May 15, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- The US border restoration & the Supreme Court
- Money in professional sports
- Update on the Diddy trial
- California's High Speed Fail
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):
Arms Strong and Jetty, I know he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
The priority is always going to be public safety, trust
in national security. If that's where the problem with that
is the sanctuary cities. We can't get our hands on
these people in the jail, where one agent can arrest
one bad guy in jail. The recent to the communities,
and that's why we're flooding the sanctuary cities zones right now.
We got to sent agents to the neighborhood. We got
sent the whole team for offer safety reasons. So we're
(00:43):
going to increase agents in these cities. We're also going
to increase worksite enforcement in these cities because we can't
arrest them.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
In the jail.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Then we got a golode community and the work site
to find these people. So that's what we're going to do.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
I really like Tom Holman there on the lead with
Jake Oh my god, he was senile Tapper, who is
talking about a number of immigration topics and really made
some major news that I'm not seeing covered very much.
A quick aside to the team, and I'm sorry I
didn't think of this a few minutes ago. We had
(01:16):
some audio a couple of days ago from a special
report with Brett baer In one of the correspondents talking
about the drop in the numbers at the border. Can
we grab that from a last day or two? I
can't remember what it was, but so anyway, Tom Holman's
on there on CNN and he started with quite a
bombshell and that was part of it there. But the
borders are revealed that the Trump administration is preparing a
(01:38):
federal deportation crackdown unlike anything the country has ever seen.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
Quote, We're going to ramp up.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
The number of teams in the interior of the United States.
We're building that team now. He explained that multiple agencies
has already been mobilized ICE, which includes over fourteen thousand officers,
as preparing to redeploy personnel for interior enforcement.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Not just ICE.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
President Trump has all the government on this, he said,
pointing the coordination with the ATF, the DEA, the US Marshals,
the DOJ, and even the State Department. This isn't piecemeal,
it's a full scale federal operation and it's just getting started. Wow,
that's big stuff. Then Jake Tapper brings up I hear
(02:22):
you're thinking of deporting people of Libya, and Holman said,
I don't know specifics about Libya, but we're talking to
multiple countries to accept illegal aliens.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
If their own country won't take them. Well, here's the quote.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
If their home countries don't accept them, we're looking for
a third safe country to repatriate them.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
But essentially they ain't staying here.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
We got that clip from the other day. If you
want to throw that in as a booster here, Yeah,
why don't we uh exam, Yeah, we'll do that after this. Okay,
So anyway the conversation. Then Jake, trying to be provocative,
confronts Holman with the recent tough talk from ass kicking
(03:02):
Representative AOC.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
If anyone's breaking the law in this situation, it's not
members of Congress, it's the Department of Homeland Security. It's
people like Tom Homan and Secretary Christy. No, you lay
a finger on someone on Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman, on
Representative or any of the representatives that were there, you
(03:25):
lay a finger on them, we are going to have
a problem.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
What's your response mister Hammond.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
First of all, you can't intimidate me. Come on, give
me a break.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
You know I was enforcing him.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
I was wearing a green uniform borbitual agent for five
years before she was even born. I had more than
three decades enforcing immigration law before she became a member
of Congress. I worked for six presidents. I've seen policy.
I've seen hundreds of policies. Some work, some didn't. But
you can't deny the success of the Trump administration when
it comes to border security again, the most secure board.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
In history of this nation.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
And I said from day one, and she knows this,
you can not support ICE, Shame on you. You can
support sant shore cities, shame on you. But you can't
cross the line. You can't knowingly impede at ICE law
enforcement officers. That is a felony. You can't harbor and conceal.
Knowingly harbor and conceal it will go alien from ICE.
That is a felony. And you certainly can't commit criminal trespass.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
You know.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
And as far as New York her district, this administration
has done more to protect her districts than she has
the number of criminal islands we took off the streets
to New York made her community much safer. She ought
to be thanking the members of this administration, the men
and women of ICE who protect this country make her
community safer. So you know, it's politics over public safety.
(04:39):
It's just ridiculous. She alt to love her community more
than she hates Trump, because we're doing a lot to
protect your community.
Speaker 4 (04:46):
I am, I would guess at public policy wise, he's
on the right side of this, even in New York.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Yeah, if Disney had congresswomen instead of princesses, AOC would
be a Disney Well Congress princess. She was referring specifically
to several lefty Democrats who are desperately trying to rebrand
themselves or have a brand at all, showing up to
impede ICE and chanting and demonstrating, and they jostled some
(05:13):
cops and ICE officers and got jostled back. And so
AOC is trying to whip up some narrative where indeed
it's the brutees of ICE, the fascists of ICE, that
are trying to assault brave left wing representatives, and we
won't have it. You're going to have a problem, mister
(05:33):
and Tom Holman says, yeah, give me a break. So
Holman's point there, other than shut up AOC, was wait
a minute, We've accomplished great things.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
How great? Listen to this.
Speaker 6 (05:44):
We are getting a first look of the Southern border
immigration numbers for April. Southern border in the US, the
government reporting a ninety three percent drop in apprehensions from
nearly one hundred twenty nine thousand a year ago to
just under eighty four hundred last month. Lasts average forty
three hundred per day this year's two hundred and seventy
nine last year. Sixty eight thousand illegal immigrants released into
(06:07):
the US during April this year five Also, drug seizures
were up fifteen percent over March. Seven hundred and fifty
eight pounds of fentanyl seas in March, about one hundred
and seventy two million lethal doses.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Well, so hardly actually anybody's actually getting across. But it's
amazing to me that there's still several hundred people trying
at this point.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
They must not read the paper, right I guess not.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Or the coyotes said hey, we've got a contract, let's
give it a try. I want to repeat a couple
of those numbers, it's a ninety three percent decrease year
over year. That is fantastic. The apprehensions numbers really what
they reflect is the number of people trying, and that's
declined from one hundred and twenty nine thousand to eight thousand.
(06:54):
But this is this is the number that ought to
be greeted with parades in the wave of flags released
into the country last April under Biden, sixty eight thousand
human beings with no right to be in the country,
sixty eight thousand this April five five, not five thousand five,
(07:20):
like the starting lineup for the New York Knicks.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Five humans who were surely.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Vetted, because you can look at five people and say, yeah, okay,
they've got a right to be here.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Number of fingers on your right hand is a non
inbred human.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
As a non railroad worker, that's correct, non shop teacher.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
If you will, Oh, I was going with extra fingers,
you were going with fewer fingers.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
Right, Well, either way worthy of discussion.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
Right So, anyway, I tell you what is I always
say when I criticized Trump, it's you know, it's because
it's what I think is legit.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
But it's also the good stuff is so good. Please
don't screw it up.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Please don't open the door for Democrats to rush in
and take back the reins of power and trag us
back to the Biden years in its policies.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
Oh so, the Supreme Court's hearing arguments as we speak
on the whole ken Trump and birthright citizenship on his own.
But what seems to be coming up as like the
crucial I don't know if it's the crucial issue, but
a crucial issue is whether or not a single judge
(08:31):
can hold up stuff a president does around the country.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I hope they finally figured this out.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
As Axios was just reporting, there are six hundred federal judges?
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Are there not really that many? Yeah? Wow? Six hundred
federal judges?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
And the question is being asked, do we want a
system where one of these people could say, nahe, I
don't think that the president's doing is okay and stop
it all the time, because it does in reality, gumma,
the work so much that you practically the end result
is a president doesn't have.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
The ability to issue executive orders. Right. It almost takes
away that legal power.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, the window dressing is the birthright citizenship thing, and
it's an important question and a really really interesting one,
but it's one I think we can all understand and
have an opinion on.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
But yeah, the underlying question, because this is a two
part question for sure, is what Jack was talking about.
Speaker 4 (09:31):
Yeah, about nation wide in junctions, and that's huge. I'll
read what CNS has up there right now, Supreme Court.
