August 14, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- LA street take overs & DC crime stats
- What is a Smart Alec?
- Trump's upcoming meeting with Putin
- People who live to 100
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.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty Armstrong and Getty and he
Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
It's three am Saturday morning in downtown Los Angeles, a
city plagued with street takeovers like this one right in
front of the home of the Los Angeles Lakers. Hundreds
of people block an intersection as drivers performed dangerous donuts
while others throw fireworks into the intersection. Angry neighbors shoot
(00:45):
paintballs that cars parked along the street belonging to the spectators.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Yeah, that's Los Angeles. A lot of people in certain cities.
I think Chicago is certainly LA Not as much San
Francisco now since they voted in a new mayor and
got their act together. But Oakland, various places are like, yeah,
I kind of see some of your stuff about DC.
It seems like it's worse here. Is there anything Trump
can do about here? And he talked yesterday about going
(01:10):
into other cities. There's no, he doesn't have the legal
authority to do that. But uh, yeah, if you're gonna
if you're worried about big cities, they got problems with
crime and in street drug addicts.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I don't think DC ranks at the top.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well it's in the top five actually, but there are
much bigger and more dangerous fish to fry as well.
I agree completely, but I don't know sending the FEDS in.
But anyway, back to.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
The street takeovers in LA.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
If you've never seen this, I mean it's like a massive,
multi multi lane intersection with a crowd of hundreds of
people around, and the guy's doing the smoking tires, wild doughnuts,
barely avoiding hitting the crowd, and the cops don't dare intercede.
There's too many people, too much wildness, so mobs just
take over the city streets for a certain amount of time.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Roll on, Michael, and.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
They aren't the only ones fed up.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
My entire office is absolutely laser focused on going after
these illegal street takeovers.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
New Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hackman says he
will pursue consequences for the drivers, including reckless driving charges
in up to ninety days in jail, as well as
the spectators, threatening jail time in a five hundred dollars
fine just for watching.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
If you want to go ahead and be one of
these drivers in illegal straight takeovers. If you want to
be spectators in illegal streight takeovers, we are going to
hold you accountable. If you're a driver and you want
to see that car crushed, literally crushed as we impound it,
go ahead and test us.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
I don't know I feel about the spectator thing.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
If one of these broke out where I am, I
might want to stand there and watch some people spin around.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
I get a five hundred taket front.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
Yeah, I have a constitutional issue with that. There is
probably a way around it. But the this through the
drivers obviously. I mean, you got a deadly weapon there,
and I would think you get a reckless driving. You
can't afford your insurance anymore. You're done driving right right
(03:12):
one final clip eighty two, please Michael from the Fabulous
Bill Malugin of Fox News.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
These street takeovers have turned deadly before. In twenty twenty two,
nursing student Elizah Wahaka was killed on Christmas Day in
South LA when a car doing donuts lost control and
hit her. The driver was just sentenced last week to
thirteen years in prison.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Okay, Nathan Hawkman's a hero.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
He's trying to clean up la and under the horrific
damage done by the Marxist George Gascone and one hundred
percent in support. Don't crush the cars, sell them. And
my only other quibble was the one Jack brought up.
There's a bit of a constitutional issue.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
With all right?
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Am I there from the beginning and I'm hooting and
hollering and rooting them on? Or did I just wander
by and say what the hell is going on here?
Speaker 2 (04:03):
I'm watching?
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yeah, I'd like to whip up my phone and document
this and send it to my local you know, congressman
or whatever. The other practical difficulty of this, which I
find interesting, is that the mobs have figured out in
watching sports, celebrations or you know, a number of different incidents,
George Floyd, riots, what have you, that if we bring
(04:27):
enough people, the number of personnel in the force it
would take to quell what we're doing, looks too bad
for society to have a stomach enough to do it.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
That sentence was a bit of a train wreck. But
you see what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
If we get big enough, they don't have the guts
to get big enough to stop the lawlessness. So the
only thing we need to do is bring mass. We
need to bring a lot of people. That's called a
breakdown of society. So what that's called with Hamas rally,
we're all wearing cafias as Columbia University educated jackasses. We
got too many of us. The cops won't stop us,
(05:07):
so let's start smashing. Politically, I think it's working the
other direction. I think people are seeing this on TV
or where we catch it and uh and thinking this
is a breakdown of civilization. I'm voting for whatever party
wants to end this. Speaking of which, like the whole
Trump taken over DC thing that I'm not that interested in.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
I'm interested in the politics of it.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Fox just had a peace on mainstream Democrats not happy
with messaging around this. And it's like I quoted Mika
Brazinski on MSNBC yesterday morning, she said, I think this
is a political loser for Democrats to claim that DC
is fine and Trump shouldn't do this. I don't think
that's the way most people feel they had to. I
was listening to NPR and they had they were quoting
(05:53):
people on the street, and I'm sure they selected these
people carefully. Some people in the street, I don't think
it's right. It's like Hitler or whatever. And I thought,
I gotta believe the vast majority of people in neighborhoods
where they got lots of crime are perfectly happy with
seeing some National guardsmen down there making sure they can
(06:14):
making sure they can walk to their car without getting
attacked or their car stolen, right right?
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Can you imagine?
Speaker 1 (06:20):
And it's I you know, having raised two daughters, I'm
a lot better at this than I used to be.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Can you imagine.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
Being a woman and the feeling of vulnerability as you
have to walk toward a handful of young tufts and
you just don't know what they're going to do. That's
a terrible That is animal fear in your heart. You
got some National guardsmen strolling alongside you, zero fear. That's
pretty blanket appealing. I mean, if you're if there's a
National guardsman there and your main concern is I don't
(06:49):
think it's constitutional what the president is doing, as opposed
to oh cool, I don't have to worry about getting
a raped while I walk to my car, then you
are really an ideologue, you know. Speaking of which, guys,
how hard would it be to grab yesterday's clip fifty
eight for me.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
Fifty eight yesday. That was a good clip, man, I
tell you I should have played it three times.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
John Roberts Fox, who's talking to Jim Kessler, who's a
political activist, dude, but part of Third Way Again.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
I think the point is true. I think there.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I think mainstream democrats are smart and seeing the average
person reacts to a crackdown on crime as a good thing,
not as an overreach. In general, there's just no doubt
about that. Yeah, they need to come to an agreement
on that, because you got guys like this in the
mainstream media.
Speaker 5 (07:38):
But do you feel safe here? I feel safe in
this city. I live in a neighborhood because I'm not
overy my shoulder every day. Well maybe you look over yourself.
But I'll tell you something. Here are two things that
could be done to make this city safer. One point
one billion dollars was stolen from DC in the last
budget bill. Give us that money back. We are down
four hundred police officers from last from last gear o
(08:00):
cash and nine hundred from our peak because stealing our
money away, so let's got our looks nothing to do
with defunding the police. No, No, it had nothing to
do with defunding the police. It had to be taking
our money away, our taxpayer dollars here. If people are
afraid to come to DC, go to Disney World, get fat,
eat French fries.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
I don't care. I've lived here thirty seven years. I'm
not afraid.
