January 14, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 4 of A&G features...
- Pete Hegseth questioned during the confirmation hearing
- More questioning for Hegseth
- Elizabeth Warren questioning Hegseth
- What happens with the TikTok ban?
- Final Thoughts!
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):
Arm Strong and Getty and he.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Armstrong and Getty jump ahead a day. I just saw
Senator Marco Rubio.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
Whose confermation hearing is tomorrow for Secretary of State. We'll
say in his opening remarks that China has lied and
cheated its way to superpower status at the expense of
the United States, according to.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
The syllable truth.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Absolutely man, I love a secretary of state coming in that.
That's his opening point of view. That's freaking awesome.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Time to call a spade a spade and a communist
a communist.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
But for today, makeup America, grow up, stand up, get up.
Speaker 4 (00:58):
For today it pull your socks up. As John Lennon right,
Pete heggsth is trying to be confirmed as Trump's choice
for Secretary of Defense. And in cases they don't follow
this sort of stuff very closely, it's worth knowing that
for a lot of the media and the politicians themselves.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
It's just yar side or boo our side.
Speaker 4 (01:24):
They just want to shoot down whoever the other side
nominates with some sort of feeling that if they have
to go to their second choice, you've won something. Though
I haven't seen that displayed in my life on any
level that it really has any lasting impact. But so
they would feel like MSNBC and the Democrat senators would
feel like they won something if they could stop Hezeth
(01:47):
from being nominated. Okay, fine, just more than I think
than the particular issues of the person that they're growing,
don't you think.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Oh yeah, absolutely, it's just posting a win for our side,
even if, as you indicate, the wind doesn't do you
any good.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Yeah, just go to a different choice.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
And and and they and they are playing out the
president's policy anyway as secretary of State or sect deef
or whatever. If they didn't, they get fired by their boss. Right,
So where should we start on some of that? They're
in the third hour of the Hegxeth hearings. That would
be a grueling day, man, And I I don't know
(02:27):
how you not lose your temper. That'd be the main
thing I'd be saying there, don't get angry, don't get angry,
don't get angry. That's I'd be saying to myself. Stay cool,
stay cool, stay cool. As they call you all kinds
of names and try to drag you into not into
losing your cool.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
That's one of their goals, right, yeah, although it depends.
You know, some some can get that boil at just
the right level. But it's a it's a dangerous game
to play. You don't me.
Speaker 4 (02:52):
I'd go with you, you pizza half, you mother plag
and try to climb over the table, and then people
have to hold me back. That's why I said some
too specific.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
He Hanson, where do we want to start in these?
Speaker 4 (03:03):
Okay, here we go, Here we go, Pete exit being
questioned by somebody.
Speaker 5 (03:07):
So what we're talking about here specifically is women in
ground combat roles in jobs like infantrymen or artillerymen or
special forces. Until about ten years ago, that wasn't the case.
Under Secretary of Panetta, those roles were opened up to
women to serve in. As President Trump indicated all that
(03:28):
he plans to rescind or alter that guidance.
Speaker 6 (03:32):
You're correct to point out, Senator, that these are the
decisions that the commander in chief will have the prerogative
to make. He has not indicated me to me that
he has plans to change whether or not women.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Would have access to these roles.
Speaker 6 (03:45):
However, I would point out ensuring that standards are equal
and high is of importance to him and great importance
to me, because in those ground combat roles, what is
true is that the weight of the ruck on your
back doesn't change, the weight of the one to five
to five round that you have to carry doesn't change,
the weight of the two forty provo machine gun you
(04:06):
might have to carry doesn't change. And so whether it's
a man or a woman, they have to meet the
same high standards, and Senator, in any place where those
things have been eroded or in courses, criteria have been
changed in order to meet quotas, racial quotas, or gender quotas.
That is putting a focus on something other than readiness, standards, meritocracy,
(04:32):
and lethality. So that's the kind of review I'm talking about,
not whether women have access to ground combat.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
R So, what percentage of America would agree with what
he just said?
Speaker 2 (04:41):
There huge, huge, huge.
Speaker 4 (04:43):
Absolute majority, without a doubt. I'm looking at Byron.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
York from the Washington If you were to poll people
who served in combat and therefore really know what they're
talking about, it would be unanimous Byron York.
Speaker 4 (04:54):
Washington Examiner says that Kristen's Jilibrand as her attempts failed.
She's the demoocratic senator from New York. Let's hear a
little of her.
Speaker 7 (05:02):
Everything you've said in these public statements is politics. I
don't want women.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
I don't want moms. What's wrong with a mom?
Speaker 7 (05:08):
By the way, once you have babies, you therefore are
no longer able to be lethal. I mean, you're basically
saying women after they have children can't ever serve in
the military in a combat role. It's a silly thing
to say. It's a silly thing to say. Beneath the
position that you are aspiring to to denigrate LGBTQ service
members is a mistake. If you are a sharpshooter, you're
(05:29):
as lethal regardless of what your gender identity is, regardless
of who you love.
Speaker 6 (05:33):
Senator, as the President has stated, I don't disagree with
the overturn of Donuts Hotel Great.
Speaker 7 (05:42):
Because I don't want you thinking can't serve if your
mom can't serve your LGBTQ.
Speaker 2 (05:48):
He's like, who are you yelling at? And why?
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Well, okay, then all right, So I would just say, hey,
Democrats keep thinking that that Twitter worldview is the winning argument.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Do it go, take it to the mat.
Speaker 4 (06:05):
Just keep pushing it, cycle after cycle. That's all about
LGBTQ and identity, politics and everything.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
Keep doing it. I'm all for you. I'm on your side.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
Kirsten Gillibrand is the classic mid wit. I think that's
the term we're supposed to use these days. Hl Menkin
would have called her a mediocrity. Whichever term searchs you
suits you the best.
Speaker 4 (06:27):
Maybe I think that's probably true. I remember when she
ran for president and I wasn't impressed. But she's also
trying to get re elected in New York where a
lot of her constituents agree with what she just said,
and that's her job.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
So staying in office is her job.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Again, to your point, her job is not to figure
out who would be the best second f right. She
probably didn't even consider that.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
So here he is, how do you say the name
Herno Rono Herono? But this is where they start getting
into his personal life and questioning him on haven't heard this.
Speaker 8 (07:00):
Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made
unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or
physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature. No, Senator,
have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement
relating to this kind of conduct.
Speaker 6 (07:19):
Senator, I was falsely accused in October of twenty seventeen.
It was fully investigated, and I was completely cleared.
Speaker 8 (07:29):
I don't think how completely cleared is accurate, but the.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Fact is that.
Speaker 8 (07:36):
Your own lawyer said that you entered into an NDA
paid a person who accused you of raping her some
of money to make sure that she did not file
a complaint. Moving on, as secretary, you will be in
charge of maintaining good order and discipline by enforcing the
(07:57):
Uniform Code of Military Justice you see in addition to
the sexual assault allegations. And by the way, the answer
to my second question should have been yes. I have
read multiple reports of your regularly being drunk at work,
including by people who worked with your Fox News.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Do you know that being drunk.
Speaker 8 (08:17):
At work is prohibited for service members under the UCMJ.
Speaker 6 (08:22):
Senator, those are multiple false, anonymous reports pedaled by NBCD.
You know that directly to the dozens of men and women.