Here's arguments on whether lower courts have authority to block
orders from the president.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
Yeah, so we do have to figure that out.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
And Preme Court justices have across the ideological spectrum have
said they are troubled by at least some nationwide injunctions
which are on the rise, and several of long called
for the court to address their scope.
Speaker 4 (09:57):
Yeah, we would need like Tim or one of our
lawyer friends who follows this sort of thing to know.
I'll bet it is on the rise. So I'll bet
back in the day you were really hesitant to jump
in and say no, I'm going to stop this. And
now people are much more comfortable holding up the whole
(10:20):
country on their own thoughts.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
I think Trump supporters would say, yeah, the woke courts
have decided to be part of the resistance against Trump.
The response from the courts would be well, Trump is lawless.
So the counter to that claim would be shut up
your lefty jackass.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
So I can tell you a little of the stuff
that happened today. Right after this a word from our
friends it Prize Picks.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
The action is heating up in Prize Picks is the
best place to get in on the action. Don't miss
your last chance to pick your favorite players during the
basketball playoffs, whether it's points, rebounds as assists, just choose
more or less on two to six player projections for
your shot to win up to two thousand times your cash.
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Nick's got crushed by the Celtics last night in Boston.
That Game six at Madison Square Garden tomorrow night is
going to be something else. And the star power on
the stands. I don't think you can pick on that
on Price Picks. I think you have to stick to
the game and every line Timothy Shalom may be sitting
next to usher, he can't.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
You can't choose on that. No, you cannot.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Every lineup you make on Prize Picks, though, will enter
you in the Takes two tickets sweepstake, which could get
you in a plus one of VIP trip to the
Championship series.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So download the Prize Picks app today.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Use the code Armstrong to get fifty bucks instantly to
play around with. After you play just a five dollars lineup.
That's the code Armstrong. You get fifty dollars instantly after
you play a five dollars lineup. You don't even have
to win, it's automatic. Prize Picks run your game.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
So I'm just looking at Jonathan Turley's Twitter feed and
he's watching the entire Supreme Court thing or list to
it and then tapping out with his fingers quickly.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
He said, Wow.
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Justice Roberts just jumped in and asked, Soda Moyer, can
I hear the rest of his answer? Soda Moyer continued
as Roberts tried to allow counsel to answer. Sodemayer just
said that Trump has violated that blah blah blah and
soda Myayron, So, sir.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
I don't know whatever.
Speaker 4 (12:18):
I can't wait to listen. I love it, love it. Yeah,
I hope they can nail this down. It's gonna be tough,
I think, to make it like a yes or no.
Can individual federal judges hold up a president's order all
across the country sometimes they probably should, but not all
(12:39):
the time, just based on their personal hatred of whoever's president.
So right, there's so.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
Many of them.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Can we come up with a rule, because I was
reading about this the other day, and how about the
good ones can and the bad ones can't? Well, yeah, exactly,
the dopey ones can't do this? Should there be an automatic,
you know, referral of that sort of thing to a
higher court, right like within seventy two hours or something
(13:07):
like that.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
I don't know. They'll work something out, but it's an
interesting question. Shot a hand right now, no doubt.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Hey, Los Angeles in San Francisco, where we are both
on the air, you're supposed to have a bullet train
connecting you.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
You don't.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
The latest details on that are hilarious slash frustrating as
a taxpayer.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
We'll get to that later this hour. Stay here. Did
I say this?
Speaker 7 (13:32):
Amazon said they fired a driver who was caught going
to the bathroom on someone's front porch. Even crazier, a
few seconds later, it was stolen.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Oh my god, I don't want the Amazon driver. Was
it number one or number two? I'm afraid it was
number two.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
It was Oh my god, I'm gonna when I get
the little review thing they always send you after a delivery.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Were you happy with your Amazon delivery? No?
Speaker 4 (14:02):
The driver pooped on my porch, So no, A hard
no is there is there like a lower score than
a no, I'm not.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
Happy with I wish there were zero stars. Many reviews
start these days. Yeah, no kidding.
Speaker 4 (14:17):
They WNBA tips off tonight for a new season. There's
talk of a lockout. We're gonna do full team coverage
an hour four on the negotiations between players and owners.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
My life will not change in iota. So I was
actually listening to either eventuality. NPR was covering this story
and they I think the is.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
It the highest salary or the mid range salary or whatever.
It's shockingly low, partially because not that many people watch.
I mean, it's all based on I'm always amazed how
many people don't.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
Understand the way professional sports works.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
If it's popular and lots of people watch, advertisers want
to have their product advertised on the radio or the
TV for that sport, and the more money that comes in,
it makes more money for the sport, and the players
can demand more chunks of that commercial revenue through salaries
blah blah blah. But if not that many people watch,
(15:17):
advertisers aren't paying that much and there's not much money
floating around. And it's not sexism or because you don't
like soccer or whatever that dictates this, it's just how
popular is it?
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Well? And if your average ticket price is one hundred
and seventy five dollars as opposed to thirty dollars, that's
a big difference too.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Anyway, I heard the number on NPR and I didn't
catch if it was like the maximum salary for first
year or something, but it was two hundred thousand dollars
a year, which is not a ton of money. And
the argument, of course on NPR was the owners of
whichever team were worth an estimated twelve million dollars should
(15:57):
be able to Okay, so I'm worth twelve million dollars,
which is a lot of money, but it's not the
same as being a billionaire, and.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
It's utterly irrelevant to the question, right.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
And why would I just give this WNBA player another
one hundred or two hundred grand of my money out
of fairness or because I like girls? Are I mean,
what's what's the reasoning here?
Speaker 2 (16:20):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (16:20):
It's it's it's non reasoning, it's emotional reasoning. We talked
about this a while back, and I remember one of
our intrepid listeners sent along the figures for the average
salary in the NBA, which is many, many times what
it is in the WNBA, which is I'm sure is
what they were whining about on NPR. But then also
the revenue for each league, and by percentage of revenue,
(16:44):
the WNBA players get paid disproportionately too much.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
They do.
Speaker 4 (16:48):
The WNBA is being subsidized by the NBA to a
great extent.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
Yeah, it's a it's it's a good thing that that,
you know, young girls have heroes to look up to.
Sports wise, I don't mind it. The NBA subsidizes the
WNBA as a PR move. That's just the reality of it. Sure,
whether that's good or bad, it's up to the NBA.
They didn't do whatever they want.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
It's a business choice and they like it for whatever reason.
Speaker 4 (17:17):
But if the WNBA was completely on its own, it
would have folded.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
A long time ago. It couldn't stay open on the
amount of money life brings in.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
It would just be, you know, a very low profile,
fairly inexpensive bit of entertainment. It's like there are a
national lacrosse leagues and there's the National Women's Soccer League,
which does pretty well and all. It's just but no,
it would not have the profile it does if it
were on its own.
Speaker 4 (17:41):
Caitlyn Clark against that Reese girl tonight. They did a
good job scheduling that for Night one for people who
like that sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Because those are the biggest games last year.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Yep, that's smart. Yeah, but the idea that this is
unfair and sexist and shows the income just no, shut up, god,
grow up? Would you please grow up?
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Dumb?
Speaker 4 (18:01):
Is the California bullet train and no matter where you live,
some of your tax pay your money has probably already
gone to it.
Speaker 8 (18:07):
More on that on the way Marstrong and Getty.
Speaker 9 (18:13):
The jurors were able to see still images of these
explicit photos, so much so that when Cassie Ventre was
going through the binder that was set out before her
to ensure that only the jurors, herself and the parties,
not the public, could see, she sort of rolled her
shoulders in discomfort. For a moment, a juror grabbed her
(18:34):
chest and let out a deep sigh. Another mail jur
looked quickly and looked away. Another one, Drew notes it
was quite a moment of this culmination.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
Of her fear. I'd like to read those notes. Here
we go with what happened yesterday. There's some interesting stuff
in here.