Speaker 5 (08:22):
I live in the city.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I'm not afraid of this city.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
If you're afraid, go ahead, leave your fear someplace else.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Wow. Will never win another election. Jim Kessler, you are
a fool of You're like the King Kong fools number one.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
There's no problem.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
I feel safe and it's dangerous because they've defunded us
and the police. But it's not defund the police because anyway,
it's safe here. You don't feel safe, go to Disneyland,
eat Prince Rise, and get fat.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
I just saw.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I just saw ancient Chris Matthews on MSNBC. He is
a mainstream Democrat saying these Democrats who are walking around
claiming DC is not scary or dangerous are just full
of crap. Yeah yeah wow. Final note. On August the fifth,
(09:16):
which was the day Donald Jay threatened a federal law
enforcement takeover in DC, first, the city quietly settled a
lawsuit from a former police sergeant who accused her superiors
plural of deliberately misclassifying certain offenses to make crime stats
look low. Court records show internal emails, depositions, phone call
(09:38):
transcripts from the suit corroborate the accusations, raising questions over
police department data. The mainstream media outlets have consistently cited
to contend that Trump's takeover is unnecessary. The crime misclassification
scheme laid out in the suit centers on two offenses,
assault and theft. The suit provides examples of knife attacks
typically categorized as assault with a dangerous weapon of felony
(10:00):
offense included in violent crime stats, but those were classified
as simple assault, a misdemeanor that they do not include
in the stats. Emails and depositions introduced as exhibits in
the case also show that police leaders explicitly instructed their subordinates,
all of them, to classify certain theft cases as quote,
(10:21):
taking property without right, a lesser offense than shoplifting or
theft that does not appear in DC's crime stats at all.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
It's a good lord, the dishonesty.
Speaker 1 (10:35):
And like I've been saying for days, I just when
I hear crime stats, I turned to something else. I
just assume I'm being lied to by somebody about something.
I wish we could figure that out. Yeah, some sort
of uniform standards. But yeah, so how many times I'm
asking you, good people, how many times.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Did you hear this is totally unnecessary crimes down thirty
percent in DC? Utterly fiction.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
Yeah, it accompanied every single story I heard about it
all weekend long, Right, what's a smart Alec got into
that conversation with my son yesterday and uh Russia Ukraine.
More importantly, Trump pootin in that whole summit, got some
new information on that, according to reporting from the Wall
Street Journal, a bunch of stuff on the ways.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Stay here. I forgot to tell you what I wanted.
I'm sorry, Michael, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
This is a really complete breakdown in the show mechanics.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Listen to this.
Speaker 6 (11:33):
I've got a billion dollar document in my hands because
Missus Trump is seeking one billion dollars in damages if
we don't take the video down and if Hunter here
doesn't issue a formal apology to Missus Trump. So now
we're here maybe to give you the platform to apologize
to the first lady for your statements that you made
(11:53):
about her possible connection to Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
That's not going to happen, Hunter Biden, responding to the
billion dollar lawsuit from Milania. Trump f that really, he said,
So that story, you know, you're both lovely folks, but
kind of peripheral to the actual problems the nation's dealing
with right now.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
So can you settle this on your own?
Speaker 1 (12:20):
I think perhaps the biggest story in the world is
the Trump Putin summit tomorrow, because really big things could
come out of that depending on.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
The direction it goes, no doubt about it.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
And man, one thing about listening to so I listened
to this podcast from the Telegraph in London, and they
have the more European view of things than we're getting
in the United States. And they talk regularly about if
Putin moves on eastern European countries, you know, the Baltic
States or whatever, and how Europe will react. I mean,
they hold that out as a serious possibility, like Putin
(12:56):
thinking NATO's not going to come.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
To the defense of Latvia. He's not, which he might
be right about.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
I don't know any who more on that later, Perhaps
if Joe Biden had said to Hunter Biden at some point,
don't be a smart alec. Hunter Biden wouldn't ended up
the disgrace that he is. I said this to my
son many times over the years. I think they must
have taken it out of context what it must have meant,
(13:23):
because they never have said this in the past. But
my oldest son said to me to today, what is
a smart alec?
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Anyway?
Speaker 1 (13:29):
It is not a term you hear very often. You
gotta admit in the modern world, I am one hundred one.
I'm one hundred and five years old, and so I
use old timey terms like I'm wearing a felt hat
and it's nineteen twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
Bye cracky.
Speaker 1 (13:43):
But I asked Chad gpt In, it's actually kind of
an interesting story. This guy named Alexander Hoge was a
con man in the eighteen hundreds. Alexander is an alec.
He and his wife ran a scam targeting men who
were looking for prostitutes in the eighteen forties. My wife
would lure the victim into a room and while they
were distracted, alex Hogue Alec Hoague would rob them. Hoag
(14:06):
bragged to the police about his cleverness, even making deals
with corrupt officers to split the profits and keep the
thing going.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
Eventually he got caught and the police started using his
name sarcastically to describe someone who thought he was too
clever for his own good. Smart Alec entered the wider
American slang by the eighteen eighteen hundreds to mean and
know it all, or a wisecracker, or somebody who thinks
they're so dang smart and they're a bunch of GPT
gave me links to a whole bunch of newspaper articles
(14:35):
from the eighteen hundreds where they would use smart Alec
in quotes to refer to the sky, and then it
just caught on.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
I wow. I think it's just.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
Interesting that things like that catch on and are used forever,
and we use them without knowing the background. I've been
called a smart Alec, I have called others so smart
alec my whole life without everythinking one of what it is,
and it did and it still works.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Right right, and occasionally than meaning mutates yeah as well.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
But yeah, that's funny, because I usually have I'm usually
curious about that sort of thing. It never occurred to
me to look into that one. That's a great backstory.
I know you got crime, you got sex, you got corruption.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
That's good.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
And I wasn't particularly accusing my son of luring horny
businessmen into his room to steal from them while they.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
Thought they were going to get sex for money.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
I would hope not need to keep a little tighter
rein on the household if that's going on. Oh my god, Yeah, craziness.
Oh speaking of a sex and crime and that sort
of in prostitutes in the rest of it. I guess
there's a new Charlie Sheen documentary out. We got to
play you a little chunk of that one. Oh, we
(15:45):
were talking before the show. America needs a Charlie Sheen
story right now. We need a celebrity that we focus
on every day for a couple of weeks or months,
doesn't actually mean anything, no greater significance. We're all kind
of into it and talking about it. It's just a
I don't know, a bonding moment, outspoken, drug crazed, hooker loving.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
Video post.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
Just you know, just something like that. There were there
were good times, there were better times.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
What'd you say, Charlie winning anyone?
Speaker 7 (16:25):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, winning, that's where that came from. You remember that
that's good cash for he was. He was the first
person I ever heard used troll and I never I
didn't understand what he was talking about the time trolls,
these damn trolls, and he was was you know, we
now now we know what trolls means, but I I
didn't at the time.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Fools and trolls.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
I remember whatever year that was predicting on a Friday
that he would be dead by the time we came
back to work on Monday, and he is not.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
He lived through it.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Uh, high stakes meeting between Trump and Putin tomorrow. As
has been pointed out on a bunch of people, Putin
has punked like four presidents in a row. Can we
put an end to that role for Putin tomorrow? I
sure hope, So get a lot on that coming up.
