship between the individual and God, making personal conscience a moral anchor. This fed into ideas of religious freedom, freedom of thought, speech, and individual rights that are central to liberal democracy. The separation of the sacred and the secular? I think that's self-explanatory. The idea of covenant and consent. The Hebrew covenant tradition. God and a community enter into a mutual agreement with obligations on both sides. That influenced early modern political thinkers like John Locke in developing social contract theory, which is foundational to democratic legitimacy. Well, how about this one? I haven't mentioned this one on the air because it's so freaking grim. But Tom Holland, and look for interviews with him on YouTube, and he is not a believer who's trying to go around converting you to, you know, believing in Jesus being the Son of God as opposed to the Christian morals that we all are living in. We're all swimming in whether we know or not. He used the example of if you go around to archaeological sites pre-Christianity, you find lots of tiny bones in where there would be refuse or the sewers or whatever of those towns. Because killing babies was just a thing forever on planet Earth. If you had a baby that was inconvenient or you didn't want a girl or whatever, murdering them was just fine. And you don't find that in the towns post-Christianity, when we began to value life. I mean, that is a stark comparison. Right, right. The idea that empires should be not cruel in colonializing the world straight out of Christianity, the abolition of slavery has Christian roots almost entirely. in fact they just reinstituted slavery in afghanistan because slavery is absolutely acceptable in islam and so uh yeah there's a little contrast there for you so anyway i don't want to you know conduct a whole college class on this um although you know what holland does make the point that and then as jack hinted at modern progressive movements are deeply christian structure. Care for the marginalized, social justice, hashtag me too, anti-racism. These are essentially Christian moral impulses operating without Christian theology. Anyway. Your point being that AOC saying Western values or Western culture or whatever she said with her finger quotes. What are you talking about? As if it doesn't exist or that it's mostly a force for evil is so brutally, horrifically wrong I just felt we ought to talk about it a little bit. And I would like to enlist you, all of you, as defenders of Judeo-Christian principles, no matter your religious beliefs. And defenders of Western values because they underpin everything we hold dear. And the idea that we can just scoff at them or let them die and things will continue on as they are because they've always been this way. And there's no other systems or there's no chance we return to the brutality of pre-Christian life. Come on, it's right around the bend. Everybody from Jesus himself to Reagan would tell you that. We're one generation away from it all falling apart. So do not ever apologize for Western values. Defend them every chance you get. So the biggest breaking news of the day is the Supreme Court ruling that Trump cannot, under a 50-year-old law, enact all these tariffs because of an emergency. That whole tariff thing, the whole Trump tariff thing is over. The unnodding of it is going to be something to see. Nobody's quite sure how that's going to work, but yeah, it's over. The out-of-control Trump Supreme Court, basically just a rubber stamp for whatever Trump wants, shot down his biggest philosophy that he's ever had in his life is this whole tariff thing. I'm looking forward to Chuck Schumer's speech and apology about how wrong he was. Well, I got Chuck Schumer's quote here for you on. Chuck Schumer said, actually, I guess I don't have it. I didn't capture it. But he said, finally, the Supreme Court shows that a wannabe king cannot dictate the world, blah, blah, blah. Sort of thing you'd expect him to say. Yeah, yeah. He's a weasel. We're going to talk to a legal expert about this ruling coming up in just moments. Yeah, an expert on the separation of powers from the Pacific Legal Foundation. I want to ask about the dissents. Some of our favorite justices dissented from the majority. Stay with us. Armstrong and Getty. The Supreme Court ruling that President Trump's use of these emergency tariffs that he has implemented are illegal. It's the most significant economic case to reach the high court in years. Sweeping implications for the economy and, of course, for presidential power. And at stake here are billions of dollars in revenue that have already been collected by the government. Yeah, one really interesting thing about this is it's a 6-3, and the dissenters on this, Justice Thomas, along with Kavanaugh and Alito, are usually the hardcore conservatives on the court. But all my favorite super hardcore limited powers conservative pundits out there agree with the decision. So I'm confused by this. Indeed, yeah. Who better to ask than Molly Nixon, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, who is very very interested in the concept of limited power and separation of powers and that sort of thing Interestingly having served in all three branches of government at times Molly how are you Welcome I'm good. Thanks for having me on. Oh, it's our pleasure. So why don't we start where Jack was introducing you. Are you surprised at who joined the majority striking down the tariffs and who was dissenting and why? You know, I think after the oral argument, it wasn't entirely clear where each justice was going to come down. And there are