Speaker 10 (18:52):
And then there were, as you noted, these bombshell emissions
or a testimony that came out yesterday, Cassie testifying that
did He actually in twenty eighteen forced his way into
her home raped her after she broke up with him.
She even testified about him, you know, threatening to blow
up rapper Kid Cutty's part to learn that she started
dating that actor and rapper in twenty eleven and in
terms of credibility or at least possible cooperation. A spokesperson
(19:16):
for Kid Cutty later confirms The New York Times that
his car exploded in his driveway in early twenty twelve Diddy,
though denying any involvement there.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Yeah, so she breaks up with did He starts bringing
the dating listening to my son listens to Kid Goody
dating Kid Cuddy, and Shawn com says I'm gonna bow
up his car And the next day the guy's.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
Car pulls up. That's a coincidence.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
She breaks up with him out of fear, as you
might do. That was pretty interesting, And then we learned yesterday.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
If the question is, how long can you have an
unbelievably perverse, violent, felonious life and cover it up if
you're a big, rich star, A long.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Damn time is the answer? Apparently?
Speaker 4 (19:56):
Apparently, yeah, especially if you're willing to pay him a
bunch of mone because she was going to come forward
with a bunch of this stuff years ago.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
And it was revealed yesterday that he paid.
Speaker 4 (20:06):
Her twenty million dollars to keep quiet, and she did
twenty million dollars.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Whoo.
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Anyway, here's some of the stuff from the day that
I found interesting. I'm looking at the New York Post.
First of all, this video of people waiting in line
outside the courtroom in New York, Diddy fans wearing puff
hats and Diddy T shirts and stuff like that, dancing
and swaying to Diddy music as they wait to get
into the courthouse. So they're obviously supporters of the moment.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Let them vote, please, What the hell?
Speaker 4 (20:35):
He's got a bunch of family members, all kinds of
family members, showing up.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
I like this from The New York Post.
Speaker 4 (20:40):
Diddy's mother, Janiscomb's eighty four arrived and, as the New
York Post said, she appears to be wearing a new
wig from other days she's been at the trial.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
You thank you for that, Just stop and thank you
showed up in a brand new wig.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
So Diddy's ex girlfriend, who is the key witness to
this whole thing. Her husband and father of the children,
Alex Fine in the courtroom looking stoically as his wife
describes how she fell in love with Sean Ditty Combs
and then what their lifestyle was like afterward.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
That would be a tough situation.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Good for him for being there and supporting his wife
that I'm sure he loves, and she's pregnant and all
that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
But man, listening to these would not be a.
Speaker 4 (21:27):
Pleasant especially as today the cross examination is going on
in there getting into Cassie Ventura, that's the former girlfriend's
text messages that she had sent to Diddy. The jury
has been shown a series of messages that Cassie Ventura
allegedly sent to Sean Ditty saying that she was excited
(21:49):
to partake in freak offs. Including one that said I'm
always ready to freak off lol. She wrote to Combs
back in August of two thousand and nine, roughly two
years into the relationship, when she was twenty one and
he was forty one or something like that. The duo
then decided through text to hold one of their marathon
sec sessions on Friday.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Night that next week. She works for me too.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
She says, I'm already I'm always ready for a freak
off lol, and he says, how about one of our
two day freak offs next Friday.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
I'm down now.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
Well yeah, yeah, that doesn't mean it continued to be
that way. No, it wasn't compelled and sick and terrible.
Speaker 4 (22:28):
No, but that is even if you don't get into
the violence and some of the other disgusting stuff we've
heard only weeks.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
They had a outside of.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
Standard sexual relationship going fairly early, we would see. Not
that that means anything legally speaking, but the jurors also
heard more explicit messages in which venturers seem to express
excitement about taking part in the twisted freak offs and
all the things that she has done in his willing
(23:00):
to do. At that point, after they were reading these
texts out loud, Ventura asked for a break, grabbed her
eight month pregnant belly with both hands, and was given
a break. I'm surprised this. I did not expect that
the media is holding back on the lurid details. I
thought all those would come out, we would all be
(23:20):
reading them, they'd be everywhere.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
But they're not.
Speaker 4 (23:23):
I mean even the New York Post doesn't have what
these explicit texts were that they read out loud in
the courtroom. Are you happy about this level of restraint
or I'm just surprised. I've got to believe they're out
there somewhere. Well, if the New York Post doesn't have them,
and that's the that's their ground, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (23:45):
Yeah. Yeah, you'd think they'd at least give you cleaned
up versions of it. I don't necessarily need it, but yeah,
they're they're gonna be out there.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
And you know, you talk a lot about jurors and
the way they look at things. I mean, if some
fifty two year old married woman who's raised two kids,
here's this young woman describing all the things she has
done and is willing to do, that might change her
view of the whole completely sympathetic feelings she had previously.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
Yes, yeah, well, the jury, the jur ors are the
sole arbiters of whether someone's telling the truth or not.
They decide that, and often part of the jury instructions is,
if you found this person lied about one thing, you
can assume they're lying.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
About everything if you'd like.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
And I can absolutely picture, because not every juror looks
at the evidence rationally. I've seen personal prejudice and stupidity
and just weird beliefs get.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
In the way.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
But yeah, to your point, that galley you described might
think this chick is a crazy ho. I'm not listening
to anything she says.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
And that's it.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
I hope that doesn't happen. But Katie, any comments on
this a woman's person.
Speaker 8 (25:01):
I'm reading through the texts that they're coming through. I'm
just thinking of how young she was, Oh yeah, when
all of this was being sent, and she's dating this
guy that she has an element of fear involved with.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Of course she's.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Well yeah, at first, awe and respect for to that point. Yeah,
when she just first, I mean, so Diddy is her
manager and she's you know, a singing star, whether or
not he actually believed in her talent or not or
just thought she was hot as a different question, of course,
But Cassie told the jury that did he brought Britney
Spears to her twenty first birthday party.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
This is before they ever started dating.
Speaker 4 (25:37):
That's where did he made his first move on her
and kissed her for the first time.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
But so to impress this.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
Hot young girl that he's managing, he shows up to
her twenty first birthday party with Britney Spears to show
what a big deal he is.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
And I'm sure that's very impressive.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
And then he kisses you later that night as a
forty year old dude, And you know, I mean, that'd
be an intoxicating thing to have happened.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
That was back with Brittany was a giant pop star
and a shaven headed, wacked Yeah, you.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Can bring Brittany to my birthday party. Now it's like,
what the hell invited her? Boy? That poor thing?
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Yeah, probably half naked, danced around with a knife. Hey
you put that thing away.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
Yeah you're looking a little methy there, Brittany.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
Have you come.
Speaker 4 (26:23):
Across and I don't I don't need them, but have
you come across anybody who's reporting on the details of
these lurid texts that they.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Read in the courtroom today now good on the media.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
Maybe we're sliding back to the old days where we
feel like this is not something anybody needs, even like
I was just surprised, even on the ABC Evening News
that she said in graphic testimony that we're not going
to explain. I thought, Wow, when did when did this start? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Well, I think it's just way, way, way too graphic.
Is there a way because I mean, if a lot
of people are paying attention to a trial and getting
very very you know, just a fraction of the evidence
and then running around shouting their strongly held opinions, that
always bothers me. So I would like to know the
nature of the testimony just you can characterize it. But no,
(27:10):
we don't need the filthy details. I can imagine them.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
How do you think it landed?
