This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human. Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. Armstrong and Getty. And now, here's Armstrong and Getty. So this is the marquee event. marking the first time a former president has been forced to testify before Congress. It comes after the House Oversight Committee voted to hold the Clintons in contempt of Congress in connection with their probe into the Epstein case. I'm not a fan of this particular norm breaking here. First time a president, former or current, has been asked to or forced to testify like this. Hillary yesterday, Bill today, just because it's going to continue. I was just watching old shirt sleeves Jordan, Brennan, the Armstrong and Getty show. Jim Jordan? Jim Jordan. They'll wrestle you for forgetting his first name. He said, because the Democrats, when they get the House, are absolutely going to subpoena Trump then, maybe while in office, let alone when he's out of office. I mean, that's a given that he's subpoenaed when he's out of office. And Don Jr. and Eric and Melania and who's the Tiffany? They'll just go down the line and keep subpoenaing. Right, and they can subpoena him while Trump's still president. So he'll have his, Trump's kids will be in there answering questions about Epstein. Their name appears multiple times in the Epstein files. Yeah, but in connection to anything that is of danger to the American public and is of use to, like as a crime, or just in the files. That's the thing. They're both at a cancer fundraiser. Come on. Well, I suppose, first of all, let's hear from Hillary. Hillary testified yesterday for six hours? That's a long time. I've never wanted to hear from Hillary, and I don't want to hear from her now. You won't hear much, but this is short. Her coming out afterwards. So it was recorded, and it's going to be released early next week. Why it wasn't live so we could just get it over with? Because I don't want another round of news coverage of this. but she came out afterwards and gave her version of what it was like in there I don't know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Hepstein I never went to his island, I never went to his home, I never went to his offices, so it's on the record numerous times and then she went on to say this about the various questions it then got at the And quite unusual because I started being asked about UFOs and a series of questions about Pizzagate, one of the most vile, bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the Internet, that was serving as the basis of a member's questions to me. So now this is Hillary's version of what happened yesterday. I would like to see that because she's a partisan spinner, and we all know that for many, many years. But there's at least one member of that committee. I forget who's this. Let the record show Jack called Hillary a spinner. Boy, you've got to be. Maybe for Shaq. Easy. Easy. Easy. I went too far than you. Come on. Reset. Where were we? Get your dignity back. There's at least one member. Unlike Congress. There's at least one member of that committee that either is full on QAnon or thinks enough of his voters are few on QAnon that has made all kinds of comments throughout this thing. That is probably the one that brought up the Pizzagate thing, like in serious terms, like there's a pizza shop they're running a pedophile ring out of. I personally don't believe that for a second, not even a little bit, that the Clintons were running a pedophile ring out of a pizza shop. I just don't believe that at all. They're too busy running a phony foundation. Yeah, and making gazillions of dollars. That's one of the problems with these hearings. Right. There are so many actual things that we should be digging into. Gazillions of dollars of waste and fraud and theft and all kinds of stuff. This is what we do. Yeah, gee, that's interesting, isn't it? Think about it. Think about it. So here's James Comer. He's the chair of the committee, and his version of what happened yesterday, clip 40. She was asked many times about questions with respect to Jeffrey Epstein because there were many forms of evidence in the documents that had been released by the Department of Justice and the estate that included her name in there, and she kept saying not only did she not have a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, that he was a shockster and he was a con artist and all of that. so i guess we'll have to see the actual video when it comes out next week um i want to get this on just because i want to comment on i don't know representative yasemin ansari democrat i assume clip 43 today we are sitting through an incredibly unserious clown show of a deposition where members of congress and the republican party are more concerned about getting their photo op of secretary Clinton than actually getting to the truth and holding anyone accountable. I only wanted to play that for the phrase unserious clown show. If I go to a clown show, it better not be serious. If it's a bunch of clowns sitting there discussing whether or not we should go to war with Iran, that's not what I'm going to do. There are days I consider whether life is worth living. See, that's a serious clown show. Nobody wants that. No, I want an unserious clown show. Get up, honey, we're leaving. My kids are crying. All you're talking about is cancer research and war. I was told this was an unserious clown show. I want my money back. Fraud! That's what I call this. I got to admit, though, I think she's right. This is idiotic. Grillin' Hillary for six hours. I never met him. I didn't know him. I've never traveled with him. I don't know anything about any of this. for six hours. What the F is the point of that? Now, on the other hand, her husband, who I think is being grilled right now, Bill Clinton, as Mark Halperin writes, he's got actual things they can ask him about. I don't think he was purposefully having sex with underage girls in part of a pedo ring, but, I mean, he did, Epstein was at the White House 17 times. 