I hope you can stay here, arm.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Strong and Getty.
Speaker 8 (17:16):
If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick
second one. I would like to do it almost immediately,
and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin
and President Zelenski and myself if they'd like to have
me there, And that would be a meeting where maybe
it could be absolutely work. But the first meeting will
not work that out. Certain great things can be gained
(17:38):
in the first It's going to be a very important meeting,
but it's setting the table for the second meeting. I
think the second meeting. If the second meeting takes place, now,
that may be no second meeting because if I feel
that it's not appropriate to have it because I didn't
get the answers that we have to have, then we're
not going to have a second meeting.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
Man, the whole ball of axe on this thing is
is is Trump actually done with believing Putin as a decent,
reasonable person or not the whole That's the whole ball
of axe, I would agree, and or I would put
it more broadly, is Trump able to see through whatever
(18:20):
manipulation Putin brings to the table. I've heard a bunch
of people say recently, you know, and you know how
something things catch on Somebody says something and then everybody
repeats it, and whether it's true like the taco thing I.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Mean, right or herd animals the media.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
But I've heard a bunch of people say, listen lately
that he he he tends to believe the last person
in there that he talked to so you know, he'll
talk to somebody think oh, you're absolutely right, and they'll
be going that way, and then I'll talk to another
person with a different point of view and say a right,
and that that's where he is then and I and
if that is true, I hope he doesn't go from
where he is now talking to all these European leaders
(18:58):
in Zelensky to being in a room with Putin and
starting to think, oh, you got a really good point.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Ukraine was, you know.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Part of Russia for a very long time, and so
you know, historically it seems like it probably ought to
be a part of Russia.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Yeah, yeah, I certainly hope not.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
The Wall Street Journal reporting today, which is really important,
Trump told his European peers yesterday he wouldn't negotiate territorial issues,
saying that Ukraine must discuss that directly with Russia. That's
according to German Chancellor Frederick Mertz, who initiated the meeting
they had yesterday. So that was good news for people
(19:32):
like me, people like Zelenski, who thought Trump might go
in there and wheel and deal in land without asking anybody.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Yeah. I just read a.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Related piece about how Putin will say, well, I tell
you what, but we'll just take that fifty square miles
over there. You guys can have that fifty square miles
over there, and that's a square deal, and that Trump,
you know, might fall for that. They were worried, but
they pointed out like, for instance, Putin really wants Ukraine
(20:07):
to seed all of the Donetsk o blots.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Okay, easy for you to say.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Notably, he wants parts of that region that Ukraine still controls,
and he's.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Willing to swap him straight up for that land over there, for.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
Instance, less vital areas Russia now controls in Krsan and Zapharijia.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Why Well, because Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (20:29):
Created what essentially is a thirty one mile fortress belt
of heavily fortified cities, towns, and defensive embattlements in Donetsk,
which the Russians have been trying to break through since
twenty fourteen years and years of effort. They cannot break
that line, and Institute for the Study War said they'd
have to try for several more years to break through
(20:51):
on the current trend.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
And so Putin's thinking.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'll just give up a bunch of
non critical lands for this critical land. That opens the
door for me to take over even more right, because
the ceasefire is going to be temporary ish and potent
and his sort are geniuses at inventing pretexts to violate ceasefires.
They fired on us first, etc. Look at our four
(21:15):
soldiers that are dead. Oh that's weird. They have Russian
bullets in their back anyway. Yeah, they just killed four
of our guys in spite of the ceasefires. So we're
going to go through this line we've created through the
negotiations and attack. Well, those pretexts only work if you
got a willing partner to go along with them, which
has happened in the past with all of Europe and
the US presidents.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Hopefully NATO wouldn't go for that sort of thing again,
I would hope.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
But so Trump said there would be consequences but didn't
elaborate yesterday. There would be harsh consequences if Putin doesn't
agree to a ceasefire, and then said this.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
I thought this was interesting.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
You meet with Vladimir Putin Friday in Alaska. Yeah, I
believe you can convince him to stop targeting civilians in Ukraine.
Speaker 9 (22:05):
Well, I'll tell you what I've had that conversation with him.
I've had a lot of good conversations with him. Then
I go home and I see that a rocket hit
a nursing home or a rocket hit an apartment building,
and people are linked dead in the streets.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
So I guess the.
Speaker 8 (22:19):
Answer to that is no, because I've had this conversation.
Speaker 10 (22:22):
I want to end the war. It's Biden's war, but
I want to end it. I'll be very proud to
end this war along with the five other wars I ended.
But I guess the answer to that is probably no,
because I would have had a good conversation with Vladimir.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
I knew him very well. I got along with him great.
Speaker 6 (22:38):
Actually we had the Russia.
Speaker 10 (22:39):
I had to go through the Russia Russia hoax.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
I don't know what to take from that. Do you
think you can convince Troop and Putin to stop targeting civilians? No,
I don't think I can. I hope he a threat
of something terrible enough to determ right. That was the
quote from George Schultz that I was mentioning the other day,
(23:06):
one of the most famous negotiators from the eighties, back
during the Cold War. These things, unless you got one
side willing to capitulate. You need some sort of power
to force the negotiation to happen. And what is that power?
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Right?
Speaker 1 (23:22):
That was the great, great fault of Obama and Biden
to a large extent, and plenty of others. They think
that intellect and conversation and cooperation and meetings around tables
can achieve things that only power achieves.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
They're naive. Well, they're so self regarding.
Speaker 1 (23:45):
There's such egomaniacs, so convinced of their own persuasive powers
and intellect that they think, I'm gonna, you know, I'm
going to ignore all of human history where it was
just you know, the strong will do what they will,
the week will do what they must. Check with me
in five thousand years unless AI robots have eaten us all,
and that will still.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Be true, right.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
And Putin will back down if he's going to lose
something where something that he doesn't want is gonna happen
like a whole bunch of European troops, or he's gonna,
you know, be absolutely devastating economically, economically or whatever.
Speaker 2 (24:25):
I'll tell you. It's an interesting place we are right
now in the politics.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
I was watching MSNBC today and Joe Scarborough was talking
about he liked the idea of Trump saying demanding a ceasefire,
you get a ceasefire, and then you and you say
we're gonna help rebuild Ukraine, and the United States and
Europe gets people in there right away helping build Ukraine,
and Trump is able to say people God, I'd say,
(24:50):
and Trump is able to say, look, we got us
workers there. You start bombing Ukraine, you're attacking the United States. Yeah,
that was Joe Scarborough and MSNB he suggesting that, So, hey, Joe,
welcome back. Where we are in the politics of this
is pretty interesting. Yeah, I would agree completely, how interesting?
(25:11):
So my you know, we could talk about this all
day and I'm sure there'll be plenty more and if
you have any more clips you want to play, great.