Speaker 8 (08:34):
I worry I'm not hearing that.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
My question.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
I like the question, do you know you're not supposed
to be drunk at work. Yeah, yeah, I know.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
Mazy Herono is a seventy seven year old progressive crank.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
So I just I've just looked ahead on this. This
gets into whether or not he'd shoot protesters in the legs,
So I want to hear this.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
The next one.
Speaker 8 (09:00):
In June of twenty twenty, then President Trump directed former
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper to shoot protesters in the
legs in downtown d C.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
An order.
Speaker 8 (09:11):
Secretary Esper refused to comply with would you carry out
such an order from President Trump?
Speaker 6 (09:19):
Senator I was in the Washington DC National Guard unit
that was in Lafayette Square during those would you carry.
Speaker 8 (09:25):
Out shoe protest in the legs?
Speaker 6 (09:29):
I saw as the service agents to get injured, b
rids trying to jump over the fence, se church on fire,
and destruyer.
Speaker 8 (09:37):
That sounds to me that you will comply with such
an order, you will shoot protesters in the leg moved on.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Hawaii. I've been to Hawaii. I've enjoyed Hawaii. I've talked
to Hawaiians. You can do better than that half wit
elect somebody who's got like two thirds of a wit
looking up at Senator Warren. Elizabeth Warren, I've been looking
(10:06):
waiting for her today. She says, I want to pick
up on the questioning of Senator Herono. So that's exciting.
So hey, take this further down the road. Well, we
have more Mazie Herono, who I'm actually enjoying in a
perverse sort of way. Uh seventy six. I think it's
clear what she's talking about, but this is this is great.
Speaker 8 (10:25):
President Luck has attacked our allies in recent weeks, refusing
to rule out using military force to take over Greenland
and the Panama Canal, and they threatening to take to
make Canada the fifty first state. Would you carry out
an order from President Trump to seize Greenland, a territory
of our NATO ally Denmark, by force? Or how would
(10:49):
you comply with an order to take over the Panama Canal?
Speaker 3 (10:54):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (10:54):
I will emphasize that President Trump received seventy seven million
votes to be the lawful commander.
Speaker 8 (11:00):
Talking about the election, my question is would you use
our military to take over Greenland or an ally of Denmark?
Speaker 3 (11:13):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
One of the things that President Trump is so good
at is never strategically tipping his hand and so I
would never in this public forum give one way or
another direct orders the president in any context.
Speaker 8 (11:24):
That sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out
such an order to basically invade Greenland.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Mister he says, was you shoot Greenlanders in the legs
if you invaded and they protest? Senator, that's a ridiculous
I can only assume you would shoot Greenlanders in their legs.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
You know what's against the law to be drunk in Greenland.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
But you, having shot a Greenlander in the legs, get
drunk and come on to her.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
Would you secu pass a drunk Greenlander who was limping
along having been shot in the leg.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Have you in the past answer the question?
Speaker 4 (12:12):
I just love how she borderline sounds drunk and goes
you understand it against the rule to be drunk. I
realize that's the way she talks. But yeah, she did
something a little drunk. You know you're not supposed to
drink the work, right, She got a just a nit
wit at age seventy seven. Now we're taking ridiculous grand
standing questions. What do we where's the greatest superpower on Earth?
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Act like it?
Speaker 4 (12:37):
Ninety nine percent of hearings are our grand standing performative
bs for talk radio to mock one side or the other.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
I do want to hear the Tim Kaine stuff. It's
kind of long.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (12:49):
He's the senator from wherever he was Hitlar Glint's running mate.
You might remember him.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Nobody cares Virginia maybe.
Speaker 3 (12:55):
Or remember they featured him on Saturday Night Live a
couple of weeks ago. It was hilarious. Nobody remembered who
he was. That was the whole point.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Anyway, he really gets into Hegzeth's personal life.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
And we're going to play that for you.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
Come up.
Speaker 4 (13:11):
The bit on SNL real quickly is they had a
game show and they played a show to tweet from
one of the contestants that said, this is the most
important election of our lifetime.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
Who's with me?
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Back in twenty sixteen for a Democrat who was voting
for Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, And then they marched
out Tim Kine, the real Tim Kaine. Ones announce said
who is this? And they had no idea. I had
no idea as a political junkie. That's how quickly you
forget the most important election of our lifetime participants. Anyway,
Tim Kaine, who's still a senator apparently was questioning Pete
(13:45):
Hegseeth about his personal life and trying to make this
a reason not to have him be Secretary of Defense.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
Thank you, mister hegg Seth.
Speaker 9 (13:53):
I'm looking forward to this opportunity to talk. I want
to return to the incident that you referenced a minute ago,
that he in Monterey, California, in October twenty seventeen. At
that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct,
I believe so, And you had just fathered a child
by a woman who would later become your.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Third wife, correct, Senator.
Speaker 6 (14:15):
I was falsely charged, fully investigated, and completely cleared.
Speaker 9 (14:20):
So you think you are completely cleared because you committed
no crime, that's your definition of cleared. You had just
fathered a child two months before by a woman that
was not your wife. I am shocked that you would
stand here and say you are completely cleared. Can you
so casually cheat on a second wife and sheet on
the mother of a child who had been born two
(14:42):
months before, and you tell us you are completely cleared?
Speaker 6 (14:45):
So how was that a complete clear Senator? Her child's
name is Gwendolen Hope hag Seth, and she's a child
of God, and she's seven years old, and you cheated
on the mother of that child less than two months
after that daughter was born, didn't you?
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Those were false charges?
Speaker 6 (15:01):
Well, no, fully investigated, and I was completely cleared.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
And I am so useful in the marriage. I have
to decide.
Speaker 9 (15:08):
You've admitted that you had sex at that hotel in
October twenty seventeen. You said it was consensual. Isn't that
correct anything. You've admitted that it was consensual and you
were still married and you.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
Just had a child by another.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Wow, again, how do.
Speaker 6 (15:24):
You explain your completely false charges against me? You fully
investigated and.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I was completely clear.
Speaker 9 (15:29):
You have admitted that you had sex while you were
married to wife two, after you just had fathered a
child by wife three.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
You've admitted that.
Speaker 9 (15:37):
Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would
be disqualifying to be secretary defense, wouldn't it?
Speaker 2 (15:43):
It was a false claim?
Speaker 3 (15:44):
Then in a false claim.
Speaker 9 (15:45):
Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would
be disqualifying to be a secretary of defense, wouldn't it?
Speaker 6 (15:53):
That was a false claim.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
So you're talking about a hypothetical.
Speaker 9 (15:56):
So you can't tell me whether someone who is committed
a sexual assault is disqualified from being a Secretary of Defense.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
I know, in my instance, and I'm talking about my
instance only, it was a false claim, but you acknowledge it.
Speaker 9 (16:11):
But you acknowledge that you cheated on your wife, and
that you cheated on the woman by whom you had
just fathered a child.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
You have ad met at that. I will allow your
words to speak for them.
Speaker 9 (16:22):
You're not retracting that today.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
That's good.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Wow oof wow.
Speaker 4 (16:27):
So he's got a very ugly don't approve of it
personal life obviously.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Oh yeah, that's been pretty well conceited by all he
ran around.
Speaker 3 (16:37):
This isn't new information.
Speaker 4 (16:38):
But he could have responded with, so are you arguing
Bill Clinton should have never have been president? Or I
know you went to Harvard John F. Kennedy's School of Government.