17 times Epstein was at the White House while Bill Clinton was president. That's a lot. Flew on the plane, went to the island, all the stuff, sitting in the hot tub. Who was the girl? I mean, there's all kinds of questions you can ask Bill Clinton, even though I ultimately think it's just an attempt to put the Clintons in an uncomfortable position. Oh, I didn't get to what Jim Jordan said. So Jim Jordan, Republican, was asked about that. Won't the Democrats now subpoena Donald Trump? And he said, he's probably right, they were going to do it anyway. They were going to subpoena Donald Trump anyway. which is probably true and that's where we are in this whole thing and then Mark Halperin's videocast that I watched yesterday is the only place I've heard anybody bring this up how sharp is Bill Clinton? apparently people close to him and know him he has definitely lost his fastball he's not the Bill Clinton that we remember from days gone by Hillary perfectly capable of handing all her stuff sounds like she always sounded, she's older Bill apparently is slipping into Joe Biden territory, so who knows how he'll do. Yeah, I suspect he'll say a lot of I don't recall and I never witnessed anything illegal. Yeah, there was womanizing and stuff like that, but who knows? I don't know. He is old, but he's also a gifted attorney and politician. So if there's anything, I don't think there's anything there. And if there were, he could cover it up fairly easily. It depends on what the definition of lubricant is. Oh, boy. Oh, brother. Yeah. Yeah. Race to the bottom. Nothing will come out of this. Nothing will come out of this. I don't think so. You know what something will come out of is J Vance is cracking down on fraud in our vast welfare state We can tell you about the opening salvo in that It's in Minnesota for good reasons, but holy cow, the list of states, California, is long, and they are going hard at the waste of billions and billions of year dollars. I think it's wonderful. Oh, plus a blockbuster gender-bending madness update that's also on the way. We were just talking about a local teacher who got caught on video somehow. In an empty classroom, important to emphasize that. Classroom was empty, either like on a lunch hour or after school or whatever. But he's peeing in an empty coffee can for some reason in the classroom, as opposed to going to the restroom. And there seems to be a great divide between men and women where men are like, so? Women are horrified. Or a bad idea, but come on now. It wasn't, you know, it's not a serious offense. Just tell them to stop it. I would be in that category. Yeah. Pretty odd. It's an error in judgment. But seriously, in that very school, all three of my kids went there, by coincidence, years ago. But in that very school, they're indoctrinating your children that little boys or little girls who are mildly unhappy are probably the wrong sex. And they should change their sex. But don't tell mommy and daddy. It'll be between us. schools all over California. Tell the dude to quit peeing in a can. Worry about the S that matters. So you're more worried about the encouraging sex change operations than the urine-soaked halls. Right, yes. Oh, he peed in a can, you liar. Why the witch hunt? This is a high-tech media witch hunt of a man who just had to pee. Yes, Katie? From someone who closely monitored the video that was posted, But he cut it pretty close because there was maybe a minute and a half before the students reentered the classroom. Oh, yeah. Any sign of locking and unlocking the door? No. Hmm. That's really bad judgment. Wow. Because obviously if a kid runs in early. Or forgot their X, whatever X might be. Well, this got recorded because somebody's laptop was sitting there recording video. Intentionally. Oh, intentionally? Because they had discovered the can, thought it was urine, and one of the kids decided, let's surveil the teacher. Oh, my God. Yeah, there's all sorts of hijinks going on. Oh, my God. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. There are children involved. I assume this guy's name's out. We haven't mentioned his name, the teacher. I haven't found it yet. Everybody who's got a kid in that classroom can name him, and I'm sure it's online. If I took two seconds, I'm sure I can find it. I don't want to be polite. P. Freely is his name. Ingmar P. Freely. Ingmar Philip Freely is his name. It's just the congratulating himself at the end, too. Nice. This is an unserious clown show. I can't believe, though. He's got a big red plastic Folgers coffee container, and he looks around a little, and he unzips. He pees in it, and then what does he say afterwards? He's like, oh, that was a good one. Nice, nice, nice, nice, nice. Wow. He enjoys that. Maybe I'm doing it wrong. Right, right. Don't do that. It's got something to be done and moved on from, but he's really enjoying it. Well done, sir. More on that as the situation warrants. Gase to here. Armstrong and Kitty. Uh-oh, what? a completely unserious clown show. I'm afraid of that. Armstrong and Getty. This is a local story for us. We broadcast from Sacramento, California. Joe's kids actually went to the school, but it's universal, and you can all appreciate it, because a teacher peeing in a coffee can in the classroom, I think, has got, I don't know, sort of thing we can all relate to in a weird... It's the universal language, Jack. An empty classroom. Yes, an empty classroom. During the school day. Right. And the kids secretly recorded it, left their laptop open recording because they suspected this was happening. Yes. I've seen the video. I've seen the video. I had not heard the audio, though, so we captured the audio off the TikTok video. This is the guy. He's got a red Folgers coffee container. He brings over. He takes the lid off. This is an unserious clown show. He unzips. You do not see any genitalia, thank God. He unzips. That's interesting. How did they... That almost seems fake from that standpoint. It's framed just exactly so you can tell what's happening but not seeing any nudity. How would you get it exactly right like that? I don't know. Just luck? Serendipity. I don't know. Don't get hung up on it. I'm starting to be suspicious of this. Maybe editing? Maybe. Anyway, here's the audio for during and after. Oh, gosh. Gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh. Love it. Love it. Love it. Kept it clean. Gosh, gosh, gosh. Appreciate the gentle language. It's middle school, after all. I have never urinated. and then said, gosh, gosh, gosh, gosh, love it. Or anything close. Again, maybe you're not doing it right. Why does he enjoy that so much? I don't know. I'm not a urologist. I'm not a urologist. That's not the question. This is irrelevant, Your Honor. I thought you've always said I almost went to urology school. Haven't you been saying that for years? Close. I own the gear. I'm just not quite sure how it works. We don't know the guy's name. I'm sure he could find it really easy. Even if I had the name in front of me, I wouldn't say it on the air. No, no. It's out there, I'm sure. Yeah. So do you think he's going to be forced to resign over this? I'll bet he is. There's a very, very good chance there is. There's a union involved. Boy, that's a good point. There are teachers who molest children, and the union finds a way to keep them employed or moves them to a different school. This guy, I don't think, has done anything wrong, only a little weird. No, it's an error in judgment. It's just a bit of an odd one. But, you know, my question is, is he a good teacher? If he's a good teacher, say, Jim, cut it out. You can't do that anymore. It might. And he says, I'm sorry, I'm embarrassed. I just, I was trying to save time. You're right, it was a terrible idea. They might try to fire him. He sues and we end up with, it goes all the way to the Supreme Court. The case of gosh, gosh, gosh, that was nice versus the state of California. I believe that was just an excuse to reset what the man said. Where I thought you were going with that idiotic comment was that it's going to cost the district half a million dollars to defend the lawsuit. I am interested, though. like he's probably like I'm near a bathroom right now in the studio. And I've never thought, I think I'll just pee in this coffee can here rather than walk. We've joked that we wish we had a urinal. Yeah. His crime was laziness. Yeah. Yeah. Poor guy. I bet his day is ruined. Day. How many, how many people are texting him? Friends. Dude. saw you on the news heard you on the radio yeah just terrible guess it was a nice pee gosh hey looks like you're having a hell of a good pee there that was nice see you later coming up a gender bending madness update full of significant developments really significant don't miss it stay with us if you can't grab the podcast Armstrong and Getty My catchphrase that I tried to get going a couple of years ago, yo, yo, yo, and it never really caught on. I've got the t-shirt and I trademarked it, but it just hasn't caught on the way I thought it would. Yeah, you shouldn't have ordered so many in advance. It's got warehouses full of yo, yo, yo t-shirts. Yeah, too bad. Coming up J Vance and company trying to crack down on waste fraud and abuse And thank goodness for it First though is a gender madness update So I kept hearing about this thing called gender madness They're locos. We're in a brave new world. This is a very encouraging gender-bending madness update. Progress is being made. Cool. Yeah, absolutely. Here's story number one. And 20 states are taking the American Medical Association to task for continuing to support puberty blockers for kids, despite the fact that the AMA recently came out against trans surgeries for children. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall wrote a letter to the AMA this week on behalf of a coalition of 20 attorneys general lauding the association for aligning with the American Society of Pediatric Surgeons that said sex change surgery should be 100% reserved for adults only. However, they argued that the AMA's position on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone therapy is inconsistent given the similar, practically identical, lack of any good research on outcomes for children who report having gender dysphoria. I mean, the reasoning for saying no surgery is precisely the same as no chemical castration. Well, obviously. I can't believe it took lawyers to get to that point. If it's going to have permanent results, it doesn't make any difference. In a horrifying turn of events, a judge in California just forced Children's Hospital in San Diego to continue providing cruel experiments mutilating children on a temporary basis, including puberty blockers, hormone therapies to minors under 19. This ruling comes just weeks after California Attorney General Rob Bonta launched a lawsuit against the hospital for halting the mutilations. That's insane. Citing a violation of a merger agreement. Do you think he believes that or just thinks he thinks that that's what the woke crowd wants? There's no way that's a majority opinion, even in California. Rob Bonta is a crook and a monster. I don't know what his motivation is. He almost has to believe it because I don't think even a majority of Californians would be in favor of that. Right, right. The fine print is that the merger agreement between this hospital and another hospital, they had to sign an agreement that the state made them saying they would continue to provide all services, including gender-affirming care. And even though, now all the medical associations are finally admitting what they've known to be true, that there's no freaking research to support these absolutely cruel Joseph Mengele-style experiments on confused children. They've been promoting. Now, they're all backing off of it, but this judge in the state of California says, no, you have to keep doing it. It's horrific. It's absolutely horrific. Here's some more encouraging stuff, though. And Jesse Single, I think that's how you pronounce the name, writes for the New York Times. and I know what y'all and we think generally of the New York Times and the reporting these days, they have been notably serious and accurate in reporting on the very things we're discussing right now. Yeah, I heard they deserve praise. What's the owner's name? Publisher's name? Never can remember the last Schellenberger? Schultzberger? Yeah, Schultzenberger? Whatever. Rickenbacker, I don't know. Yeah, I heard a podcast with him. Yeah, they really, really want to be fair on this issue and feel like a lot of other publications have been wrong. Wesley Yang, who's got a really worth following Twitter account, says it takes only four paragraphs for Jesse Singal to summarize the process by which pseudo consensus on behalf of the chemical castration of confused children was astroturfed into being in the absence of any good evidence. And I'm going to read that for you right now. Singhal writes, the most striking finding of the CAST review, a 2024 British inquiry that found, quote, remarkably weak evidence to back up the practice of youth gender medicine was the shoddy quality of the professional guidelines for this treatment. Researchers at the University of York who provided underlying work for the CAST review found that rather than being linked to careful, independent evaluation of evidence, the guidelines relied heavily on other organizations' guidelines. The authors wrote, quote, This may explain why there has until recently been an apparent consensus on key areas of practice for which evidence remains lacking. For instance, a 2018 policy statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics provides a useful example of how these documents can go wrong. At one point, it argues that children who say they are trans, quote, quote, know their gender as clearly and as consistently as their developmentally equivalent peers, quote, end quote. an extreme exaggeration of what we know about this population. A single study is cited, and it's not a good one. The document also criticizes the outdated approach in which a child's gender-diverse assertions are held as possibly true and not accepted immediately until an arbitrary age, adulthood. The AAP, that's the American Academy of Pediatrics, was instructing clinicians to take four- and five-year-olds' claims about their gender identities as certainly true. That's insane. It is. If you've ever raised a four or five-year-old, they are certainly true. They certainly believe, well, the Easter Bunny and a whole bunch of other different things. Right, right. A green monster just came into the room and ate the cookies. The AAP was instructing clinicians to take four- and five-year-old claims as certainly true. It's understandable why the cast reviewers scored this policy statement so abysmally, giving it 12 out of 100 possible points on rigor of development and 6 out of 100 on applicability. This was a serious, rigorous medical examination of the data. Policy statements like this one reflect the complex and opaque internal politics of an organization rather than dispassionate scientific analysis. The journalist Aaron Saberiams reporting strongly suggests that a small group of AAP members, many of whom were themselves youth gender medicine providers, played a disproportionate role in developing these guidelines. Shocking. What percentage of those five-year-olds were told this by their parents? How many of them came to this on their own? Or their teachers. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Singal documents the manner in which major U.S.-based medical associations are either stonewalling now or shrinking away from the confidence of their prior pronouncements on pediatric gender medicine. And that confidence was always fraudulent and never evidence-based because there is no evidence. The American Psychological Association in 2014, for instance, quote, argued that there is a comprehensive body of psychological and medical research supporting the positive impact of gender-affirming treatments for individuals, including children. Comprehensive body of psychological and medical research. Last year, the same group argued that, quote, psychologists do not make broad claims about treatment effectiveness. This dramatic erosion in confidence reflects the fact that, one, there was never any evidence to support the purported consensus, and two, now it is no longer possible to lie about this fact that was always true and has repeatedly been proven to be true by the National Health Services of Social Democratic Europe and now by a major medical society, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, which issued a statement calling into question every single aspect of the pediatric gender medicalization pipeline. You know, I could go on, but I think you've gotten the idea. It is absolutely horrific that the activists were able to capture these organizations with the authority of these organizations spread the word that this radical philosophy, which I'll tell you again where it came from. They were able to spread it and mainstream it and people were afraid to argue against it and how many kids have been mutilated. It's unbelievable. This, and if you know the origin of this, it's straight out of the Marxists of the mid 20th century who failed with workers of the world unite. So they thought, okay, how else can we divide society and get people to question Western civilization? Do you remember and I should have asked for this audio when Patrisse Cullors I think it was at the height of the Black Lives Matter madness she said You've learned your critical theory, your gender theory, your queer theory, now it's time to put all those theories to work! As she was rallying the kids for, well, literally a rally. Wow. That is straight out of the critical theory crowd in Frankfurt in the middle 20th century. These people, once again, they wrote books. Their names are on the spine. They said precisely what they're going to do. This is not a fantasy of mine. They said what they were going to do. And radical gender theory is an aspect of it. They wrote books about it. Anyway, one more thing, and I'll stop ranting. This is from Christina Buttons, who wrote this in, what publication is this? I can't remember. One of the central claims behind gender-affirming care is that medical transitions improve mental health, but a major new longitudinal study on adults has corrected the flaws in earlier research and found that medical transition is likely not what is driving those improvements. In other words, these are people with emotional, mental health problems. God bless them. They got the sex change, and if any improvement happened, it was independent of the sex change. That was never their problem. And in fact, the one piece of evidence that the radicals keep citing is gender affirming treatments did not reduce depressive or anxiety symptoms significantly after controlling for coping and social support. Where is the key phrase? It essentially says that it caused a temporary, very temporary feeling of now I'm happy, now it's good in the honeymoon period after the procedures. because they thought, ah, I've been told over and over again, this is my problem. We have solved my problem. I'm going to be happy now. And within a matter of weeks, months, they realized, oh, my God, no, it hasn't. But the statistics cited by the activists were in that very brief period. So it's just utterly, utterly fraudulent. Gender-mending madness update with hope. I think the people who push these mutilations really ought to be brought to trial a lot of them are going to be I certainly hope so or at least a civil court sue the bejesus out of them breaking news NASA says the moon landing attempt is going to be delayed to 2028 no no another story what if the Chinese sees our moon in the meantime another story out of Florida will they often launch rockets? This headline, I might look into more of the details. This sounds interesting. A Florida man who went missing on Valentine's Day was rescued yesterday after being stuck up to his shoulders in mud without food or water. Oh, my lord. And mosquitoes eating at his face, too. Was rescued yesterday. Yesterday was the 26th for the 14th. You can't go 12 days without water. He