But my final thought on this is that when you're negotiating,
you have to understand one of the most important things
you can possibly do. And those of you who are
old hands at this, I apologize for telling you something
you already know. But the one thing you absolutely have
(25:33):
to do is understand the other side, and understand the
other sides cost benefit analysis, their priorities, what they're willing
to pay, what their goals.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
Are, because if you look at.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
Putin's cost benefit analysis, the benefit he is seeking is
the reconquest of the great Soviet Empire. And if that
is the benefit to what you were doing, you would
endure enormous costs. And I hope Trump understands that you
can't say, look, we'll sanction your oil and Putin's like
(26:10):
that will slow us somewhat in restoring the grandeur of
the Soviet Empire.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
Go ahead.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
Yeah, he has a monumental goal, so it could be
difficult to stop him without some pretty monumental costs. Some
of the reporting is that Trump is hell bent on ceasefire.
That's the whole thing. He's going to go in there
before we get to any of this other stuff. There
needs to be a ceasefire. And if he figures out
in two minutes, as he said the other day, that
Putin has no interest in it, well, here's a Senator
(26:39):
Ted Cruz on.
Speaker 11 (26:40):
That there's a very real chance President Trump will get
up and leave if Putin refuses to concede anything. That's
exactly what Ronald Reagan did in Raykovic with Gorbachev, and
it's what led to winning the Cold War. We will
end the war in Ukraine, but we will do so
through a strong president and a strong commander in.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
I don't know if Ted Cruz has any inside this
is just what he wishes would happen. But I hope
that that's what happens. That is that if Trump goes
in there and Putin has no interest in a ceasefire, okay,
we're done here.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
I just hope Trump has.
Speaker 1 (27:17):
A team of, you know, negotiation experts, although Trump has
done plenty of himself, but and psychologists and like professional poker.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Players, and I don't know who else.
Speaker 7 (27:30):
Professional poker players, or like professors of logic or whatever
who can say all right, or chess masters who can say,
all right, I see what Putin's.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Doing chess, because he will. It's actually there's no tea
at the end of Michael of Chess. There's really not
check it out.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (27:49):
You need to go in knowing with certainty Putin will
be trying to manipulate you, not negotiate with you, manipulate
with you. Just you've got to know that in your soul.
Trump takes in a lot of mainstream media and there
are a ton of people talking about him. Will he
(28:10):
get played by Putin, punked by Putin, or whatever. The
most easily butt hurt man in the history of the
world surely knows that and is, like I said earlier,
treat him like you treated Ran Paul on the debate stage.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
That's what I want to see. Put in your mind.
Speaker 1 (28:27):
Put Rosie O'donald's head on Putin's body and talk to
him like that. Now you're talking. So final note, and
this is so interesting. We talked about this during hour
one of the show briefly, but it could be one
of the pivotal moments in the history of Ukraine and Europe,
or one of the pivotal factors. Is the fact that
Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, is a really, really
(28:53):
good golfer, and he and Trump bonded during a visit
to mar A Lago, really hit it off, played golf together,
and Trump has and look, I'm a golf freak, and
I think Trump's tendency to like rank people based on
their prowess at the game is weird, okay, But Stub
(29:18):
is a really good player, and Trump really likes him
and he really respects him. And oh, by the way, Finland,
which has been at the receiving end of Russian slash
Soviet viciousness and bloodshed and conquest for a very very
long time. And the Finns are tough suns up bitches.
(29:39):
The president of Finland has now got Trump's ear when
it comes to talking about Russia and Putin. If it had,
if you know what, if freaking Macrone of France was
a really good stick, might be a very different situation,
you know, or whoever's in charge of Spain. They don't
even know who's in charge in Spain anyway, happens to
(30:01):
be the fin who's a good stick that could change history,
which is crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
I'm thinking Emmanuel Macron not a long ball hitter.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
M No, I'm thinking maybe maybe wears shorts, maybe wears
sports if I'm playing, if I'm playing best ball with
him as my partner, all drive you put and make sandwiches. Mmm,
you're you're wearing pink again? Looks looks good.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Wow. Traffic stereotypes. That was That was to toxic masculine.
It really was.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
That was sickening. Yeah, I apologize. I don't know what
got into me.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Manosphere just dripping with manosphere. Oh yeah, it's kidding on that.
I'm thoroughly disappointed in both of you. This is disgusting,
it happens. I'm triggered.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
We had we had another minute to kill and we'd
run out of material, and then we just started.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
We just we just fell apart. Speak for yourself. We
got more on the way, Armstrong Hetty.
Speaker 6 (31:04):
President Chump today announced that he will host the twenty
twenty five Kennedy Center Honors. Hosting award shows is what
he envisioned being president is in the first place.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
I now present the award for Sexiest NATO ally and
congratulations to the women of Latvia. So the whole redistricting
thing getting a lot of news. Why did I just
come across some of this stuff yesterday in a podcast
with people who know what they're talking about. Hey, Republican
congress people do a better job on those talk shows
(31:35):
against pushing back.
Speaker 2 (31:36):
Good lord. Anyway, get to that, among other things in
hour three.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
Plus, Behind the scenes of the rent a crowd business.
You see a protest, folks, There's a good chance those
people are there because they got paid.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Just hilarious.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
Taylor Swift and the Kelsey Brothers broke the internet. Gotta
check in on that story. Oh, you just made me vomit.
So this is unintentionally hilarious. I think. Here's the headline.
This is a big Swedish study about people who live
a long time. Headline people who live to one hundred
(32:15):
have much in common, including suffering from fewer diseases. Wow,
thanks for that, doctor, I.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
Have something in common.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
I feel like people who live to one hundred have
birth dates that are more than a century away from
their current living status, almost all of them. Recent studies
you're saying they're healthier than the dead.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Huh.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Recent studies of centurions that would be people who are
in their hundreds, thank you for that, have found that
they suffer fewer diseases overall, develop them more slowly and
are less likely to experience fatal conditions compared to people
and shorter live No, they didn't say that they had.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
The sentence actually.
Speaker 1 (33:03):
Says that people who live to one hundred are less
likely to experience fatal conditions than people who die.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
Well. I agree completely. H it's hard. On the other hand, did.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
A I write that?
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Are you kidding me? I find that hilarious.
Speaker 1 (33:21):
They considered the historical dad from people born over blah
blah blah blah between nineteen twelve and nineteen twenty two
thousands of people.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
It's a very big study.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
You know, I would suggest it's a near one hundred
percent correlation between being alive and not being dead.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
Or not having a fatal condition.
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Yeah, so there's a lot of luck involved. He asked
a doctor Dan to say, you know, what's the best
way to live a long time? Uh, don't smoke and
have good genetics. Yeah, and the genetics seem to be oh, whoa, whoa, Michael,
did you hear that? Did you hear that good genetics?
That's eugenics, that's white fascism or something white supremacy.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
I heard it. That's why why I bought those American
Eagle genes.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
This actually makes sense, and it's a little more in
depth than that other comment.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (34:12):
One hundred year olds or more are able to delay
and avoid many major age related diseases rather than surviving them.
So it's not like, you know, they get whatever horrible
thing kills a lot of us and then the medical,
modern medical or whatever is able to take care of it.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
They just don't get it. They just don't get.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
Heart disease or you know, any of the horrible things
that can happen to you from whatever genetic reason. Yeah,
great genes. Yeah, and I've said this a thousand times,
but I remember it happened. I read about it roughly
the time I got cancer. There's a big article in
the Wall Street Journal the number one factor in getting
cancer bad luck.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
Still, it's just it's just we don't know why. Wow. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I was amongst a group of doctors who are all
smoking cigars, and I said, do you guys just not
care about mouth camp or whatever?