countervailing factors where you can kind of see how the dissents ended up where they were. And I should say it's 170 pages that came out about an hour ago, and so I'm still spinning through them. But you do have two dissents. And I think a lot of it is the different weights they give to history and precedence. So they're looking at different parts of history. They're looking at different statutory precedents and coming down to different sides, just weighing them differently. And I can go into it a bit more, but yeah. Well, are you surprised by the ruling? I'm not. So I should say we have at PLF, we represent clients in a very, very similar challenge also at the Court of International Trade to the same tariffs, the same emergency tariffs. And we've been thinking a lot about emergency powers, really worried about how much power Congress has given away, and really satisfied that the court saw that, at least in this one instance, the Congress did not give away the power to tax as an emergency power here. So really gratified by that and really not surprised at the outcome. Yeah, I was just reading David French. He's a New York Times columnist and Harvard Law sort of guy. And he said the through line on a lot of decisions recently is the Supreme Court jamming the presidency back into its constitutional box, putting together this tariff ruling along with telling Joe Biden, hey, you don't get to wipe out all the student loans, you know, things like that. I think that's exactly right. Yeah. I mean, we've seen there's been a lot of commentary about the Supreme Court when it rules for the president and for the administration. And I think that's a lot of within the executive branch, the president has a lot of power. The Constitution vests a lot of power within the branch in the president. But Congress is the first article of the Constitution, and they really have all that legislative power. And of course, if you look back to founding era history, taxation was a big one that we cared a lot about. And we gave that explicitly to Congress. And so the court's going to take a very careful look at claims that Congress delegated that power to the president. And here are the words that the administration was relying on to claim this tariff power. The words regulate importation. And they said regulate includes a power to tariff. And that's really the main difference between the majority and the dissent. Do those words include taxes or not? Boy, I've got to admit, I can't wait to read the dissents. I feel like those justices going the way they did. I feel like my mom endorsed fist fighting in bars on Friday night. I don't get it. You know, the separation of powers is such a sacred conservative principle. But anyway, am I correct that the decision really does not address the sure-to-be-incredibly complex unknotting of all of this? Who gets their money back? What about the trade agreements, et cetera? Right. And I've been skimming through Twitter to see if the administration is saying anything. Because what it did was affirm the judgment below. And the judgment below had said, well, initially there was a trial court decision that enjoined the tariffs. So it said, stop, you can't do this. I think it gave the administration a 10-day deadline to stop. And then the appellate court said, we're not so sure about that. We think we agree that the tariffs are unlawful in this instance, but we're not sure exactly what the remedy needs to be, whether you can stop the tariffs just for the plaintiffs in this case or for everyone, how there will be refunds. And so the Supreme Court just said, here's what our decision on the law is. And then they kick it back to the lower courts to further analyze and address what the right remedy is here. Yeah, that makes sense. I haven't seen anything from being there. It's not their job done, not this whole thing. I mean, slavery is bad. It's not, well, how's the cotton going to get picked then? It doesn't work that way. On the other hand, I'm not an attorney, but I know many of them, Molly, a little inside attorney joke. This will launch roughly 7.9 billion billable hours over the next two years. Good Lord. There's a lot of different ways this could go. So, you know, there's the administration could could probably make this very easy by saying it's an administrative process for a refund. Say, I think they've done that before in the past for tariffs that were collected unlawfully. Congress could also step in and set up, you know, an organized process. But there's also the alternative of every single importer going to court, which is very messy. But that's also a possibility here, too. And then it's still unclear whether the courts will decide that refunds are in order. How about class action lawsuits? All of us have paid an extra 50 bucks for a microwave oven or whatever. Wanting our money back. Yeah, I think there's already a lot of cases. We were pretty early on this in court, but since then there have been a lot more filed by big importers looking to set themselves up to receive refunds in expectation that the Supreme Court would hold the tariff on lawful. Well, interesting. Okay, so we'll plow through the decisions and then perhaps appeal to you when all the dust is settled next week. We'd love to do that. Just out of curiosity, when you're not worried about tariffs, when it comes to separation of powers, what are you most passionate about these days? It's actually an alternative argument that was made in this case that we really focused on and the court didn't have to reach. So we argued that Congress did not give away its power here. But we said if they did, if