Speaker 4 (27:14):
The fact that she got twenty million dollars to keep
her mouth shut with the jury.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
And then did well, she had to by the terms
of the agreement. It doesn't help your credibility. I could
see somebody, Well, there are a range of opinions from
look for twenty mil I mean that like changes your
life and your children's life and your grandchildren's life and
blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Her.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
On the other hand, a person could say, all these
people are getting like raped and sex trafficked and beaten
and jabbed with drugs and the rest of it, and
you're giving your mouth shut for money. Huh Okay, I
could see either.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Her poor husband. I hope they make it. I mean,
because I mean, this would be a stress on any marriage.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
And you know what he already knew in what he
didn't I mean, he might be sitting there in the courtroom.
You never told me that that you like, were into
it or whatever.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Really, I don't know.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
But you know, I don't mean to be childish or
idiotic about this because it's you know, troubling case.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:13):
But if she's like particularly conservative and demure in the
bedroom these days, and you know there are text messages
about her enthusiasm for running through the entire Comma Sutra,
you know, yeah, her current man might think wait a minute.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
He apparently asked her to refer to him as pop Pop,
which was the nickname she used for her grandfather. Ooh ooh,
and she said, quote, I thought it was weird.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
You know why it is uber weird?
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Wow, Wow, that's a pretty good flex showing up with
then at the time, very big deal Britney Spears and
just so it's your birthday, I thought you might think of.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
This was cool. Did she pop out of a cake?
That's what I want to know. And then that's when
the whole thing started. Everybody got covered with baby oil.
And you know the rest who the.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
Us who are the enthusiastically show up with puff hats,
puffy hats dancing to music supporters.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
I guess you're the same that the same crowd that
showed up to.
Speaker 4 (29:19):
Michael Jackson's trial, all excited about supporting their almost completely
obviously pedophile hero.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Yeah. I've read debate on that point recently, but I
don't want to relitigate that one. But yeah, you're you're
you're a softhead. You're an oddball. Do you have real friends,
actual friends, family? Don't you have a job?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Right? There are some crowds out gently.
Speaker 8 (29:43):
There are some cracked out homeless guy yelling at the
news outlets. I can't remember if it was yesterday or
if it was on Tuesday, but he ran up without
a shirt on. He's like freaky and he started telling
everybody shut up, b and like just going off.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
He got arrested. That sounds about right.
Speaker 4 (29:57):
So they're going after her today to try to make
her look well, what are they trying to make her look?
You almost went to law school. What is their number
one thing? Make her look like a liar or like
a money She hasn't doing this for money. She got
twenty million.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
Dollars, a willing participant and somebody who didn't feel strongly
enough about all of this to not take the money
and shut up. They're just trying to impeach her credibility
in general, you know, and accomplish something very much like
you described, just make the jury think, I don't want
to listen to this woman.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
She's half a nut herself.
Speaker 4 (30:32):
And you could also get to an emotion perhaps where
you'd think she got twenty million dollars. So it's not like,
you know, come on, it's not like she got her
life ruined or whatever. She because a lot of people
feel like money fixes everything and everything will be happy
for the rest of your life if you have enough money.
So she has twenty million dollars, So what's the big deal.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
Yeah, for the record, We're not defending these notions. We're
just saying that's what the defense is trying to put
into people's heads. Because I would say, somebody's forcible raped
and compelled to commit bizarre sex acts over an extended
period under thread of beatings, that's gonna have an effect
on their life.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
No matter what their check account, checking account.
Speaker 4 (31:09):
They're gonna be the headline being Diddy's mom showed up
with a new wig. Oh it did say that Puff
is taking notes for the first time in the trial.
I don't know what his notes are. Oh, that was
a good one. I forgot about that one. Let's do
that one again Friday.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
If I ever get loose.
Speaker 4 (31:25):
Yeah yeah, if I'm ever out of jail, and he
may never be ever again in his life, which is
sat wherever you're living. Some of your taxi when he
went to the California High Speed Rail already maybe more.
Speaker 2 (31:36):
It's stupider than you even thought.
Speaker 4 (31:38):
I'm glad national organizations are starting to look into this.
This is quite an update on the high speed fail.
Stay tuned.
Speaker 7 (31:48):
So no matter Tayman News that's the streaming service Max
is now changing its name back.
Speaker 2 (31:53):
To HBO Max.
Speaker 7 (31:57):
People were like well, as long as my parents keep
paying for it, you can call it.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
So there's been a couple of great government works, things
that got out of control and cost gazillions of dollars
and never got finished in my lifetime. I remember Boston's
big dig, hearing about that my whole life, decades and
decades and decades of wasted tons of money, Alaska's famous
bridge to nowhere. But they're all paling in comparison to
California's high speed rail project, which goes back to two
(32:25):
thousand and eight, and if it's not already at the
end of the day, will be the biggest government sinkhole
of bureaucracy and waste as an example of how democracy
keys can fail in our nation's history.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
And it's probably already be in Richmond too. I must
point out part of.
Speaker 4 (32:45):
The reason it's getting a bunch of a national attention now.
New York Times did a story last Sunday, the Associated
presses on it, and The Dispatch did a story yesterday.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
Is the c HSR. That's the California High Speed Rail Authority.
They put out.
Speaker 4 (33:01):
New numbers just recently, and their own new numbers have
now increased the total cost to one hundred and thirty
five billion dollars. When taxpayers agreed to this, it was
thirty three billion. It's now one hundred and thirty five billion.
It's more than one hundred billion dollars more than originally
proposed it was. We were supposed to be writing it
(33:22):
five years ago. It's supposed to be done in twenty twenty.
I have not written into view. They're now saying it.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Comes anywhere near the original promise.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
It will be north of two hundred billion dollars, mark
my words.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
And they and they said in their most recent.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
Statement it may take two more decades to complete most
of the San Francisco to Los Angeles segment, two more
decades to complete most. So they're not even saying in
two decades they.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Can complete it, right.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
And I don't know if you know about travel, but
you need the whole thing. Like if I'm going to
New York this summer, I need to get all the
way there. Most of the way doesn't do any good.
It's either get you to Indianapolis. It's really an all
or nothing proposition. Whenever you travel somewhere, Am I going
there or not? But I thought this was really interesting,
(34:17):
and I can't believe this hasn't gotten more attention. This
is from the chsra's own plan. It is now going
to connect to towns on the outskirts of both major metros.
It's not gonna take you from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
It's gonna take you from Gilroy, which if you live
in the area, you know very close to San Francisco.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
And that is the outskirts of the outskirts of the out.
Speaker 4 (34:41):
It's seventy miles southeast of San Francisco.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
To check, it will take you just under two hours
to drive from Gilroy to San Francisco as we speak.
Speaker 4 (34:52):
To Palmdale, which is thirty seven miles northeast of the
edge of Los Angeles, and in Los Angeles traffic, it
would take you several hours to make that drive. So
instead of the city centers, it's going to take you
from Gilroy to Palmdale. That will save construction time and money,
but it will need mean the writers will need another
hour or more to get into the cities. That is
(35:13):
an incredibly generous statement. I would say a minimum of
three to four hours on a good day, all.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
Told, an hour and a quarter from Palmdale to La
right now.
Speaker 4 (35:23):
All told economist Scott Summer estimates that this new setup
would require at least a seven hour series of trains
or cars for someone to get from downtown San Francisco
to downtown Los Angeles. Instead of the original promised three
hour one train trip and seven hours on the best
everything broke your way.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
It would take seven hours for seven times the budget
over fifty years of construction.
Speaker 2 (35:53):
Right, So that's the current statement.
Speaker 4 (35:55):
That And and when Trump cut off federal funding or
said he wanted to cut off federal funding a week
or so, go to people rally, how dare you.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
You don't believe in high spreed rail or whatever?
Speaker 4 (36:04):
And Gavin Newsom is still touting this is something to
be proud of.
Speaker 1 (36:07):
It is the greatest failure of democracy. I've ever witnessed
a lot of great stuff coming up an hour four.
Perhaps you don't get our four. You have to go somewhere,
do something that's fine. Grab the podcast later, subscribe to
Armstrong and Getty on demand. How to try lawyers factor
into all this mess. We'll talk about it.