Speaker 2 (35:00):
And they're all in their.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
Fifty sixty seventies and they said no, if at this
point we've had no sign and blood.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
The nuns just geneix.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
Yeah, I'm not a doctor, so don't go start smoking
or anything. But you thought you were going to drive
people to start smoking with your flippant comment.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
I was afraid. Yeah, and then being sued for it.
Speaker 1 (35:19):
Yeah, if you missed a segment or an hour, get
the podcast. It's Armstrong and Getty on demand. You should
subscribe Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty Armstrong and Getty and he
Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
It's three am Saturday morning in downtown Los Angeles, a
city plagued with street takeovers like this one right in
front of the home of the Los Angeles Lakers. Hundreds
of people block an intersection as drivers performed dangerous donuts
while others throw fireworks into the intersection. Angry neighbors shoot
(00:45):
paintballs that cars parked along the street belonging to the spectators.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Yeah, that's Los Angeles. A lot of people in certain cities.
I think Chicago is certainly LA Not as much San
Francisco now since they voted in a new mayor and
got their act together. But Oakland, various places are like, yeah,
I kind of see some of your stuff about DC.
It seems like it's worse here. Is there anything Trump
can do about here? And he talked yesterday about going
(01:10):
into other cities. There's no, he doesn't have the legal
authority to do that. But uh, yeah, if you're gonna
if you're worried about big cities, they got problems with
crime and in street drug addicts.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I don't think DC ranks at the top.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well it's in the top five actually, but there are
much bigger and more dangerous fish to fry as well.
I agree completely, but I don't know sending the FEDS in.
But anyway, back to.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
The street takeovers in LA.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
If you've never seen this, I mean it's like a massive,
multi multi lane intersection with a crowd of hundreds of
people around, and the guy's doing the smoking tires, wild doughnuts,
barely avoiding hitting the crowd, and the cops don't dare intercede.
There's too many people, too much wildness, so mobs just
take over the city streets for a certain amount of time.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Roll on, Michael, and.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
They aren't the only ones fed up.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
My entire office is absolutely laser focused on going after
these illegal street takeovers.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
New Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hackman says he
will pursue consequences for the drivers, including reckless driving charges
in up to ninety days in jail, as well as
the spectators, threatening jail time in a five hundred dollars
fine just for watching.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
If you want to go ahead and be one of
these drivers in illegal straight takeovers. If you want to
be spectators in illegal streight takeovers, we are going to
hold you accountable. If you're a driver and you want
to see that car crushed, literally crushed as we impound it,
go ahead and test us.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
I don't know I feel about the spectator thing.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
If one of these broke out where I am, I
might want to stand there and watch some people spin around.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
I get a five hundred taket front.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
Yeah, I have a constitutional issue with that. There is
probably a way around it. But the this through the
drivers obviously. I mean, you got a deadly weapon there,
and I would think you get a reckless driving. You
can't afford your insurance anymore. You're done driving right right
(03:12):
one final clip eighty two, please Michael from the Fabulous
Bill Malugin of Fox News.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
These street takeovers have turned deadly before. In twenty twenty two,
nursing student Elizah Wahaka was killed on Christmas Day in
South LA when a car doing donuts lost control and
hit her. The driver was just sentenced last week to
thirteen years in prison.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Okay, Nathan Hawkman's a hero.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
He's trying to clean up la and under the horrific
damage done by the Marxist George Gascone and one hundred
percent in support. Don't crush the cars, sell them. And
my only other quibble was the one Jack brought up.
There's a bit of a constitutional issue.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
With all right?
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Am I there from the beginning and I'm hooting and
hollering and rooting them on? Or did I just wander
by and say what the hell is going on here?
Speaker 2 (04:03):
I'm watching?
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yeah, I'd like to whip up my phone and document
this and send it to my local you know, congressman
or whatever. The other practical difficulty of this, which I
find interesting, is that the mobs have figured out in
watching sports, celebrations or you know, a number of different incidents,
George Floyd, riots, what have you, that if we bring
(04:27):
enough people, the number of personnel in the force it
would take to quell what we're doing, looks too bad
for society to have a stomach enough to do it.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
That sentence was a bit of a train wreck. But
you see what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
If we get big enough, they don't have the guts
to get big enough to stop the lawlessness. So the
only thing we need to do is bring mass. We
need to bring a lot of people. That's called a
breakdown of society. So what that's called with Hamas rally,
we're all wearing cafias as Columbia University educated jackasses. We
got too many of us. The cops won't stop us,
(05:07):
so let's start smashing. Politically, I think it's working the
other direction. I think people are seeing this on TV
or where we catch it and uh and thinking this
is a breakdown of civilization. I'm voting for whatever party
wants to end this. Speaking of which, like the whole
Trump taken over DC thing that I'm not that interested in.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
I'm interested in the politics of it.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Fox just had a peace on mainstream Democrats not happy
with messaging around this. And it's like I quoted Mika
Brazinski on MSNBC yesterday morning, she said, I think this
is a political loser for Democrats to claim that DC
is fine and Trump shouldn't do this. I don't think
that's the way most people feel they had to. I
was listening to NPR and they had they were quoting
(05:53):
people on the street, and I'm sure they selected these
people carefully. Some people in the street, I don't think
it's right. It's like Hitler or whatever. And I thought,
I gotta believe the vast majority of people in neighborhoods
where they got lots of crime are perfectly happy with
seeing some National guardsmen down there making sure they can
(06:14):
making sure they can walk to their car without getting
attacked or their car stolen, right right?
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Can you imagine?
Speaker 1 (06:20):
And it's I you know, having raised two daughters, I'm
a lot better at this than I used to be.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Can you imagine.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
Being a woman and the feeling of vulnerability as you
have to walk toward a handful of young tufts and
you just don't know what they're going to do. That's
a terrible That is animal fear in your heart. You
got some National guardsmen strolling alongside you, zero fear. That's
pretty blanket appealing. I mean, if you're if there's a
National guardsman there and your main concern is I don't
(06:49):
think it's constitutional what the president is doing, as opposed
to oh cool, I don't have to worry about getting
a raped while I walk to my car, then you
are really an ideologue, you know. Speaking of which, guys,
how hard would it be to grab yesterday's clip fifty
eight for me.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
Fifty eight yesday. That was a good clip, man, I
tell you I should have played it three times.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
John Roberts Fox, who's talking to Jim Kessler, who's a
political activist, dude, but part of Third Way Again.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
I think the point is true. I think there.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I think mainstream democrats are smart and seeing the average
person reacts to a crackdown on crime as a good thing,
not as an overreach. In general, there's just no doubt
about that. Yeah, they need to come to an agreement
on that, because you got guys like this in the
mainstream media.
Speaker 5 (07:38):
But do you feel safe here? I feel safe in
this city. I live in a neighborhood because I'm not
overy my shoulder every day. Well maybe you look over yourself.