Should his name be taken off that building? I mean,
my lifestyle is not much different than their lifestyle. I
know you wouldn't say that, but it's true.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Or yeah and absolutely throw in And I regret the
way I acted. I was more interested in my desires
than my responsibilities as the young men. I've changed completely.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
That's some ugly stuff there.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
That his wife's business, but it's current wife didn't really
dig hearing it either. We had a little more of
this and other stuff on the way Liz.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Warren Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
I love my country, Senator, and I've dedicated.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
My life to the war fighters.
Speaker 6 (17:23):
People see me as someone who hosts a morning show
on television, but people that really know me know where
my heart's at. It's with the guys in this audience
who've had my back and I've had theirs. We've been
in some of the darkest and most difficult places you
can ever be in. You come back a different person,
(17:45):
and only by the grace of God am I.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Here before you today.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
I'm doing this job for them, thank all of them.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
And I'm getting drilled and insulted by a bunch of
rich halfwits who the most difficult thing they ever done
is accepted their phony master's degree.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Mark Levin tweeted out, is herono part of an S
and L skit agreed, We played that a little bit earlier.
If you missed it, get the podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Yeah, yeah, I wish there had been more of her.
She was so funny. Unintentionally speaking. Speaking of unintentionally funny,
you've got the beer swinging fake Indian from Massachusetts or
wherever she's from. Elizabeth Warren. She's a Havid academic. She
is in favor of all things progressive. She has a
(18:35):
problem with the actual fighting man. Pete Hagsith. I like
this conversation, though, I'm glad it's taking place. Seventy nine Michael,
page fourty eight of.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Your book, you claim that women should not be in
combat roles meant because men are distracted by women. And
then ten weeks ago you appeared on the Sean Ryan
Show and said, I'm straight up just saying should not
have women in combat rules. Now, I presume you recall
(19:04):
making all these statements.
Speaker 6 (19:07):
Senator, I'm not familiar with arcle you're pointing to in
twenty thirteen, but it underscores my argument completely. It is
in that twenty thirteen argument I was talking about standard.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
I stand up there.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
What it's always been about, you have the same fight
has always.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
Been about, So did you directly.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
We've got the video. We're happy to show it. But
I want to be clear here. For twelve years you
were quite open about your views, and your views were
consistently the same. Women are inferiors, soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen
and guardians. And in case anyone missed the point, and
these are your words from ten weeks ago. Women absolutely,
(19:46):
straight up should not be permitted to serve in combat.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
And I notice on each.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
Of these quotes those are said without qualification. It's not
by how much you can lift or how fast you
can run. They don't belong in combat, period, or your
words straight up. And then on November ninth, twenty twenty four,
just thirty two days after your last public comment saying
(20:13):
that women absolutely should not be in comment, you declared
that quote, some of our greatest warriors are women, and
you support having them serve in combat. Now, that is
a very very big about face in a very very
(20:33):
short period of time. So help me understand, mister hag said,
what extraordinary event happened in that thirty two day period
that made you change the core values you had expressed
for the preceding twelve years.
Speaker 6 (20:56):
Senator again, I very much appreciate you bringing up my
comment from twenty thirteen, because for me, this issue has
always been about standards. And unfortunately, because of some of
the people that have been in four years, stop have driven.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
Seen you so and I have the answer. Actually, he
Pete's not going to give it. The reason why he
change his opinion was Jony Ernst, the female senator from Iowa,
who is a Republican, who was very unhappy with those
things that I think he actually believes, and he needs
fifty Republican votes to get confirmed, and he is.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Trying to get hers.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
I think he believes that women in combat are a
distraction and make it more difficult to have an effective
fighting for us. I don't have any way to speak
to that. I think it makes perfectly good sense his theory,
but I don't know that's true or not. I've never
experienced it myself well and honestly.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
It's it's it's at once a lazy argument an incredibly
good argument, Senator. For all of human history, mankind has
not put women into combat except in very, very rare circumstances.
I mean, the numbers are tiny historically speaking, for a
number of reasons, including standards, but also because women are
too valuable to the society. If you want ten babies
(22:16):
to be.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Had this Handmaid's tale, okay, here we go.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
If you want ten babies this year, you need ten women.
You need a dude.
Speaker 4 (22:27):
By the way, that's the part that made me grown
out loud. At Gladiator two, they're opening scene they had
to have a chick warrior who was kicking ass.
Speaker 3 (22:35):
Like, come don it, you're trying too hardier.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Oh goodness sakes pre historic.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Back in the Roman days, that wasn't happening.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
It's not hard to imagine it as possibly being true
that to have one woman in a group of fifteen
guys presents more obstacles than it's worth. It's not difficult
for me to understand even if she's.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
Qualified, like physically can do the job right, it's just
and this is the difference in orientation between Liz Warren
and her type and more ours and Pete Hexas's is
the only thing that matters. Well, okay, let me rephrase it.
The first question must be effectiveness. It must be the
(23:27):
result period before we discuss anything else. We discuss the
result of having that woman in a combat unit, because
it's not always going to be disruptive necessarily, but you've
got to discuss in terms of combat readiness and effectiveness.
How does it affect it. Now, if you say it
affects it significantly, well then that's the end of the discussion.
(23:51):
Even if it's it affects it significantly a smallish percentage
of the time we're done talking here. From my point
of view, Now, if it's a very minor difference in effectiveness,
then okay, I'm willing to say, all right, what do
we gain by doing that?
Speaker 4 (24:08):
Well, you gain by in ferry you would double the
pool of people you can choose warriors from. It's probably
not double because the percentage of women that can physically
do it would not be as high as men, but
you greatly enhance the pool of potential great warriors if
you allow women.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
Well, I would suggest not to quibble, but if you
kept the same standards as Pete is advocating, you would
increase the pool slightly.
Speaker 4 (24:36):
Yeah, I don't know that the current standards Tom Cotton
was talking about aren't very strict.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Running at two miles and twenty two minutes, for instance.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Can you get off a couch and walk swiftly? Yes? Ah? Yeah, yeah. Well,
putting aside the fact that a lot of this questioning
is is blatantly unfair or irrelevant, and not all of it,
but they got to figure out who this guy is
and what sort of character he hasn't and there are
(25:06):
gonna be some embarrassing and tough questions. I'm not gonna
go full on, you know, one sided partisan on this one,
but I just.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Feel like you did a bit ago where we got
to keep the women back to have ten babies each.
Speaker 3 (25:16):
Whatever. Whatever you're talking about, it's just been discussed that roughly.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
That's roughly correct. Yeah. No, I'm glad these discussions are
being had. Anytime they can be had publicly and have
America's attention drawn to them, I think that's a good thing.
Otherwise China is gonna whoop our ass.
Speaker 3 (25:31):
Well, do you agree with me?
Speaker 4 (25:32):
I think Pete believes women shouldn't be in combat roles
because it doesn't it's more of a negative than a positive.
But he has he feels like he had to abandon
that position for whatever reason, for Jony Ernst at least.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think there could be some clarification.
I mean, if a woman's like a fabulous drone pilot,
is that quote unquote in combat?
Speaker 3 (25:59):
Good question.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
You're killed, folks, you're in combat. I would think, so,
how about a fighter pilot because Joni was a pilot?
Correct or am I misremembering? I might be thinking of
somebody else. I apologize. But fighter pilot, okay with that.