Speaker 2 (36:24):
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):
Arms Strong and Jetty, I know he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
The priority is always going to be public safety, trust
in national security. If that's where the problem with that
is the sanctuary cities. We can't get our hands on
these people in the jail, where one agent can arrest
one bad guy in jail. The recent to the communities,
and that's why we're flooding the sanctuary cities zones right now.
We got to sent agents to the neighborhood. We got
sent the whole team for offer safety reasons. So we're
(00:43):
going to increase agents in these cities. We're also going
to increase worksite enforcement in these cities because we can't
arrest them.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
In the jail.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Then we got a golode community and the work site
to find these people. So that's what we're going to do.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
I really like Tom Holman there on the lead with
Jake Oh my god, he was senile Tapper, who is
talking about a number of immigration topics and really made
some major news that I'm not seeing covered very much.
A quick aside to the team, and I'm sorry I
didn't think of this a few minutes ago. We had
(01:16):
some audio a couple of days ago from a special
report with Brett baer In one of the correspondents talking
about the drop in the numbers at the border. Can
we grab that from a last day or two? I
can't remember what it was, but so anyway, Tom Holman's
on there on CNN and he started with quite a
bombshell and that was part of it there. But the
borders are revealed that the Trump administration is preparing a
(01:38):
federal deportation crackdown unlike anything the country has ever seen.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
Quote, We're going to ramp up.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
The number of teams in the interior of the United States.
We're building that team now. He explained that multiple agencies
has already been mobilized ICE, which includes over fourteen thousand officers,
as preparing to redeploy personnel for interior enforcement.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Not just ICE.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
President Trump has all the government on this, he said,
pointing the coordination with the ATF, the DEA, the US Marshals,
the DOJ, and even the State Department. This isn't piecemeal,
it's a full scale federal operation and it's just getting started. Wow,
that's big stuff. Then Jake Tapper brings up I hear
(02:22):
you're thinking of deporting people of Libya, and Holman said,
I don't know specifics about Libya, but we're talking to
multiple countries to accept illegal aliens.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
If their own country won't take them. Well, here's the quote.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
If their home countries don't accept them, we're looking for
a third safe country to repatriate them.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
But essentially they ain't staying here.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
We got that clip from the other day. If you
want to throw that in as a booster here, Yeah,
why don't we uh exam, Yeah, we'll do that after this. Okay,
So anyway the conversation. Then Jake, trying to be provocative,
confronts Holman with the recent tough talk from ass kicking
(03:02):
Representative AOC.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
If anyone's breaking the law in this situation, it's not
members of Congress, it's the Department of Homeland Security. It's
people like Tom Homan and Secretary Christy. No, you lay
a finger on someone on Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman, on
Representative or any of the representatives that were there, you
(03:25):
lay a finger on them, we are going to have
a problem.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
What's your response mister Hammond.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
First of all, you can't intimidate me. Come on, give
me a break.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
You know I was enforcing him.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
I was wearing a green uniform borbitual agent for five
years before she was even born. I had more than
three decades enforcing immigration law before she became a member
of Congress. I worked for six presidents. I've seen policy.
I've seen hundreds of policies. Some work, some didn't. But
you can't deny the success of the Trump administration when
it comes to border security again, the most secure board.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
In history of this nation.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
And I said from day one, and she knows this,
you can not support ICE, Shame on you. You can
support sant shore cities, shame on you. But you can't
cross the line. You can't knowingly impede at ICE law
enforcement officers. That is a felony. You can't harbor and conceal.
Knowingly harbor and conceal it will go alien from ICE.
That is a felony. And you certainly can't commit criminal trespass.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
You know.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
And as far as New York her district, this administration
has done more to protect her districts than she has
the number of criminal islands we took off the streets
to New York made her community much safer. She ought
to be thanking the members of this administration, the men
and women of ICE who protect this country make her
community safer. So you know, it's politics over public safety.
(04:39):
It's just ridiculous. She alt to love her community more
than she hates Trump, because we're doing a lot to
protect your community.
Speaker 4 (04:46):
I am, I would guess at public policy wise, he's
on the right side of this, even in New York.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Yeah, if Disney had congresswomen instead of princesses, AOC would
be a Disney Well Congress princess. She was referring specifically
to several lefty Democrats who are desperately trying to rebrand
themselves or have a brand at all, showing up to
impede ICE and chanting and demonstrating, and they jostled some
(05:13):
cops and ICE officers and got jostled back. And so
AOC is trying to whip up some narrative where indeed
it's the brutees of ICE, the fascists of ICE, that
are trying to assault brave left wing representatives, and we
won't have it. You're going to have a problem, mister
(05:33):
and Tom Holman says, yeah, give me a break. So
Holman's point there, other than shut up AOC, was wait
a minute, We've accomplished great things.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
How great? Listen to this.
Speaker 6 (05:44):
We are getting a first look of the Southern border
immigration numbers for April. Southern border in the US, the
government reporting a ninety three percent drop in apprehensions from
nearly one hundred twenty nine thousand a year ago to
just under eighty four hundred last month. Lasts average forty
three hundred per day this year's two hundred and seventy
nine last year. Sixty eight thousand illegal immigrants released into
(06:07):
the US during April this year five Also, drug seizures
were up fifteen percent over March. Seven hundred and fifty
eight pounds of fentanyl seas in March, about one hundred
and seventy two million lethal doses.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Well, so hardly actually anybody's actually getting across. But it's
amazing to me that there's still several hundred people trying
at this point.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
They must not read the paper, right I guess not.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Or the coyotes said hey, we've got a contract, let's
give it a try. I want to repeat a couple
of those numbers, it's a ninety three percent decrease year
over year. That is fantastic. The apprehensions numbers really what
they reflect is the number of people trying, and that's
declined from one hundred and twenty nine thousand to eight thousand.
(06:54):
But this is this is the number that ought to
be greeted with parades in the wave of flags released
into the country last April under Biden, sixty eight thousand
human beings with no right to be in the country,
sixty eight thousand this April five five, not five thousand five,
(07:20):
like the starting lineup for the New York Knicks.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Five humans who were surely.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Vetted, because you can look at five people and say, yeah, okay,
they've got a right to be here.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Number of fingers on your right hand is a non
inbred human.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
As a non railroad worker, that's correct, non shop teacher.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
If you will, Oh, I was going with extra fingers,
you were going with fewer fingers.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
Right, Well, either way worthy of discussion.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
Right So, anyway, I tell you what is I always
say when I criticized Trump, it's you know, it's because
it's what I think is legit.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
But it's also the good stuff is so good. Please
don't screw it up.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Please don't open the door for Democrats to rush in
and take back the reins of power and trag us
back to the Biden years in its policies.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
Oh so, the Supreme Court's hearing arguments as we speak
on the whole ken Trump and birthright citizenship on his own.
But what seems to be coming up as like the
crucial I don't know if it's the crucial issue, but
a crucial issue is whether or not a single judge
(08:31):
can hold up stuff a president does around the country.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I hope they finally figured this out.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
As Axios was just reporting, there are six hundred federal judges?
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Are there not really that many? Yeah? Wow? Six hundred
federal judges?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
And the question is being asked, do we want a
system where one of these people could say, nahe, I
don't think that the president's doing is okay and stop
it all the time, because it does in reality, gumma,
the work so much that you practically the end result
is a president doesn't have.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
The ability to issue executive orders. Right. It almost takes
away that legal power.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, the window dressing is the birthright citizenship thing, and
it's an important question and a really really interesting one,
but it's one I think we can all understand and
have an opinion on.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
But yeah, the underlying question, because this is a two
part question for sure, is what Jack was talking about.
Speaker 4 (09:31):
Yeah, about nation wide in junctions, and that's huge. I'll
read what CNS has up there right now, Supreme Court.