But I'll tell you something. Here are two things that
could be done to make this city safer. One point
one billion dollars was stolen from DC in the last
budget bill. Give us that money back. We are down
four hundred police officers from last from last gear o
(08:00):
cash and nine hundred from our peak because stealing our
money away, so let's got our looks nothing to do
with defunding the police. No, No, it had nothing to
do with defunding the police. It had to be taking
our money away, our taxpayer dollars here. If people are
afraid to come to DC, go to Disney World, get fat,
eat French fries.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
I don't care. I've lived here thirty seven years. I'm
not afraid.
Speaker 5 (08:22):
I live in the city.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I'm not afraid of this city.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
If you're afraid, go ahead, leave your fear someplace else.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Wow. Will never win another election. Jim Kessler, you are
a fool of You're like the King Kong fools number one.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
There's no problem.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
I feel safe and it's dangerous because they've defunded us
and the police. But it's not defund the police because anyway,
it's safe here. You don't feel safe, go to Disneyland,
eat Prince Rise, and get fat.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
I just saw.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I just saw ancient Chris Matthews on MSNBC. He is
a mainstream Democrat saying these Democrats who are walking around
claiming DC is not scary or dangerous are just full
of crap. Yeah yeah wow. Final note. On August the fifth,
(09:16):
which was the day Donald Jay threatened a federal law
enforcement takeover in DC, first, the city quietly settled a
lawsuit from a former police sergeant who accused her superiors
plural of deliberately misclassifying certain offenses to make crime stats
look low. Court records show internal emails, depositions, phone call
(09:38):
transcripts from the suit corroborate the accusations, raising questions over
police department data. The mainstream media outlets have consistently cited
to contend that Trump's takeover is unnecessary. The crime misclassification
scheme laid out in the suit centers on two offenses,
assault and theft. The suit provides examples of knife attacks
typically categorized as assault with a dangerous weapon of felony
(10:00):
offense included in violent crime stats, but those were classified
as simple assault, a misdemeanor that they do not include
in the stats. Emails and depositions introduced as exhibits in
the case also show that police leaders explicitly instructed their subordinates,
all of them, to classify certain theft cases as quote,
(10:21):
taking property without right, a lesser offense than shoplifting or
theft that does not appear in DC's crime stats at all.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
It's a good lord, the dishonesty.
Speaker 1 (10:35):
And like I've been saying for days, I just when
I hear crime stats, I turned to something else. I
just assume I'm being lied to by somebody about something.
I wish we could figure that out. Yeah, some sort
of uniform standards. But yeah, so how many times I'm
asking you, good people, how many times.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Did you hear this is totally unnecessary crimes down thirty
percent in DC? Utterly fiction.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
Yeah, it accompanied every single story I heard about it
all weekend long, Right, what's a smart Alec got into
that conversation with my son yesterday and uh Russia Ukraine.
More importantly, Trump pootin in that whole summit, got some
new information on that, according to reporting from the Wall
Street Journal, a bunch of stuff on the ways.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Stay here. I forgot to tell you what I wanted.
I'm sorry, Michael, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
This is a really complete breakdown in the show mechanics.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Listen to this.
Speaker 6 (11:33):
I've got a billion dollar document in my hands because
Missus Trump is seeking one billion dollars in damages if
we don't take the video down and if Hunter here
doesn't issue a formal apology to Missus Trump. So now
we're here maybe to give you the platform to apologize
to the first lady for your statements that you made
(11:53):
about her possible connection to Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
That's not going to happen, Hunter Biden, responding to the
billion dollar lawsuit from Milania. Trump f that really, he said,
So that story, you know, you're both lovely folks, but
kind of peripheral to the actual problems the nation's dealing
with right now.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
So can you settle this on your own?
Speaker 1 (12:20):
I think perhaps the biggest story in the world is
the Trump Putin summit tomorrow, because really big things could
come out of that depending on.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
The direction it goes, no doubt about it.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
And man, one thing about listening to so I listened
to this podcast from the Telegraph in London, and they
have the more European view of things than we're getting
in the United States. And they talk regularly about if
Putin moves on eastern European countries, you know, the Baltic
States or whatever, and how Europe will react. I mean,
they hold that out as a serious possibility, like Putin
(12:56):
thinking NATO's not going to come.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
To the defense of Latvia. He's not, which he might
be right about.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
I don't know any who more on that later, Perhaps
if Joe Biden had said to Hunter Biden at some point,
don't be a smart alec. Hunter Biden wouldn't ended up
the disgrace that he is. I said this to my
son many times over the years. I think they must
have taken it out of context what it must have meant,
(13:23):
because they never have said this in the past. But
my oldest son said to me to today, what is
a smart alec?
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Anyway?
Speaker 1 (13:29):
It is not a term you hear very often. You
gotta admit in the modern world, I am one hundred one.
I'm one hundred and five years old, and so I
use old timey terms like I'm wearing a felt hat
and it's nineteen twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
Bye cracky.
Speaker 1 (13:43):
But I asked Chad gpt In, it's actually kind of
an interesting story. This guy named Alexander Hoge was a
con man in the eighteen hundreds. Alexander is an alec.
He and his wife ran a scam targeting men who
were looking for prostitutes in the eighteen forties. My wife
would lure the victim into a room and while they
were distracted, alex Hogue Alec Hoague would rob them. Hoag
(14:06):
bragged to the police about his cleverness, even making deals
with corrupt officers to split the profits and keep the
thing going.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
Eventually he got caught and the police started using his
name sarcastically to describe someone who thought he was too
clever for his own good. Smart Alec entered the wider
American slang by the eighteen eighteen hundreds to mean and
know it all, or a wisecracker, or somebody who thinks
they're so dang smart and they're a bunch of GPT
gave me links to a whole bunch of newspaper articles
(14:35):
from the eighteen hundreds where they would use smart Alec
in quotes to refer to the sky, and then it
just caught on.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
I wow. I think it's just.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
Interesting that things like that catch on and are used forever,
and we use them without knowing the background. I've been
called a smart Alec, I have called others so smart
alec my whole life without everythinking one of what it is,
and it did and it still works.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Right right, and occasionally than meaning mutates yeah as well.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
But yeah, that's funny, because I usually have I'm usually
curious about that sort of thing. It never occurred to
me to look into that one. That's a great backstory.
I know you got crime, you got sex, you got corruption.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
That's good.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
And I wasn't particularly accusing my son of luring horny
businessmen into his room to steal from them while they.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
Thought they were going to get sex for money.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
I would hope not need to keep a little tighter
rein on the household if that's going on. Oh my god, Yeah, craziness.
Oh speaking of a sex and crime and that sort
of in prostitutes in the rest of it. I guess
there's a new Charlie Sheen documentary out. We got to
play you a little chunk of that one. Oh, we
(15:45):
were talking before the show. America needs a Charlie Sheen
story right now. We need a celebrity that we focus
on every day for a couple of weeks or months,
doesn't actually mean anything, no greater significance. We're all kind
of into it and talking about it. It's just a
I don't know, a bonding moment, outspoken, drug crazed, hooker loving.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
Video post.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
Just you know, just something like that. There were there
were good times, there were better times.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
What'd you say, Charlie winning anyone?