It's when you get into infantry and you know our
artillery groups, squads, you know that I have problems with
(26:24):
whish we get again, but again I will leave. I
will happily leave that to the experts and not just
civilians spouting off opinions based on their beliefs about you know,
pie in the sky ideals for society. The military is
not a social experiment, right.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
It's amazing that we still can't have these conversations without
just getting to the that group of twenty humans over there,
are they going to be a more lethal fighting force
with a woman or two or without the end? And
then somebody honestly answered that question, and then whichever gonna
make it the most lethal, Let's do that. If making
(27:03):
it all women makes it more lethal, let's do that.
Speaker 3 (27:05):
I don't care. I just wanted to beat the Chinese
when the US HiT's the fan, right.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
I'm reminded of that piece I read earlier, and we
were talking about about Tanashi Coats and how the romantic
point of view is just about your feelings and the
facts and figures and effectiveness. Why are you denying my truth?
I know I'm right, and I don't care what your
facts are. We can't have that sort of person running
(27:32):
our military. That please, the grown ups are required.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
How about that team kine stuff.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
Another thing I'm surprised we haven't worked out by twenty
twenty five where we've just decided we're not gonna care
if guys cheat on their wives and that sort of
stuff that doesn't have anything to do with the job.
Or do we care? I mean, why can't we just
figure that out once and for all.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Oh, we have. If it's the other guys, it matters completely,
it's incredibly important. If it's our guy, it's irrelevant.
Speaker 4 (28:05):
Seventy seven million people just dond voted for Donald Trump
knowing exactly what kind of guy is when it comes
to women.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
Yeah, I think the difference there is it's a binary choice. Probably, sure, sure, yeah, yeah,
I absolutely see your point. At the same time, it
feels kind of case by case ish to me. Okay,
I mean, it's not a sin to have an unhappy
marriage and before the paperwork's done, maybe you've got a
girlfriend or a boyfriend. Well, according to some people, it
(28:35):
is a sin. But you know, in my world, I
get that it's fine. If you're like abusive and you know,
I don't love If I found out a friend of
mine had, for instance, produced a child with soon to
be wife number three while still married to wife number two,
(29:03):
and was stopping strangers in hotels.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
Who was also married. The that woman was married and
her husband was upstairs with the kids, that's a horrible story.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
You almost need a chart, like we're doing a murder podcast.
But anyway, story with her kids upstairs and her husband's
in the host yeah, same hotel room. Yeah, but anyway. Uh,
if I found that that about a person, I would
definitely think, oh boy, Okay, I know what sort of
fell I'm dealing with here, right, case by case basis,
(29:34):
I don't like his chances at all for a variety
of reasons. Okay, but I respect Pete hegseeth, and I
value his voice. Well, I think, just having looked at
the various like modern Republican senators in which way they're leaning,
I don't like his chances.
Speaker 4 (29:49):
I think Fetterman hinted he's a yes. So then you
only need to get to forty nine Republican senators right
if yes, but there are according to Mark Alprin, yeah, yesterday,
a dozen pretty close to hard nos among the Republicans,
which is way more than would doomi, which includes Mitch
McConnell and a variety of other people whoever replaced Mitt Romney.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
You know who doesn't have a chance. I'll tell you
next Okay.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
We'll finish strong next day.
Speaker 10 (30:17):
Here, it's looking like the Supreme Court is going to
uphold the ban on TikTok starting this weekend. If the
band goes into effect, Americans can still see tiktoks, but
the apple will stop working due to a lack of updates.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
It's pretty much what happened to President Biden. Yeah, I
didn't know that till yesterday.
Speaker 4 (30:38):
The TikTok app, it doesn't like disappear from your phone
or whatever, and you can still get it. It's just
they're not going to be able to update it or anything.
And over time it will work, it'll get bugs, and
your new phone won't be.
Speaker 3 (30:51):
Able to use it, so it'll kind of phase out.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Interesting again, as Jimmy Fallon said, they're starting this weekend,
but it's not a hard cut off all of a sudden,
TikTok dis beers this weekend.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
No, you just can't download the app. You could still
access it online theoretically. I don't know how that differs
the experience from having the actual app. I guess people,
I was listening to a technical explanation of the how
it develops bugs and win and then eventually it doesn't
work at all. Stuff. But it was just it was
a very dry and be over my head.
Speaker 4 (31:19):
I'm guessing there'll be a lot of reporting next week
about how well it is or isn't still working on
people's phones.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Yeah, how about your youngsters. You get your homework done,
learn to read and write.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
To go on a date, Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
Yeah, yeah, go have a couple of beers by the overpass.
Don't drive, just go live life. Oh my god. So
you gave a great it's so cool, it really is.
Oh that's you gave a great tease.
Speaker 3 (31:46):
And I don't remember what it was.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Oh it was. Which nominee for the cabinet is absolutely
not going to make it? And that would be, uh,
the perhaps highest profile guy, Robert F. Kennedy Junior. I'm
looking at a pretty good list of you know how
many yes's and no's and maybe's probably there are in
(32:11):
the Senate, and he has a whole lot of people
who are barely even able to say, yeah, we'll give
him a good look. A lot of a lot of Republicans,
modern Republicans are very hesitant or very skeptical about him.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
So you're predicting he goes down.
Speaker 2 (32:31):
I am. I am indeed, so how I'm not rooting
for it, per se. It'll be interesting to see. And again,
he is a very bright guy. So how the hearings
go nobody knows, but I don't love his chance.
Speaker 3 (32:40):
How will Maha react to that?
Speaker 2 (32:45):
Make America healthy? And yeah, they will react badly and angrily.
Speaker 4 (32:50):
Practically everybody I know who's into that, the sort of
thing has Maga and Maha in their.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
In their feeds.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Thought. I'm strong, I'm strong.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Get ready with Katie Green and.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Strong.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Here's your host for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Hey, let's get a final thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap things up for the day. Let's begin
with our technical director, Michaelangelo. Michael, what's your final thought?
I agree with you guys. Young people, if you're listening, go.
Speaker 9 (33:27):
Find that cute girl, take her out for ice cream,
Go to a square dance, Get out.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
There, Get out there.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Katie Greener esteemed Newswoman. As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 6 (33:39):
I just came across an interesting fact.
Speaker 4 (33:41):
They've now arrested forty people that were looting these fires
in LA not one of them from the area.
Speaker 3 (33:48):
They all traveled there for the looting.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
Wow, they hang horse thieves or they used to just
say stand story. Yeah yeah, indeed, My god, there can't
be a sanctions severe enough Jackie.
Speaker 4 (34:01):
Final thought, This might be all you need to know
about politics. One of the Democratic senators who's already announced
he's a no vote, Senator Richard Blumenthal, for decades lied
about being a Vietnam vet, then we all found out
he wasn't, and he's still a US senator and gets
to grill the potential sect deaf.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 2 (34:24):
My final thought. I'm looking at the handicapping from the
various nominees, including Christy Nome, and the first thing they
mentioned is that she fatally shot her dog. Credit cricket.
Tell you what you need to shoot your dog, Go
ahead and shoot it, but don't put it in your
buck armstrong.
Speaker 4 (34:39):
Yeah, he's wrapping up another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
I'll see it tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
God bless America.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
I'm strong and Getty. He has to stop like the
day before yesterday. Yep, absolutely, are you sure? Oh dead shure.
I've been thinking that we really all need a trendous hug.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Get the hell out of here. Do you think it's
a little ot?
Speaker 2 (35:01):
It's one hundred on the crazy meter? Are you shuting?