Here's arguments on whether lower courts have authority to block
orders from the president.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
Yeah, so we do have to figure that out.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
And Preme Court justices have across the ideological spectrum have
said they are troubled by at least some nationwide injunctions
which are on the rise, and several of long called
for the court to address their scope.
Speaker 4 (09:57):
Yeah, we would need like Tim or one of our
lawyer friends who follows this sort of thing to know.
I'll bet it is on the rise. So I'll bet
back in the day you were really hesitant to jump
in and say no, I'm going to stop this. And
now people are much more comfortable holding up the whole
(10:20):
country on their own thoughts.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
I think Trump supporters would say, yeah, the woke courts
have decided to be part of the resistance against Trump.
The response from the courts would be well, Trump is lawless.
So the counter to that claim would be shut up
your lefty jackass.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
So I can tell you a little of the stuff
that happened today. Right after this a word from our
friends it Prize Picks.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
The action is heating up in Prize Picks is the
best place to get in on the action. Don't miss
your last chance to pick your favorite players during the
basketball playoffs, whether it's points, rebounds as assists, just choose
more or less on two to six player projections for
your shot to win up to two thousand times your cash.
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Nick's got crushed by the Celtics last night in Boston.
That Game six at Madison Square Garden tomorrow night is
going to be something else. And the star power on
the stands. I don't think you can pick on that
on Price Picks. I think you have to stick to
the game and every line Timothy Shalom may be sitting
next to usher, he can't.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
You can't choose on that. No, you cannot.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Every lineup you make on Prize Picks, though, will enter
you in the Takes two tickets sweepstake, which could get
you in a plus one of VIP trip to the
Championship series.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So download the Prize Picks app today.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Use the code Armstrong to get fifty bucks instantly to
play around with. After you play just a five dollars lineup.
That's the code Armstrong. You get fifty dollars instantly after
you play a five dollars lineup. You don't even have
to win, it's automatic. Prize Picks run your game.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
So I'm just looking at Jonathan Turley's Twitter feed and
he's watching the entire Supreme Court thing or list to
it and then tapping out with his fingers quickly.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
He said, Wow.
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Justice Roberts just jumped in and asked, Soda Moyer, can
I hear the rest of his answer? Soda Moyer continued
as Roberts tried to allow counsel to answer. Sodemayer just
said that Trump has violated that blah blah blah and
soda Myayron, So, sir.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
I don't know whatever.
Speaker 4 (12:18):
I can't wait to listen. I love it, love it. Yeah,
I hope they can nail this down. It's gonna be tough,
I think, to make it like a yes or no.
Can individual federal judges hold up a president's order all
across the country sometimes they probably should, but not all
(12:39):
the time, just based on their personal hatred of whoever's president.
So right, there's so.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
Many of them.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Can we come up with a rule, because I was
reading about this the other day, and how about the
good ones can and the bad ones can't? Well, yeah, exactly,
the dopey ones can't do this? Should there be an automatic,
you know, referral of that sort of thing to a
higher court, right like within seventy two hours or something
(13:07):
like that.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
I don't know. They'll work something out, but it's an
interesting question. Shot a hand right now, no doubt.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Hey, Los Angeles in San Francisco, where we are both
on the air, you're supposed to have a bullet train
connecting you.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
You don't.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
The latest details on that are hilarious slash frustrating as
a taxpayer.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
We'll get to that later this hour. Stay here. Did
I say this?
Speaker 7 (13:32):
Amazon said they fired a driver who was caught going
to the bathroom on someone's front porch. Even crazier, a
few seconds later, it was stolen.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Oh my god, I don't want the Amazon driver. Was
it number one or number two? I'm afraid it was
number two.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
It was Oh my god, I'm gonna when I get
the little review thing they always send you after a delivery.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Were you happy with your Amazon delivery? No?
Speaker 4 (14:02):
The driver pooped on my porch, So no, A hard
no is there is there like a lower score than
a no, I'm not.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
Happy with I wish there were zero stars. Many reviews
start these days. Yeah, no kidding.
Speaker 4 (14:17):
They WNBA tips off tonight for a new season. There's
talk of a lockout. We're gonna do full team coverage
an hour four on the negotiations between players and owners.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
My life will not change in iota. So I was
actually listening to either eventuality. NPR was covering this story
and they I think the is.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
It the highest salary or the mid range salary or whatever.
It's shockingly low, partially because not that many people watch.
I mean, it's all based on I'm always amazed how
many people don't.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
Understand the way professional sports works.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
If it's popular and lots of people watch, advertisers want
to have their product advertised on the radio or the
TV for that sport, and the more money that comes in,
it makes more money for the sport, and the players
can demand more chunks of that commercial revenue through salaries
blah blah blah. But if not that many people watch,
(15:17):
advertisers aren't paying that much and there's not much money
floating around. And it's not sexism or because you don't
like soccer or whatever that dictates this, it's just how
popular is it?
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Well? And if your average ticket price is one hundred
and seventy five dollars as opposed to thirty dollars, that's
a big difference too.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Anyway, I heard the number on NPR and I didn't
catch if it was like the maximum salary for first
year or something, but it was two hundred thousand dollars
a year, which is not a ton of money. And
the argument, of course on NPR was the owners of
whichever team were worth an estimated twelve million dollars should
(15:57):
be able to Okay, so I'm worth twelve million dollars,
which is a lot of money, but it's not the
same as being a billionaire, and.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
It's utterly irrelevant to the question, right.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
And why would I just give this WNBA player another
one hundred or two hundred grand of my money out
of fairness or because I like girls? Are I mean,
what's what's the reasoning here?
Speaker 2 (16:20):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (16:20):
It's it's it's non reasoning, it's emotional reasoning. We talked
about this a while back, and I remember one of
our intrepid listeners sent along the figures for the average
salary in the NBA, which is many, many times what
it is in the WNBA, which is I'm sure is
what they were whining about on NPR. But then also
the revenue for each league, and by percentage of revenue,
(16:44):
the WNBA players get paid disproportionately too much.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
They do.
Speaker 4 (16:48):
The WNBA is being subsidized by the NBA to a
great extent.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
Yeah, it's a it's it's a good thing that that,
you know, young girls have heroes to look up to.
Sports wise, I don't mind it. The NBA subsidizes the
WNBA as a PR move. That's just the reality of it. Sure,
whether that's good or bad, it's up to the NBA.
They didn't do whatever they want.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
It's a business choice and they like it for whatever reason.
Speaker 4 (17:17):
But if the WNBA was completely on its own, it
would have folded.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
A long time ago. It couldn't stay open on the
amount of money life brings in.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
It would just be, you know, a very low profile,
fairly inexpensive bit of entertainment. It's like there are a
national lacrosse leagues and there's the National Women's Soccer League,
which does pretty well and all. It's just but no,
it would not have the profile it does if it
were on its own.
Speaker 4 (17:41):
Caitlyn Clark against that Reese girl tonight. They did a
good job scheduling that for Night one for people who
like that sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Because those are the biggest games last year.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Yep, that's smart. Yeah, but the idea that this is
unfair and sexist and shows the income just no, shut up, god,
grow up? Would you please grow up?
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Dumb?
Speaker 4 (18:01):
Is the California bullet train and no matter where you live,
some of your tax pay your money has probably already
gone to it.
Speaker 8 (18:07):
More on that on the way Marstrong and Getty.
Speaker 9 (18:13):
The jurors were able to see still images of these
explicit photos, so much so that when Cassie Ventre was
going through the binder that was set out before her
to ensure that only the jurors, herself and the parties,
not the public, could see, she sort of rolled her
shoulders in discomfort. For a moment, a juror grabbed her
(18:34):
chest and let out a deep sigh. Another mail jur
looked quickly and looked away. Another one, Drew notes it
was quite a moment of this culmination.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
Of her fear. I'd like to read those notes. Here
we go with what happened yesterday. There's some interesting stuff
in here.