Congress, if the court had read this statute and said, yep, looks like Congress gave the president the power to tax here. We argued that would be unconstitutional because that's a legislative power. And if Congress gave away its power to tariffs entirely here to the president with no boundaries, no policy goals. You know, there are two sets of tariffs where one was to prevent or to limit drug importation. and the other one was trade deficits. And it left it entirely to the executive branch of what country we wanted to impose tariffs and for how long and to what degree, you know, at 200%, 5%. That was really a delegation of the legislative power. And we vested that in Congress. And they can ask the executive branch to exercise some discretion in helping them execute the law that Congress passes. But we said, if this law authorizes tariffs, then Congress just abdicated responsibility, basically. then it would have just given the president its entire legislative power. And so Congress has done that in a lot of cases. And that's really my passion. And what got me interested in trade policy to begin with was the amount of trade law, the trade policy making that Congress has given to the executive branch. And you've heard the Trump administration say many times, even if the Supreme Court rules against us here, we have lots of other authorities. And they're right, they do. Congress has given away a lot of its power. And so we'll see how that sorts itself out. But, yeah, that's the learning passion. My passion is origami. But, you know, we have different things. Teach. They're all. Who's your all-time favorite Supreme Court justice? Lightning round. I think there are several for different reasons. I do like the Chief Justice's writing style. I think I really like Justice Barrett's approach. She has a very analytical approach to the law that I find very satisfying. And then there are Chief Justice Marshall, I think, you know, not our first chief justice, but the one who really transformed how we do judicial review in this country and how the court operates. And I just I recently finished a biography of Chief Justice Marshall and still in love with him. OK, cool. All right. My lightning round question. Do you think wealth taxes are constitutional, for instance, when being considered by California? Oh, gosh. I'm sure I could come up with an opinion on that in a little bit, but I'm not even going to find out one right now. Or a very cerebral. Have you ever spent any time on origami? You start out with a piece of paper, and the next thing you know, you've got a little duck. You've got a swan. That's amazing. Molly Nixon is with the Pacific Legal Foundation. Absolutely love chatting with you, Molly. I hope we can do it again. and she's like feeling is non-mutual and she hung up I was trying to give her a flavor of the show because I was telling Hanson because he said she wasn't really ready to go on the dissent thing and I said let her know we're not like shows where you need to come off as an expert on everything all the time you can say I don't know I haven't read it yet say it's long as hell and I'm skimming it as fast as I can that's fine perfectly okay I agree with her though fancy restaurants where they do origami with the little takeout tinfoil That so classy Yeah Yes Katie She just did exactly what AOC should have done the other day Yes With that answer Yeah. I need to think about it. Yeah. Which is always okay. Or I don't know. I tell my kids this all the time. Because sometimes they feel like they've got to come up with an answer. And it's pretty clear that they just made it up. Yeah. I don't know if it's all right here in this circumstance. You can just say, I don't know. Yeah, maybe ChatGPT could keep that in mind as well. Yeah. Really nice. Wow. I tell you what, the Pacific Legal Foundation coming through with some great, great guests. Appreciate that and well done. Love those people. A word from our friends at SimpliSafe Home Security. Another aspect of the law, criminal law. A lot of places are turning their criminals back onto the streets over and over again and they rob your house and steal your stuff and maybe beat you over the head. You don't want that. You want SimpliSafe instead. Yes, in the case of bad guy versus house, the ruling is against the bad guy and toward the house. If you got this active guard outdoor protection going on from SimpliSafe because they can see the bad guys before they break in, which is super, super cool. And with no long-term contracts, no cancellation fees, and this whole thing costs about a dollar a day, why wouldn't you want to try SimpliSafe? It's about preventing break-ins before they happen. It's really amazing technology. It's so good. That's why it's so popular. Why wait? Protect your home today. You can enjoy 50% off a new SimpliSafe system with a professional monitoring plan, which, again, is around a buck a day. That's much less than the crappy old systems. Wow, this is better in every way. simplisafe.com slash armstrong simplisafe.com slash armstrong there's no safe like SimpliSafe yeah I might do a figure out what's the best biography on Justice Marshall and read it that'd be a good thing to read maybe that would be my next non-fiction that would be a good one might make me a little less dumb which is what I'm going for I don't want to depress anybody but a lot of the influencers of the founding generation be they Marshall or Washington or a handful of others, they were all about principle. I mean, they were some of the most principled men who have ever walked the earth. And I tell you what, you give away your principles to gain