So let's go with a bang. I think our generation
is very aware, like a lot of us are activists,
and I think that awareness influences our drinking habits. On
that high note, bye bye 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):
Arm Strong and Getty and he.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Armstrong and Getty jump ahead a day. I just saw
Senator Marco Rubio.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
Whose confermation hearing is tomorrow for Secretary of State. We'll
say in his opening remarks that China has lied and
cheated its way to superpower status at the expense of
the United States, according to.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
The syllable truth.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Absolutely man, I love a secretary of state coming in that.
That's his opening point of view. That's freaking awesome.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Time to call a spade a spade and a communist
a communist.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
But for today, makeup America, grow up, stand up, get up.
Speaker 4 (00:58):
For today it pull your socks up. As John Lennon right,
Pete heggsth is trying to be confirmed as Trump's choice
for Secretary of Defense. And in cases they don't follow
this sort of stuff very closely, it's worth knowing that
for a lot of the media and the politicians themselves.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
It's just yar side or boo our side.
Speaker 4 (01:24):
They just want to shoot down whoever the other side
nominates with some sort of feeling that if they have
to go to their second choice, you've won something. Though
I haven't seen that displayed in my life on any
level that it really has any lasting impact. But so
they would feel like MSNBC and the Democrat senators would
feel like they won something if they could stop Hezeth
(01:47):
from being nominated. Okay, fine, just more than I think
than the particular issues of the person that they're growing,
don't you think.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Oh yeah, absolutely, it's just posting a win for our side,
even if, as you indicate, the wind doesn't do you
any good.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Yeah, just go to a different choice.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
And and and they and they are playing out the
president's policy anyway as secretary of State or sect deef
or whatever. If they didn't, they get fired by their boss. Right,
So where should we start on some of that? They're
in the third hour of the Hegxeth hearings. That would
be a grueling day, man, And I I don't know
(02:27):
how you not lose your temper. That'd be the main
thing I'd be saying there, don't get angry, don't get angry,
don't get angry. That's I'd be saying to myself. Stay cool,
stay cool, stay cool. As they call you all kinds
of names and try to drag you into not into
losing your cool.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
That's one of their goals, right, yeah, although it depends.
You know, some some can get that boil at just
the right level. But it's a it's a dangerous game
to play. You don't me.
Speaker 4 (02:52):
I'd go with you, you pizza half, you mother plag
and try to climb over the table, and then people
have to hold me back. That's why I said some
too specific.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
He Hanson, where do we want to start in these?
Speaker 4 (03:03):
Okay, here we go, Here we go, Pete exit being
questioned by somebody.
Speaker 5 (03:07):
So what we're talking about here specifically is women in
ground combat roles in jobs like infantrymen or artillerymen or
special forces. Until about ten years ago, that wasn't the case.
Under Secretary of Panetta, those roles were opened up to
women to serve in. As President Trump indicated all that
(03:28):
he plans to rescind or alter that guidance.
Speaker 6 (03:32):
You're correct to point out, Senator, that these are the
decisions that the commander in chief will have the prerogative
to make. He has not indicated me to me that
he has plans to change whether or not women.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Would have access to these roles.
Speaker 6 (03:45):
However, I would point out ensuring that standards are equal
and high is of importance to him and great importance
to me, because in those ground combat roles, what is
true is that the weight of the ruck on your
back doesn't change, the weight of the one to five
to five round that you have to carry doesn't change,
the weight of the two forty provo machine gun you
(04:06):
might have to carry doesn't change. And so whether it's
a man or a woman, they have to meet the
same high standards, and Senator, in any place where those
things have been eroded or in courses, criteria have been
changed in order to meet quotas, racial quotas, or gender quotas.
That is putting a focus on something other than readiness, standards, meritocracy,
(04:32):
and lethality. So that's the kind of review I'm talking about,
not whether women have access to ground combat.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
R So, what percentage of America would agree with what
he just said?
Speaker 2 (04:41):
There huge, huge, huge.
Speaker 4 (04:43):
Absolute majority, without a doubt. I'm looking at Byron.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
York from the Washington If you were to poll people
who served in combat and therefore really know what they're
talking about, it would be unanimous Byron York.
Speaker 4 (04:54):
Washington Examiner says that Kristen's Jilibrand as her attempts failed.
She's the demoocratic senator from New York. Let's hear a
little of her.
Speaker 7 (05:02):
Everything you've said in these public statements is politics. I
don't want women.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
I don't want moms. What's wrong with a mom?
Speaker 7 (05:08):
By the way, once you have babies, you therefore are
no longer able to be lethal. I mean, you're basically
saying women after they have children can't ever serve in
the military in a combat role. It's a silly thing
to say. It's a silly thing to say. Beneath the
position that you are aspiring to to denigrate LGBTQ service
members is a mistake. If you are a sharpshooter, you're
(05:29):
as lethal regardless of what your gender identity is, regardless
of who you love.
Speaker 6 (05:33):
Senator, as the President has stated, I don't disagree with
the overturn of Donuts Hotel Great.
Speaker 7 (05:42):
Because I don't want you thinking can't serve if your
mom can't serve your LGBTQ.
Speaker 2 (05:48):
He's like, who are you yelling at? And why?
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Well, okay, then all right, So I would just say, hey,
Democrats keep thinking that that Twitter worldview is the winning argument.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Do it go, take it to the mat.
Speaker 4 (06:05):
Just keep pushing it, cycle after cycle. That's all about
LGBTQ and identity, politics and everything.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
Keep doing it. I'm all for you. I'm on your side.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
Kirsten Gillibrand is the classic mid wit. I think that's
the term we're supposed to use these days. Hl Menkin
would have called her a mediocrity. Whichever term searchs you
suits you the best.
Speaker 4 (06:27):
Maybe I think that's probably true. I remember when she
ran for president and I wasn't impressed. But she's also
trying to get re elected in New York where a
lot of her constituents agree with what she just said,
and that's her job.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
So staying in office is her job.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Again, to your point, her job is not to figure
out who would be the best second f right. She
probably didn't even consider that.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
So here he is, how do you say the name
Herno Rono Herono? But this is where they start getting
into his personal life and questioning him on haven't heard this.
Speaker 8 (07:00):
Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made
unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or
physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature. No, Senator,
have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement
relating to this kind of conduct.
Speaker 6 (07:19):
Senator, I was falsely accused in October of twenty seventeen.
It was fully investigated, and I was completely cleared.
Speaker 8 (07:29):
I don't think how completely cleared is accurate, but the.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Fact is that.
Speaker 8 (07:36):
Your own lawyer said that you entered into an NDA
paid a person who accused you of raping her some
of money to make sure that she did not file
a complaint. Moving on, as secretary, you will be in
charge of maintaining good order and discipline by enforcing the
(07:57):
Uniform Code of Military Justice you see in addition to
the sexual assault allegations. And by the way, the answer
to my second question should have been yes. I have
read multiple reports of your regularly being drunk at work,
including by people who worked with your Fox News.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Do you know that being drunk.
Speaker 8 (08:17):
At work is prohibited for service members under the UCMJ.
Speaker 6 (08:22):
Senator, those are multiple false, anonymous reports pedaled by NBCD.
You know that directly to the dozens of men and women.
Speaker 8 (08:34):
I worry I'm not hearing that.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
My question.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
I like the question, do you know you're not supposed
to be drunk at work. Yeah, yeah, I know.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
Mazy Herono is a seventy seven year old progressive crank.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
So I just I've just looked ahead on this. This
gets into whether or not he'd shoot protesters in the legs,
So I want to hear this.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
The next one.