Speaker 10 (18:52):
And then there were, as you noted, these bombshell emissions
or a testimony that came out yesterday, Cassie testifying that
did He actually in twenty eighteen forced his way into
her home raped her after she broke up with him.
She even testified about him, you know, threatening to blow
up rapper Kid Cutty's part to learn that she started
dating that actor and rapper in twenty eleven and in
terms of credibility or at least possible cooperation. A spokesperson
(19:16):
for Kid Cutty later confirms The New York Times that
his car exploded in his driveway in early twenty twelve Diddy,
though denying any involvement there.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Yeah, so she breaks up with did He starts bringing
the dating listening to my son listens to Kid Goody
dating Kid Cuddy, and Shawn com says I'm gonna bow
up his car And the next day the guy's.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
Car pulls up. That's a coincidence.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
She breaks up with him out of fear, as you
might do. That was pretty interesting, And then we learned yesterday.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
If the question is, how long can you have an
unbelievably perverse, violent, felonious life and cover it up if
you're a big, rich star, A long.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Damn time is the answer? Apparently?
Speaker 4 (19:56):
Apparently, yeah, especially if you're willing to pay him a
bunch of mone because she was going to come forward
with a bunch of this stuff years ago.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
And it was revealed yesterday that he paid.
Speaker 4 (20:06):
Her twenty million dollars to keep quiet, and she did
twenty million dollars.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Whoo.
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Anyway, here's some of the stuff from the day that
I found interesting. I'm looking at the New York Post.
First of all, this video of people waiting in line
outside the courtroom in New York, Diddy fans wearing puff
hats and Diddy T shirts and stuff like that, dancing
and swaying to Diddy music as they wait to get
into the courthouse. So they're obviously supporters of the moment.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Let them vote, please, What the hell?
Speaker 4 (20:35):
He's got a bunch of family members, all kinds of
family members, showing up.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
I like this from The New York Post.
Speaker 4 (20:40):
Diddy's mother, Janiscomb's eighty four arrived and, as the New
York Post said, she appears to be wearing a new
wig from other days she's been at the trial.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
You thank you for that, Just stop and thank you
showed up in a brand new wig.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
So Diddy's ex girlfriend, who is the key witness to
this whole thing. Her husband and father of the children,
Alex Fine in the courtroom looking stoically as his wife
describes how she fell in love with Sean Ditty Combs
and then what their lifestyle was like afterward.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
That would be a tough situation.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Good for him for being there and supporting his wife
that I'm sure he loves, and she's pregnant and all
that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
But man, listening to these would not be a.
Speaker 4 (21:27):
Pleasant especially as today the cross examination is going on
in there getting into Cassie Ventura, that's the former girlfriend's
text messages that she had sent to Diddy. The jury
has been shown a series of messages that Cassie Ventura
allegedly sent to Sean Ditty saying that she was excited
(21:49):
to partake in freak offs. Including one that said I'm
always ready to freak off lol. She wrote to Combs
back in August of two thousand and nine, roughly two
years into the relationship, when she was twenty one and
he was forty one or something like that. The duo
then decided through text to hold one of their marathon
sec sessions on Friday.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Night that next week. She works for me too.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
She says, I'm already I'm always ready for a freak
off lol, and he says, how about one of our
two day freak offs next Friday.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
I'm down now.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
Well yeah, yeah, that doesn't mean it continued to be
that way. No, it wasn't compelled and sick and terrible.
Speaker 4 (22:28):
No, but that is even if you don't get into
the violence and some of the other disgusting stuff we've
heard only weeks.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
They had a outside of.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
Standard sexual relationship going fairly early, we would see. Not
that that means anything legally speaking, but the jurors also
heard more explicit messages in which venturers seem to express
excitement about taking part in the twisted freak offs and
all the things that she has done in his willing
(23:00):
to do. At that point, after they were reading these
texts out loud, Ventura asked for a break, grabbed her
eight month pregnant belly with both hands, and was given
a break. I'm surprised this. I did not expect that
the media is holding back on the lurid details. I
thought all those would come out, we would all be
(23:20):
reading them, they'd be everywhere.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
But they're not.
Speaker 4 (23:23):
I mean even the New York Post doesn't have what
these explicit texts were that they read out loud in
the courtroom. Are you happy about this level of restraint
or I'm just surprised. I've got to believe they're out
there somewhere. Well, if the New York Post doesn't have them,
and that's the that's their ground, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (23:45):
Yeah. Yeah, you'd think they'd at least give you cleaned
up versions of it. I don't necessarily need it, but yeah,
they're they're gonna be out there.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
And you know, you talk a lot about jurors and
the way they look at things. I mean, if some
fifty two year old married woman who's raised two kids,
here's this young woman describing all the things she has
done and is willing to do, that might change her
view of the whole completely sympathetic feelings she had previously.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
Yes, yeah, well, the jury, the jur ors are the
sole arbiters of whether someone's telling the truth or not.
They decide that, and often part of the jury instructions is,
if you found this person lied about one thing, you
can assume they're lying.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
About everything if you'd like.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
And I can absolutely picture, because not every juror looks
at the evidence rationally. I've seen personal prejudice and stupidity
and just weird beliefs get.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
In the way.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
But yeah, to your point, that galley you described might
think this chick is a crazy ho. I'm not listening
to anything she says.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
And that's it.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
I hope that doesn't happen. But Katie, any comments on
this a woman's person.
Speaker 8 (25:01):
I'm reading through the texts that they're coming through. I'm
just thinking of how young she was, Oh yeah, when
all of this was being sent, and she's dating this
guy that she has an element of fear involved with.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Of course she's.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Well yeah, at first, awe and respect for to that point. Yeah,
when she just first, I mean, so Diddy is her
manager and she's you know, a singing star, whether or
not he actually believed in her talent or not or
just thought she was hot as a different question, of course,
But Cassie told the jury that did he brought Britney
Spears to her twenty first birthday party.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
This is before they ever started dating.
Speaker 4 (25:37):
That's where did he made his first move on her
and kissed her for the first time.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
But so to impress this.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
Hot young girl that he's managing, he shows up to
her twenty first birthday party with Britney Spears to show
what a big deal he is.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
And I'm sure that's very impressive.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
And then he kisses you later that night as a
forty year old dude, And you know, I mean, that'd
be an intoxicating thing to have happened.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
That was back with Brittany was a giant pop star
and a shaven headed, wacked Yeah, you.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Can bring Brittany to my birthday party. Now it's like,
what the hell invited her? Boy? That poor thing?
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Yeah, probably half naked, danced around with a knife. Hey
you put that thing away.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
Yeah you're looking a little methy there, Brittany.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
Have you come.
Speaker 4 (26:23):
Across and I don't I don't need them, but have
you come across anybody who's reporting on the details of
these lurid texts that they.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Read in the courtroom today now good on the media.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
Maybe we're sliding back to the old days where we
feel like this is not something anybody needs, even like
I was just surprised, even on the ABC Evening News
that she said in graphic testimony that we're not going
to explain. I thought, Wow, when did when did this start? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Well, I think it's just way, way, way too graphic.
Is there a way because I mean, if a lot
of people are paying attention to a trial and getting
very very you know, just a fraction of the evidence
and then running around shouting their strongly held opinions, that
always bothers me. So I would like to know the
nature of the testimony just you can characterize it. But no,
(27:10):
we don't need the filthy details. I can imagine them.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
How do you think it landed?
Speaker 4 (27:14):
The fact that she got twenty million dollars to keep
her mouth shut with the jury.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
And then did well, she had to by the terms
of the agreement. It doesn't help your credibility. I could
see somebody, Well, there are a range of opinions from
look for twenty mil I mean that like changes your
life and your children's life and your grandchildren's life and
blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Her.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
On the other hand, a person could say, all these
people are getting like raped and sex trafficked and beaten
and jabbed with drugs and the rest of it, and
you're giving your mouth shut for money. Huh Okay, I
could see either.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Her poor husband. I hope they make it. I mean,
because I mean, this would be a stress on any marriage.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
And you know what he already knew in what he
didn't I mean, he might be sitting there in the courtroom.