Speaker 7 (16:25):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, winning, that's where that came from. You remember that
that's good cash for he was. He was the first
person I ever heard used troll and I never I
didn't understand what he was talking about the time trolls,
these damn trolls, and he was was you know, we
now now we know what trolls means, but I I
didn't at the time.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Fools and trolls.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
I remember whatever year that was predicting on a Friday
that he would be dead by the time we came
back to work on Monday, and he is not.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
He lived through it.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Uh, high stakes meeting between Trump and Putin tomorrow. As
has been pointed out on a bunch of people, Putin
has punked like four presidents in a row. Can we
put an end to that role for Putin tomorrow? I
sure hope, So get a lot on that coming up.
I hope you can stay here, arm.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Strong and Getty.
Speaker 8 (17:16):
If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick
second one. I would like to do it almost immediately,
and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin
and President Zelenski and myself if they'd like to have
me there, And that would be a meeting where maybe
it could be absolutely work. But the first meeting will
not work that out. Certain great things can be gained
(17:38):
in the first It's going to be a very important meeting,
but it's setting the table for the second meeting. I
think the second meeting. If the second meeting takes place, now,
that may be no second meeting because if I feel
that it's not appropriate to have it because I didn't
get the answers that we have to have, then we're
not going to have a second meeting.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
Man, the whole ball of axe on this thing is
is is Trump actually done with believing Putin as a decent,
reasonable person or not the whole That's the whole ball
of axe, I would agree, and or I would put
it more broadly, is Trump able to see through whatever
(18:20):
manipulation Putin brings to the table. I've heard a bunch
of people say recently, you know, and you know how
something things catch on Somebody says something and then everybody
repeats it, and whether it's true like the taco thing I.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Mean, right or herd animals the media.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
But I've heard a bunch of people say, listen lately
that he he he tends to believe the last person
in there that he talked to so you know, he'll
talk to somebody think oh, you're absolutely right, and they'll
be going that way, and then I'll talk to another
person with a different point of view and say a right,
and that that's where he is then and I and
if that is true, I hope he doesn't go from
where he is now talking to all these European leaders
(18:58):
in Zelensky to being in a room with Putin and
starting to think, oh, you got a really good point.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Ukraine was, you know.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Part of Russia for a very long time, and so
you know, historically it seems like it probably ought to
be a part of Russia.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Yeah, yeah, I certainly hope not.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
The Wall Street Journal reporting today, which is really important,
Trump told his European peers yesterday he wouldn't negotiate territorial issues,
saying that Ukraine must discuss that directly with Russia. That's
according to German Chancellor Frederick Mertz, who initiated the meeting
they had yesterday. So that was good news for people
(19:32):
like me, people like Zelenski, who thought Trump might go
in there and wheel and deal in land without asking anybody.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Yeah. I just read a.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Related piece about how Putin will say, well, I tell
you what, but we'll just take that fifty square miles
over there. You guys can have that fifty square miles
over there, and that's a square deal, and that Trump,
you know, might fall for that. They were worried, but
they pointed out like, for instance, Putin really wants Ukraine
(20:07):
to seed all of the Donetsk o blots.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Okay, easy for you to say.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Notably, he wants parts of that region that Ukraine still controls,
and he's.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Willing to swap him straight up for that land over there, for.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
Instance, less vital areas Russia now controls in Krsan and Zapharijia.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Why Well, because Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (20:29):
Created what essentially is a thirty one mile fortress belt
of heavily fortified cities, towns, and defensive embattlements in Donetsk,
which the Russians have been trying to break through since
twenty fourteen years and years of effort. They cannot break
that line, and Institute for the Study War said they'd
have to try for several more years to break through
(20:51):
on the current trend.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
And so Putin's thinking.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'll just give up a bunch of
non critical lands for this critical land. That opens the
door for me to take over even more right, because
the ceasefire is going to be temporary ish and potent
and his sort are geniuses at inventing pretexts to violate ceasefires.
They fired on us first, etc. Look at our four
(21:15):
soldiers that are dead. Oh that's weird. They have Russian
bullets in their back anyway. Yeah, they just killed four
of our guys in spite of the ceasefires. So we're
going to go through this line we've created through the
negotiations and attack. Well, those pretexts only work if you
got a willing partner to go along with them, which
has happened in the past with all of Europe and
the US presidents.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Hopefully NATO wouldn't go for that sort of thing again,
I would hope.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
But so Trump said there would be consequences but didn't
elaborate yesterday. There would be harsh consequences if Putin doesn't
agree to a ceasefire, and then said this.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
I thought this was interesting.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
You meet with Vladimir Putin Friday in Alaska. Yeah, I
believe you can convince him to stop targeting civilians in Ukraine.
Speaker 9 (22:05):
Well, I'll tell you what I've had that conversation with him.
I've had a lot of good conversations with him. Then
I go home and I see that a rocket hit
a nursing home or a rocket hit an apartment building,
and people are linked dead in the streets.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
So I guess the.
Speaker 8 (22:19):
Answer to that is no, because I've had this conversation.
Speaker 10 (22:22):
I want to end the war. It's Biden's war, but
I want to end it. I'll be very proud to
end this war along with the five other wars I ended.
But I guess the answer to that is probably no,
because I would have had a good conversation with Vladimir.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
I knew him very well. I got along with him great.
Speaker 6 (22:38):
Actually we had the Russia.
Speaker 10 (22:39):
I had to go through the Russia Russia hoax.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
I don't know what to take from that. Do you
think you can convince Troop and Putin to stop targeting civilians? No,
I don't think I can. I hope he a threat
of something terrible enough to determ right. That was the
quote from George Schultz that I was mentioning the other day,
(23:06):
one of the most famous negotiators from the eighties, back
during the Cold War. These things, unless you got one
side willing to capitulate. You need some sort of power
to force the negotiation to happen. And what is that power?
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Right?
Speaker 1 (23:22):
That was the great, great fault of Obama and Biden
to a large extent, and plenty of others. They think
that intellect and conversation and cooperation and meetings around tables
can achieve things that only power achieves.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
They're naive. Well, they're so self regarding.
Speaker 1 (23:45):
There's such egomaniacs, so convinced of their own persuasive powers
and intellect that they think, I'm gonna, you know, I'm
going to ignore all of human history where it was
just you know, the strong will do what they will,
the week will do what they must. Check with me
in five thousand years unless AI robots have eaten us all,
and that will still.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Be true, right.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
And Putin will back down if he's going to lose
something where something that he doesn't want is gonna happen
like a whole bunch of European troops, or he's gonna,
you know, be absolutely devastating economically, economically or whatever.
Speaker 2 (24:25):
I'll tell you. It's an interesting place we are right
now in the politics.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
I was watching MSNBC today and Joe Scarborough was talking
about he liked the idea of Trump saying demanding a ceasefire,
you get a ceasefire, and then you and you say
we're gonna help rebuild Ukraine, and the United States and
Europe gets people in there right away helping build Ukraine,
and Trump is able to say people God, I'd say,
(24:50):
and Trump is able to say, look, we got us
workers there. You start bombing Ukraine, you're attacking the United States. Yeah,
that was Joe Scarborough and MSNB he suggesting that, So, hey, Joe,
welcome back. Where we are in the politics of this
is pretty interesting. Yeah, I would agree completely, how interesting?