Speaker 8 (09:00):
In June of twenty twenty, then President Trump directed former
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper to shoot protesters in the
legs in downtown d C.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
An order.
Speaker 8 (09:11):
Secretary Esper refused to comply with would you carry out
such an order from President Trump?
Speaker 6 (09:19):
Senator I was in the Washington DC National Guard unit
that was in Lafayette Square during those would you carry.
Speaker 8 (09:25):
Out shoe protest in the legs?
Speaker 6 (09:29):
I saw as the service agents to get injured, b
rids trying to jump over the fence, se church on fire,
and destruyer.
Speaker 8 (09:37):
That sounds to me that you will comply with such
an order, you will shoot protesters in the leg moved on.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Hawaii. I've been to Hawaii. I've enjoyed Hawaii. I've talked
to Hawaiians. You can do better than that half wit
elect somebody who's got like two thirds of a wit
looking up at Senator Warren. Elizabeth Warren, I've been looking
(10:06):
waiting for her today. She says, I want to pick
up on the questioning of Senator Herono. So that's exciting.
So hey, take this further down the road. Well, we
have more Mazie Herono, who I'm actually enjoying in a
perverse sort of way. Uh seventy six. I think it's
clear what she's talking about, but this is this is great.
Speaker 8 (10:25):
President Luck has attacked our allies in recent weeks, refusing
to rule out using military force to take over Greenland
and the Panama Canal, and they threatening to take to
make Canada the fifty first state. Would you carry out
an order from President Trump to seize Greenland, a territory
of our NATO ally Denmark, by force? Or how would
(10:49):
you comply with an order to take over the Panama Canal?
Speaker 3 (10:54):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (10:54):
I will emphasize that President Trump received seventy seven million
votes to be the lawful commander.
Speaker 8 (11:00):
Talking about the election, my question is would you use
our military to take over Greenland or an ally of Denmark?
Speaker 3 (11:13):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
One of the things that President Trump is so good
at is never strategically tipping his hand and so I
would never in this public forum give one way or
another direct orders the president in any context.
Speaker 8 (11:24):
That sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out
such an order to basically invade Greenland.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Mister he says, was you shoot Greenlanders in the legs
if you invaded and they protest? Senator, that's a ridiculous
I can only assume you would shoot Greenlanders in their legs.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
You know what's against the law to be drunk in Greenland.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
But you, having shot a Greenlander in the legs, get
drunk and come on to her.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
Would you secu pass a drunk Greenlander who was limping
along having been shot in the leg.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Have you in the past answer the question?
Speaker 4 (12:12):
I just love how she borderline sounds drunk and goes
you understand it against the rule to be drunk. I
realize that's the way she talks. But yeah, she did
something a little drunk. You know you're not supposed to
drink the work, right, She got a just a nit
wit at age seventy seven. Now we're taking ridiculous grand
standing questions. What do we where's the greatest superpower on Earth?
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Act like it?
Speaker 4 (12:37):
Ninety nine percent of hearings are our grand standing performative
bs for talk radio to mock one side or the other.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
I do want to hear the Tim Kaine stuff. It's
kind of long.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (12:49):
He's the senator from wherever he was Hitlar Glint's running mate.
You might remember him.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Nobody cares Virginia maybe.
Speaker 3 (12:55):
Or remember they featured him on Saturday Night Live a
couple of weeks ago. It was hilarious. Nobody remembered who
he was. That was the whole point.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Anyway, he really gets into Hegzeth's personal life.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
And we're going to play that for you.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
Come up.
Speaker 4 (13:11):
The bit on SNL real quickly is they had a
game show and they played a show to tweet from
one of the contestants that said, this is the most
important election of our lifetime.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
Who's with me?
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Back in twenty sixteen for a Democrat who was voting
for Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, And then they marched
out Tim Kine, the real Tim Kaine. Ones announce said
who is this? And they had no idea. I had
no idea as a political junkie. That's how quickly you
forget the most important election of our lifetime participants. Anyway,
Tim Kaine, who's still a senator apparently was questioning Pete
(13:45):
Hegseeth about his personal life and trying to make this
a reason not to have him be Secretary of Defense.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
Thank you, mister hegg Seth.
Speaker 9 (13:53):
I'm looking forward to this opportunity to talk. I want
to return to the incident that you referenced a minute ago,
that he in Monterey, California, in October twenty seventeen. At
that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct,
I believe so, And you had just fathered a child
by a woman who would later become your.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Third wife, correct, Senator.
Speaker 6 (14:15):
I was falsely charged, fully investigated, and completely cleared.
Speaker 9 (14:20):
So you think you are completely cleared because you committed
no crime, that's your definition of cleared. You had just
fathered a child two months before by a woman that
was not your wife. I am shocked that you would
stand here and say you are completely cleared. Can you
so casually cheat on a second wife and sheet on
the mother of a child who had been born two
(14:42):
months before, and you tell us you are completely cleared?
Speaker 6 (14:45):
So how was that a complete clear Senator? Her child's
name is Gwendolen Hope hag Seth, and she's a child
of God, and she's seven years old, and you cheated
on the mother of that child less than two months
after that daughter was born, didn't you?
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Those were false charges?
Speaker 6 (15:01):
Well, no, fully investigated, and I was completely cleared.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
And I am so useful in the marriage. I have
to decide.
Speaker 9 (15:08):
You've admitted that you had sex at that hotel in
October twenty seventeen. You said it was consensual. Isn't that
correct anything. You've admitted that it was consensual and you
were still married and you.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
Just had a child by another.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Wow, again, how do.
Speaker 6 (15:24):
You explain your completely false charges against me? You fully
investigated and.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I was completely clear.
Speaker 9 (15:29):
You have admitted that you had sex while you were
married to wife two, after you just had fathered a
child by wife three.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
You've admitted that.
Speaker 9 (15:37):
Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would
be disqualifying to be secretary defense, wouldn't it?
Speaker 2 (15:43):
It was a false claim?
Speaker 3 (15:44):
Then in a false claim.
Speaker 9 (15:45):
Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would
be disqualifying to be a secretary of defense, wouldn't it?
Speaker 6 (15:53):
That was a false claim.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
So you're talking about a hypothetical.
Speaker 9 (15:56):
So you can't tell me whether someone who is committed
a sexual assault is disqualified from being a Secretary of Defense.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Senator.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
I know, in my instance, and I'm talking about my
instance only, it was a false claim, but you acknowledge it.
Speaker 9 (16:11):
But you acknowledge that you cheated on your wife, and
that you cheated on the woman by whom you had
just fathered a child.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
You have ad met at that. I will allow your
words to speak for them.
Speaker 9 (16:22):
You're not retracting that today.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
That's good.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Wow oof wow.
Speaker 4 (16:27):
So he's got a very ugly don't approve of it
personal life obviously.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Oh yeah, that's been pretty well conceited by all he
ran around.
Speaker 3 (16:37):
This isn't new information.
Speaker 4 (16:38):
But he could have responded with, so are you arguing
Bill Clinton should have never have been president? Or I
know you went to Harvard John F. Kennedy's School of Government.