You never told me that that you like, were into
it or whatever.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Really, I don't know.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
But you know, I don't mean to be childish or
idiotic about this because it's you know, troubling case.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:13):
But if she's like particularly conservative and demure in the
bedroom these days, and you know there are text messages
about her enthusiasm for running through the entire Comma Sutra,
you know, yeah, her current man might think wait a minute.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
He apparently asked her to refer to him as pop Pop,
which was the nickname she used for her grandfather. Ooh ooh,
and she said, quote, I thought it was weird.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
You know why it is uber weird?
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Wow, Wow, that's a pretty good flex showing up with
then at the time, very big deal Britney Spears and
just so it's your birthday, I thought you might think of.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
This was cool. Did she pop out of a cake?
That's what I want to know. And then that's when
the whole thing started. Everybody got covered with baby oil.
And you know the rest who the.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
Us who are the enthusiastically show up with puff hats,
puffy hats dancing to music supporters.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
I guess you're the same that the same crowd that
showed up to.
Speaker 4 (29:19):
Michael Jackson's trial, all excited about supporting their almost completely
obviously pedophile hero.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Yeah. I've read debate on that point recently, but I
don't want to relitigate that one. But yeah, you're you're
you're a softhead. You're an oddball. Do you have real friends,
actual friends, family? Don't you have a job?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Right? There are some crowds out gently.
Speaker 8 (29:43):
There are some cracked out homeless guy yelling at the
news outlets. I can't remember if it was yesterday or
if it was on Tuesday, but he ran up without
a shirt on. He's like freaky and he started telling
everybody shut up, b and like just going off.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
He got arrested. That sounds about right.
Speaker 4 (29:57):
So they're going after her today to try to make
her look well, what are they trying to make her look?
You almost went to law school. What is their number
one thing? Make her look like a liar or like
a money She hasn't doing this for money. She got
twenty million.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
Dollars, a willing participant and somebody who didn't feel strongly
enough about all of this to not take the money
and shut up. They're just trying to impeach her credibility
in general, you know, and accomplish something very much like
you described, just make the jury think, I don't want
to listen to this woman.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
She's half a nut herself.
Speaker 4 (30:32):
And you could also get to an emotion perhaps where
you'd think she got twenty million dollars. So it's not like,
you know, come on, it's not like she got her
life ruined or whatever. She because a lot of people
feel like money fixes everything and everything will be happy
for the rest of your life if you have enough money.
So she has twenty million dollars, So what's the big deal.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
Yeah, for the record, We're not defending these notions. We're
just saying that's what the defense is trying to put
into people's heads. Because I would say, somebody's forcible raped
and compelled to commit bizarre sex acts over an extended
period under thread of beatings, that's gonna have an effect
on their life.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
No matter what their check account, checking account.
Speaker 4 (31:09):
They're gonna be the headline being Diddy's mom showed up
with a new wig. Oh it did say that Puff
is taking notes for the first time in the trial.
I don't know what his notes are. Oh, that was
a good one. I forgot about that one. Let's do
that one again Friday.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
If I ever get loose.
Speaker 4 (31:25):
Yeah yeah, if I'm ever out of jail, and he
may never be ever again in his life, which is
sat wherever you're living. Some of your taxi when he
went to the California High Speed Rail already maybe more.
Speaker 2 (31:36):
It's stupider than you even thought.
Speaker 4 (31:38):
I'm glad national organizations are starting to look into this.
This is quite an update on the high speed fail.
Stay tuned.
Speaker 7 (31:48):
So no matter Tayman News that's the streaming service Max
is now changing its name back.
Speaker 2 (31:53):
To HBO Max.
Speaker 7 (31:57):
People were like well, as long as my parents keep
paying for it, you can call it.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
So there's been a couple of great government works, things
that got out of control and cost gazillions of dollars
and never got finished in my lifetime. I remember Boston's
big dig, hearing about that my whole life, decades and
decades and decades of wasted tons of money, Alaska's famous
bridge to nowhere. But they're all paling in comparison to
California's high speed rail project, which goes back to two
(32:25):
thousand and eight, and if it's not already at the
end of the day, will be the biggest government sinkhole
of bureaucracy and waste as an example of how democracy
keys can fail in our nation's history.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
And it's probably already be in Richmond too. I must
point out part of.
Speaker 4 (32:45):
The reason it's getting a bunch of a national attention now.
New York Times did a story last Sunday, the Associated
presses on it, and The Dispatch did a story yesterday.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
Is the c HSR. That's the California High Speed Rail Authority.
They put out.
Speaker 4 (33:01):
New numbers just recently, and their own new numbers have
now increased the total cost to one hundred and thirty
five billion dollars. When taxpayers agreed to this, it was
thirty three billion. It's now one hundred and thirty five billion.
It's more than one hundred billion dollars more than originally
proposed it was. We were supposed to be writing it
(33:22):
five years ago. It's supposed to be done in twenty twenty.
I have not written into view. They're now saying it.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Comes anywhere near the original promise.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
It will be north of two hundred billion dollars, mark
my words.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
And they and they said in their most recent.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
Statement it may take two more decades to complete most
of the San Francisco to Los Angeles segment, two more
decades to complete most. So they're not even saying in
two decades they.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Can complete it, right.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
And I don't know if you know about travel, but
you need the whole thing. Like if I'm going to
New York this summer, I need to get all the
way there. Most of the way doesn't do any good.
It's either get you to Indianapolis. It's really an all
or nothing proposition. Whenever you travel somewhere, Am I going
there or not? But I thought this was really interesting,
(34:17):
and I can't believe this hasn't gotten more attention. This
is from the chsra's own plan. It is now going
to connect to towns on the outskirts of both major metros.
It's not gonna take you from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
It's gonna take you from Gilroy, which if you live
in the area, you know very close to San Francisco.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
And that is the outskirts of the outskirts of the out.
Speaker 4 (34:41):
It's seventy miles southeast of San Francisco.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
To check, it will take you just under two hours
to drive from Gilroy to San Francisco as we speak.
Speaker 4 (34:52):
To Palmdale, which is thirty seven miles northeast of the
edge of Los Angeles, and in Los Angeles traffic, it
would take you several hours to make that drive. So
instead of the city centers, it's going to take you
from Gilroy to Palmdale. That will save construction time and money,
but it will need mean the writers will need another
hour or more to get into the cities. That is
(35:13):
an incredibly generous statement. I would say a minimum of
three to four hours on a good day, all.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
Told, an hour and a quarter from Palmdale to La
right now.
Speaker 4 (35:23):
All told economist Scott Summer estimates that this new setup
would require at least a seven hour series of trains
or cars for someone to get from downtown San Francisco
to downtown Los Angeles. Instead of the original promised three
hour one train trip and seven hours on the best
everything broke your way.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
It would take seven hours for seven times the budget
over fifty years of construction.
Speaker 2 (35:53):
Right, So that's the current statement.
Speaker 4 (35:55):
That And and when Trump cut off federal funding or
said he wanted to cut off federal funding a week
or so, go to people rally, how dare you.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
You don't believe in high spreed rail or whatever?
Speaker 4 (36:04):
And Gavin Newsom is still touting this is something to
be proud of.
Speaker 1 (36:07):
It is the greatest failure of democracy. I've ever witnessed
a lot of great stuff coming up an hour four.
Perhaps you don't get our four. You have to go somewhere,
do something that's fine. Grab the podcast later, subscribe to
Armstrong and Getty on demand. How to try lawyers factor
into all this mess. We'll talk about it.
Speaker 2 (36:24):
Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.