must have had some water. let's add access to some water you can go without food that long sipping the pond scum that was around him wow stuck up to his shoulders in mud that sounds like a nightmare I'll get more details on that maybe the fact that he was perfectly motionless and protected from the sun except for his face but you're right that's extraordinary without water we'll figure out more on that the great airport dress code debate we can check in on that for some reason that's erupted in the news we might be going to war with Iran of course and lots on the way, so stay here. Armstrong and Getty. The website NorthJersey.com has launched a March Madness-style competition to determine the best chicken parmesan in the state, though it's going to be confusing when 30 of the choices are my cousin Angela's. A major airport posted a joke about a dress code rule. People lost their S, and they've had to retract it. That coming up. All right. All right. So this ought to be getting the attention that's going to the idiotic waste of time grueling of Hillary Clinton, in my opinion. Great piece by Kim Strassel in the journal opinion pages about J.D. Vance tightening the fraud spigot, going off after Minnesota first with several more states to be named, going after the incredible misspending of federal dollars through these perverse systems that if you spend one state dollar, you get seven federal dollars. And so states are going wild spending. And she gets a little bit into the weeds here, but she says this is unprecedented and different from the administration's moves to pause grant disbursement to high fraud states, disbursement. Future payments are also at risk. This is a powerful approach since it attacks the key structural flaw in the current system. Medicaid is a joint federal state program, but states make all the decisions and send the feds a bill. So states have little interest in policing fraud, in making sure that a non-profit they send money to is real or qualified or successful. Like the stinking Somali-run fraud outfits that were feed the families and fed freaking nobody. But the state didn't care. It wasn't their money. Some Medicaid populations, every dollar a state pays brings $9 from federal taxpayers. Spend more, get more. Yeah, obviously there's an incentive problem there. This is how you get an estimated $9 billion in fraudulent Minnesota claims. This federal ultimatum, no more reimbursements until you can show you are paying legit people for legit services, surely sent terror rippling through state administrations across the country. This ought to be getting 50 times the attention it's getting. Of course, we'll take it too far, like we always do, and people who actually need medical care won't get it. It's kind of like after you were giving home loans to anyone. It wouldn't matter if there were three maxed-out credit cards and a credit score of two. You gave them a home loan. Then shortly after that, you cracked down. I remember the first home loan I got after that. It was almost impossible. It was ridiculous. so we always swing too far the other direction yeah so the Tampa International Airport posted this over the weekend they had signs around the airport and they put this on their website we've seen enough, we've had enough it's time to ban pajamas at Tampa International Airport after successfully banning Crocs and giving everyone the amazing opportunity to experience the world's first Crocs free airport it's time to take on an even larger crisis and they did that thing where you put a period after each word for drama. Pajamas at the airport in the middle of the day. We know this decision could be disruptive to someone in your life. It's time to have a difficult conversation with them. You can do this. We and Phoebe believe in you. I don't know what that is. The madness stops today. The movement starts now. Help Tampa International Airport become the world's first Crocs-free and pajama-free airport. Do your part. Say no to pajamas. Anyway, people went berserko, and now they've had to issue a... We're just kidding. Apology. Oh, my God. Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right, or anybody should even listen to you. What do you think caused the move toward ultimate comfort with dress? And why didn't it happen earlier? That's what I'm interested in. It's been headed that way for a century. I'm not an ultimate comfort guy, but I know you and lots of people are. I don't dress for maximum comfort really ever. But most people do now. And what do you think caused it? Well, I'm wearing pants. I mean, I'm a max comfort guy? I kind of am. But only in certain settings. I would never wear anything other than, like, nice golf clothes to travel in. What do you think caused it, though? Why didn't it happen earlier, I think, is a better question. Why did guys used to wear a vest and a hat and hard shoes? That's a book-length answer, and we have 12 seconds. I would like to hear the answer. Communism. That's all I have time to say. To shout. The communists. That's why, you idiot. That's the end of that hour. If you missed a segment or an hour, get the podcast. Armstrong and Getty on demand. Hour four to come. Armstrong and Getty. This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human