Should his name be taken off that building? I mean,
my lifestyle is not much different than their lifestyle. I
know you wouldn't say that, but it's true.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Or yeah and absolutely throw in And I regret the
way I acted. I was more interested in my desires
than my responsibilities as the young men. I've changed completely.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
That's some ugly stuff there.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
That his wife's business, but it's current wife didn't really
dig hearing it either. We had a little more of
this and other stuff on the way Liz.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Warren Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
I love my country, Senator, and I've dedicated.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
My life to the war fighters.
Speaker 6 (17:23):
People see me as someone who hosts a morning show
on television, but people that really know me know where
my heart's at. It's with the guys in this audience
who've had my back and I've had theirs. We've been
in some of the darkest and most difficult places you
can ever be in. You come back a different person,
(17:45):
and only by the grace of God am I.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Here before you today.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
I'm doing this job for them, thank all of them.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
And I'm getting drilled and insulted by a bunch of
rich halfwits who the most difficult thing they ever done
is accepted their phony master's degree.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Mark Levin tweeted out, is herono part of an S
and L skit agreed, We played that a little bit earlier.
If you missed it, get the podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Yeah, yeah, I wish there had been more of her.
She was so funny. Unintentionally speaking. Speaking of unintentionally funny,
you've got the beer swinging fake Indian from Massachusetts or
wherever she's from. Elizabeth Warren. She's a Havid academic. She
is in favor of all things progressive. She has a
(18:35):
problem with the actual fighting man. Pete Hagsith. I like
this conversation, though, I'm glad it's taking place. Seventy nine Michael,
page fourty eight of.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Your book, you claim that women should not be in
combat roles meant because men are distracted by women. And
then ten weeks ago you appeared on the Sean Ryan
Show and said, I'm straight up just saying should not
have women in combat rules. Now, I presume you recall
(19:04):
making all these statements.
Speaker 6 (19:07):
Senator, I'm not familiar with arcle you're pointing to in
twenty thirteen, but it underscores my argument completely. It is
in that twenty thirteen argument I was talking about standard.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
I stand up there.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
What it's always been about, you have the same fight
has always.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
Been about, So did you directly.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
We've got the video. We're happy to show it. But
I want to be clear here. For twelve years you
were quite open about your views, and your views were
consistently the same. Women are inferiors, soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen
and guardians. And in case anyone missed the point, and
these are your words from ten weeks ago. Women absolutely,
(19:46):
straight up should not be permitted to serve in combat.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
And I notice on each.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
Of these quotes those are said without qualification. It's not
by how much you can lift or how fast you
can run. They don't belong in combat, period, or your
words straight up. And then on November ninth, twenty twenty four,
just thirty two days after your last public comment saying
(20:13):
that women absolutely should not be in comment, you declared
that quote, some of our greatest warriors are women, and
you support having them serve in combat. Now, that is
a very very big about face in a very very
(20:33):
short period of time. So help me understand, mister hag said,
what extraordinary event happened in that thirty two day period
that made you change the core values you had expressed
for the preceding twelve years.
Speaker 6 (20:56):
Senator again, I very much appreciate you bringing up my
comment from twenty thirteen, because for me, this issue has
always been about standards. And unfortunately, because of some of
the people that have been in four years, stop have driven.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
Seen you so and I have the answer. Actually, he
Pete's not going to give it. The reason why he
change his opinion was Jony Ernst, the female senator from Iowa,
who is a Republican, who was very unhappy with those
things that I think he actually believes, and he needs
fifty Republican votes to get confirmed, and he is.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Trying to get hers.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
I think he believes that women in combat are a
distraction and make it more difficult to have an effective
fighting for us. I don't have any way to speak
to that. I think it makes perfectly good sense his theory,
but I don't know that's true or not. I've never
experienced it myself well and honestly.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
It's it's it's at once a lazy argument an incredibly
good argument, Senator. For all of human history, mankind has
not put women into combat except in very, very rare circumstances.
I mean, the numbers are tiny historically speaking, for a
number of reasons, including standards, but also because women are
too valuable to the society. If you want ten babies
(22:16):
to be.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Had this Handmaid's tale, okay, here we go.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
If you want ten babies this year, you need ten women.
You need a dude.
Speaker 4 (22:27):
By the way, that's the part that made me grown
out loud. At Gladiator two, they're opening scene they had
to have a chick warrior who was kicking ass.
Speaker 3 (22:35):
Like, come don it, you're trying too hardier.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Oh goodness sakes pre historic.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Back in the Roman days, that wasn't happening.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
It's not hard to imagine it as possibly being true
that to have one woman in a group of fifteen
guys presents more obstacles than it's worth. It's not difficult
for me to understand even if she's.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
Qualified, like physically can do the job right, it's just
and this is the difference in orientation between Liz Warren
and her type and more ours and Pete Hexas's is
the only thing that matters. Well, okay, let me rephrase it.
The first question must be effectiveness. It must be the
(23:27):
result period before we discuss anything else. We discuss the
result of having that woman in a combat unit, because
it's not always going to be disruptive necessarily, but you've
got to discuss in terms of combat readiness and effectiveness.
How does it affect it. Now, if you say it
affects it significantly, well then that's the end of the discussion.
(23:51):
Even if it's it affects it significantly a smallish percentage
of the time we're done talking here. From my point
of view, Now, if it's a very minor difference in effectiveness,
then okay, I'm willing to say, all right, what do
we gain by doing that?
Speaker 4 (24:08):
Well, you gain by in ferry you would double the
pool of people you can choose warriors from. It's probably
not double because the percentage of women that can physically
do it would not be as high as men, but
you greatly enhance the pool of potential great warriors if
you allow women.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
Well, I would suggest not to quibble, but if you
kept the same standards as Pete is advocating, you would
increase the pool slightly.
Speaker 4 (24:36):
Yeah, I don't know that the current standards Tom Cotton
was talking about aren't very strict.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Running at two miles and twenty two minutes, for instance.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Can you get off a couch and walk swiftly? Yes? Ah? Yeah, yeah. Well,
putting aside the fact that a lot of this questioning
is is blatantly unfair or irrelevant, and not all of it,
but they got to figure out who this guy is
and what sort of character he hasn't and there are
(25:06):
gonna be some embarrassing and tough questions. I'm not gonna
go full on, you know, one sided partisan on this one,
but I just.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Feel like you did a bit ago where we got
to keep the women back to have ten babies each.
Speaker 3 (25:16):
Whatever. Whatever you're talking about, it's just been discussed that roughly.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
That's roughly correct. Yeah. No, I'm glad these discussions are
being had. Anytime they can be had publicly and have
America's attention drawn to them, I think that's a good thing.
Otherwise China is gonna whoop our ass.
Speaker 3 (25:31):
Well, do you agree with me?
Speaker 4 (25:32):
I think Pete believes women shouldn't be in combat roles
because it doesn't it's more of a negative than a positive.
But he has he feels like he had to abandon
that position for whatever reason, for Jony Ernst at least.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think there could be some clarification.
I mean, if a woman's like a fabulous drone pilot,
is that quote unquote in combat?
Speaker 3 (25:59):
Good question.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
You're killed, folks, you're in combat. I would think, so,
how about a fighter pilot because Joni was a pilot?
Correct or am I misremembering? I might be thinking of
somebody else. I apologize. But fighter pilot, okay with that.