momentary advantage at your own peril and your soul's peril. Your soul! Mike Pence is very happy with the ruling. Trump's former vice president said it's a victory for the American people and a win for the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. He's strongly against the dissenting opinion of Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas. Says their defeat in contentious tariff decision is a victory. Now, again, Joe will do this. I won't do it because I'm busy. We'll figure out, how did Justice Thomas twist his mind into thinking the president should be able to do this and fit it into conservatism. Yeah, Thomas. Yeah, it's Alito and Kavanaugh that bother me more, but I've got to read about it. Okay. Yeah. Restraint of executive power. Separation of powers. Fellas. Well, we'll be at war with Iran here pretty quick, so all this will be forgotten. Among other things we need to talk about. Stay here. Armstrong and Getty. This is the greatest comeback I have ever seen. the 20-year-old from Oakland, Alyssa Lu. A script that would have been rejected as far-fetched. Alyssa Lu is the gold medalist at the Olympics. I just watched her four-minute routine at the suggestion of someone. Man, she skated with joy, Joe. She was just happy and having a good time. The exact opposite of Quad God, who felt all the pressure of the world on him and looked miserable. She was just like having a good time, and the crowd was going wild, and she's pumping her fists and spinning around and wins the gold medal. So many great subplots to this. Number one, she was burned out and chewed up by figure skating and all the pressure and quit when she was 16, then came back at 18 and said, all right, I love skating. I'm going to do it, but I call all the shots at age 18. I choose my coaches. I choose what I wear, the music, how I train. I'm doing it. And interestingly, she came back with her striped hair and piercings and stuff like that. That's extra interesting because I just read her fascinating piece about transgenderism and murderous transgenderism and all as a rejection of their prior self and a rejection of society. and maybe we'll get into that in a podcast. It's meaty. But she clearly said, I'm not that little girl anymore. I'm me. I'm a different person and wanted to manifest that outwardly in the way a lot of young people do. Second subplot. This is the granddaddy of subplots. Both her dad and Eileen Gu, the traitorous commie-loving skier, were approached by the Chinese as part of that same program to let's recruit some Chinese Americans who will opt for China so we can use them as propaganda tools, saying our system is better. Eileen Gu's parent and her, she said, great, give me that commie money. Eileen Aliso Lu, rather, and her dad said, F off, commie dogs. So we say, woo, Lu, boo, Gu. I'm going to get that tattoo today. A Wu-Liu tattoo? Wu-Liu-Bugu, yeah, exactly, with pictures of them both, but with Lu looking like an angel and Gu looking like an evil communist devil. I can't wait. Wu-Liu-Bugu tattoo, you do you, I say. Well said. Second, or third, or fifth subplot, I've lost track. Her dad, who was a bit of a tiger dad, and was definitely part of her, although he was a Tiananmen Square escapee slash survivor and said F off to the commies and good for him if the story is accurate. He's one of those Chinese fellas that has I think four kids all by surrogates. Yeah. Bred himself a family. Children. To turn into champions. So that's interesting. But good for her. Good for her. She did it on her terms. She's having fun. And she kicked ass. How American is that? No regerts. I love that. Love that. Plenty he. I wish that would be contrasted more. I mean, the fact that she grew up in Oakland and Googled up just across the water in San Francisco and they took such different paths in terms of embracing communism for cash or embracing your own country, which is the hope of the earth, is a pretty good storyline. Yeah, I would say completely, not just ignored by the utterly disgusting mainstream media, but in fact, they've gone the other direction. They've just given a woo, a goo, I'm sorry. I need to jot this down. Get that before your tattoo, get it straightened out. Yeah, that's true. you'd hate to end up with a Boo, Lou, Goo, Woo shot. It's a tattoo, rather. Anyway, they practically give Goo a tongue bath when they do interviews with her. It's terrible. Of course, I had the giant Quad God tattoo across my entire back that I'm getting removed now. With Ilya Malin and wearing the gold medal. Since he fell, I'm getting it removed, and it's very painful. But I just can't have that at the beach. I told you, wait. You wouldn't listen. There's no need to wait. He's going to win the gold medal. Everybody knows it. He can't lose. So now I'm faced with being at the beach this summer with this ridiculous quad god gold medal tattoo. Meanwhile, not only are we on the brink of war with Iran, we're blockading Cuba. They are, like, out of fuel and food? This is controversial. But it'd be great to get the commie devils out of a big old island right off our shore. We can't have malign communist regimes menacing us in our own backyard. I love it. How about that? How about that? It could be a pretty newsy weekend that we will be following up on Monday. I don't know when we're actually going to war with Iran. Trump said to give them 10 to 15 days. I like when he gives these vague deadlines, 10 to 15 days. Then maybe hits them two days later. Yeah, yeah, maybe. If you missed a second, you get the podcast. Armstrong and Getty on demand. Armstrong and Getty This is an iHeart Podcast Guaranteed human