It's when you get into infantry and you know our
artillery groups, squads, you know that I have problems with
(26:24):
whish we get again, but again I will leave. I
will happily leave that to the experts and not just
civilians spouting off opinions based on their beliefs about you know,
pie in the sky ideals for society. The military is
not a social experiment, right.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
It's amazing that we still can't have these conversations without
just getting to the that group of twenty humans over there,
are they going to be a more lethal fighting force
with a woman or two or without the end? And
then somebody honestly answered that question, and then whichever gonna
make it the most lethal, Let's do that. If making
(27:03):
it all women makes it more lethal, let's do that.
Speaker 3 (27:05):
I don't care. I just wanted to beat the Chinese
when the US HiT's the fan, right.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
I'm reminded of that piece I read earlier, and we
were talking about about Tanashi Coats and how the romantic
point of view is just about your feelings and the
facts and figures and effectiveness. Why are you denying my truth?
I know I'm right, and I don't care what your
facts are. We can't have that sort of person running
(27:32):
our military. That please, the grown ups are required.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
How about that team kine stuff.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
Another thing I'm surprised we haven't worked out by twenty
twenty five where we've just decided we're not gonna care
if guys cheat on their wives and that sort of
stuff that doesn't have anything to do with the job.
Or do we care? I mean, why can't we just
figure that out once and for all.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Oh, we have. If it's the other guys, it matters completely,
it's incredibly important. If it's our guy, it's irrelevant.
Speaker 4 (28:05):
Seventy seven million people just dond voted for Donald Trump
knowing exactly what kind of guy is when it comes
to women.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
Yeah, I think the difference there is it's a binary choice. Probably, sure, sure, yeah, yeah,
I absolutely see your point. At the same time, it
feels kind of case by case ish to me. Okay,
I mean, it's not a sin to have an unhappy
marriage and before the paperwork's done, maybe you've got a
girlfriend or a boyfriend. Well, according to some people, it
(28:35):
is a sin. But you know, in my world, I
get that it's fine. If you're like abusive and you know,
I don't love If I found out a friend of
mine had, for instance, produced a child with soon to
be wife number three while still married to wife number two,
(29:03):
and was stopping strangers in hotels.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
Who was also married. The that woman was married and
her husband was upstairs with the kids, that's a horrible story.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
You almost need a chart, like we're doing a murder podcast.
But anyway, story with her kids upstairs and her husband's
in the host yeah, same hotel room. Yeah, but anyway. Uh,
if I found that that about a person, I would
definitely think, oh boy, Okay, I know what sort of
fell I'm dealing with here, right, case by case basis,
(29:34):
I don't like his chances at all for a variety
of reasons. Okay, but I respect Pete hegseeth, and I
value his voice. Well, I think, just having looked at
the various like modern Republican senators in which way they're leaning,
I don't like his chances.
Speaker 4 (29:49):
I think Fetterman hinted he's a yes. So then you
only need to get to forty nine Republican senators right
if yes, but there are according to Mark Alprin, yeah, yesterday,
a dozen pretty close to hard nos among the Republicans,
which is way more than would doomi, which includes Mitch
McConnell and a variety of other people whoever replaced Mitt Romney.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
You know who doesn't have a chance. I'll tell you
next Okay.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
We'll finish strong next day.
Speaker 10 (30:17):
Here, it's looking like the Supreme Court is going to
uphold the ban on TikTok starting this weekend. If the
band goes into effect, Americans can still see tiktoks, but
the apple will stop working due to a lack of updates.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
It's pretty much what happened to President Biden. Yeah, I
didn't know that till yesterday.
Speaker 4 (30:38):
The TikTok app, it doesn't like disappear from your phone
or whatever, and you can still get it. It's just
they're not going to be able to update it or anything.
And over time it will work, it'll get bugs, and
your new phone won't be.
Speaker 3 (30:51):
Able to use it, so it'll kind of phase out.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Interesting again, as Jimmy Fallon said, they're starting this weekend,
but it's not a hard cut off all of a sudden,
TikTok dis beers this weekend.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
No, you just can't download the app. You could still
access it online theoretically. I don't know how that differs
the experience from having the actual app. I guess people,
I was listening to a technical explanation of the how
it develops bugs and win and then eventually it doesn't
work at all. Stuff. But it was just it was
a very dry and be over my head.
Speaker 4 (31:19):
I'm guessing there'll be a lot of reporting next week
about how well it is or isn't still working on
people's phones.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Yeah, how about your youngsters. You get your homework done,
learn to read and write.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
To go on a date, Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
Yeah, yeah, go have a couple of beers by the overpass.
Don't drive, just go live life. Oh my god. So
you gave a great it's so cool, it really is.
Oh that's you gave a great tease.
Speaker 3 (31:46):
And I don't remember what it was.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Oh it was. Which nominee for the cabinet is absolutely
not going to make it? And that would be, uh,
the perhaps highest profile guy, Robert F. Kennedy Junior. I'm
looking at a pretty good list of you know how
many yes's and no's and maybe's probably there are in
(32:11):
the Senate, and he has a whole lot of people
who are barely even able to say, yeah, we'll give
him a good look. A lot of a lot of Republicans,
modern Republicans are very hesitant or very skeptical about him.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
So you're predicting he goes down.
Speaker 2 (32:31):
I am. I am indeed, so how I'm not rooting
for it, per se. It'll be interesting to see. And again,
he is a very bright guy. So how the hearings
go nobody knows, but I don't love his chance.
Speaker 3 (32:40):
How will Maha react to that?
Speaker 2 (32:45):
Make America healthy? And yeah, they will react badly and angrily.
Speaker 4 (32:50):
Practically everybody I know who's into that, the sort of
thing has Maga and Maha in their.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
In their feeds.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Thought. I'm strong, I'm strong.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Get ready with Katie Green and.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Strong.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Here's your host for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Hey, let's get a final thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap things up for the day. Let's begin
with our technical director, Michaelangelo. Michael, what's your final thought?
I agree with you guys. Young people, if you're listening, go.
Speaker 9 (33:27):
Find that cute girl, take her out for ice cream,
Go to a square dance, Get out.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
There, Get out there.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Katie Greener esteemed Newswoman. As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 6 (33:39):
I just came across an interesting fact.
Speaker 4 (33:41):
They've now arrested forty people that were looting these fires
in LA not one of them from the area.
Speaker 3 (33:48):
They all traveled there for the looting.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
Wow, they hang horse thieves or they used to just
say stand story. Yeah yeah, indeed, My god, there can't
be a sanctions severe enough Jackie.
Speaker 4 (34:01):
Final thought, This might be all you need to know
about politics. One of the Democratic senators who's already announced
he's a no vote, Senator Richard Blumenthal, for decades lied
about being a Vietnam vet, then we all found out
he wasn't, and he's still a US senator and gets
to grill the potential sect deaf.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 2 (34:24):
My final thought. I'm looking at the handicapping from the
various nominees, including Christy Nome, and the first thing they
mentioned is that she fatally shot her dog. Credit cricket.
Tell you what you need to shoot your dog, Go
ahead and shoot it, but don't put it in your
buck armstrong.
Speaker 4 (34:39):
Yeah, he's wrapping up another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
I'll see it tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
God bless America.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
I'm strong and Getty. He has to stop like the
day before yesterday. Yep, absolutely, are you sure? Oh dead shure.
I've been thinking that we really all need a trendous hug.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Get the hell out of here. Do you think it's
a little ot?
Speaker 2 (35:01):
It's one hundred on the crazy meter? Are you shuting?
So let's go with a bang. I think our generation
is very aware, like a lot of us are activists,
and I think that awareness influences our drinking habits. On
that high note, bye bye Armstrong and Getty.
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.