(25:11):
So my you know, we could talk about this all
day and I'm sure there'll be plenty more and if
you have any more clips you want to play, great.
But my final thought on this is that when you're negotiating,
you have to understand one of the most important things
you can possibly do. And those of you who are
old hands at this, I apologize for telling you something
you already know. But the one thing you absolutely have
(25:33):
to do is understand the other side, and understand the
other sides cost benefit analysis, their priorities, what they're willing
to pay, what their goals.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
Are, because if you look at.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
Putin's cost benefit analysis, the benefit he is seeking is
the reconquest of the great Soviet Empire. And if that
is the benefit to what you were doing, you would
endure enormous costs. And I hope Trump understands that you
can't say, look, we'll sanction your oil and Putin's like
(26:10):
that will slow us somewhat in restoring the grandeur of
the Soviet Empire.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
Go ahead.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
Yeah, he has a monumental goal, so it could be
difficult to stop him without some pretty monumental costs. Some
of the reporting is that Trump is hell bent on ceasefire.
That's the whole thing. He's going to go in there
before we get to any of this other stuff. There
needs to be a ceasefire. And if he figures out
in two minutes, as he said the other day, that
Putin has no interest in it, well, here's a Senator
(26:39):
Ted Cruz on.
Speaker 11 (26:40):
That there's a very real chance President Trump will get
up and leave if Putin refuses to concede anything. That's
exactly what Ronald Reagan did in Raykovic with Gorbachev, and
it's what led to winning the Cold War. We will
end the war in Ukraine, but we will do so
through a strong president and a strong commander in.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
I don't know if Ted Cruz has any inside this
is just what he wishes would happen. But I hope
that that's what happens. That is that if Trump goes
in there and Putin has no interest in a ceasefire, okay,
we're done here.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
I just hope Trump has.
Speaker 1 (27:17):
A team of, you know, negotiation experts, although Trump has
done plenty of himself, but and psychologists and like professional poker.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Players, and I don't know who else.
Speaker 7 (27:30):
Professional poker players, or like professors of logic or whatever
who can say all right, or chess masters who can say,
all right, I see what Putin's.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Doing chess, because he will. It's actually there's no tea
at the end of Michael of Chess. There's really not
check it out.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (27:49):
You need to go in knowing with certainty Putin will
be trying to manipulate you, not negotiate with you, manipulate
with you. Just you've got to know that in your soul.
Trump takes in a lot of mainstream media and there
are a ton of people talking about him. Will he
(28:10):
get played by Putin, punked by Putin, or whatever. The
most easily butt hurt man in the history of the
world surely knows that and is, like I said earlier,
treat him like you treated Ran Paul on the debate stage.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
That's what I want to see. Put in your mind.
Speaker 1 (28:27):
Put Rosie O'donald's head on Putin's body and talk to
him like that. Now you're talking. So final note, and
this is so interesting. We talked about this during hour
one of the show briefly, but it could be one
of the pivotal moments in the history of Ukraine and Europe,
or one of the pivotal factors. Is the fact that
Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, is a really, really
(28:53):
good golfer, and he and Trump bonded during a visit
to mar A Lago, really hit it off, played golf together,
and Trump has and look, I'm a golf freak, and
I think Trump's tendency to like rank people based on
their prowess at the game is weird, okay, But Stub
(29:18):
is a really good player, and Trump really likes him
and he really respects him. And oh, by the way, Finland,
which has been at the receiving end of Russian slash
Soviet viciousness and bloodshed and conquest for a very very
long time. And the Finns are tough suns up bitches.
(29:39):
The president of Finland has now got Trump's ear when
it comes to talking about Russia and Putin. If it had,
if you know what, if freaking Macrone of France was
a really good stick, might be a very different situation,
you know, or whoever's in charge of Spain. They don't
even know who's in charge in Spain anyway, happens to
(30:01):
be the fin who's a good stick that could change history,
which is crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
I'm thinking Emmanuel Macron not a long ball hitter.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
M No, I'm thinking maybe maybe wears shorts, maybe wears
sports if I'm playing, if I'm playing best ball with
him as my partner, all drive you put and make sandwiches. Mmm,
you're you're wearing pink again? Looks looks good.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Wow. Traffic stereotypes. That was That was to toxic masculine.
It really was.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
That was sickening. Yeah, I apologize. I don't know what
got into me.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Manosphere just dripping with manosphere. Oh yeah, it's kidding on that.
I'm thoroughly disappointed in both of you. This is disgusting,
it happens. I'm triggered.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
We had we had another minute to kill and we'd
run out of material, and then we just started.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
We just we just fell apart. Speak for yourself. We
got more on the way, Armstrong Hetty.
Speaker 6 (31:04):
President Chump today announced that he will host the twenty
twenty five Kennedy Center Honors. Hosting award shows is what
he envisioned being president is in the first place.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
I now present the award for Sexiest NATO ally and
congratulations to the women of Latvia. So the whole redistricting
thing getting a lot of news. Why did I just
come across some of this stuff yesterday in a podcast
with people who know what they're talking about. Hey, Republican
congress people do a better job on those talk shows
(31:35):
against pushing back.
Speaker 2 (31:36):
Good lord. Anyway, get to that, among other things in
hour three.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
Plus, Behind the scenes of the rent a crowd business.
You see a protest, folks, There's a good chance those
people are there because they got paid.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Just hilarious.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
Taylor Swift and the Kelsey Brothers broke the internet. Gotta
check in on that story. Oh, you just made me vomit.
So this is unintentionally hilarious. I think. Here's the headline.
This is a big Swedish study about people who live
a long time. Headline people who live to one hundred
(32:15):
have much in common, including suffering from fewer diseases. Wow,
thanks for that, doctor, I.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
Have something in common.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
I feel like people who live to one hundred have
birth dates that are more than a century away from
their current living status, almost all of them. Recent studies
you're saying they're healthier than the dead.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Huh.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Recent studies of centurions that would be people who are
in their hundreds, thank you for that, have found that
they suffer fewer diseases overall, develop them more slowly and
are less likely to experience fatal conditions compared to people
and shorter live No, they didn't say that they had.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
The sentence actually.
Speaker 1 (33:03):
Says that people who live to one hundred are less
likely to experience fatal conditions than people who die.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
Well. I agree completely. H it's hard. On the other hand, did.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
A I write that?
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Are you kidding me? I find that hilarious.
Speaker 1 (33:21):
They considered the historical dad from people born over blah
blah blah blah between nineteen twelve and nineteen twenty two
thousands of people.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
It's a very big study.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
You know, I would suggest it's a near one hundred
percent correlation between being alive and not being dead.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
Or not having a fatal condition.
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Yeah, so there's a lot of luck involved. He asked
a doctor Dan to say, you know, what's the best
way to live a long time? Uh, don't smoke and
have good genetics. Yeah, and the genetics seem to be oh, whoa, whoa, Michael,
did you hear that? Did you hear that good genetics?
That's eugenics, that's white fascism or something white supremacy.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
I heard it. That's why why I bought those American
Eagle genes.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
This actually makes sense, and it's a little more in
depth than that other comment.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (34:12):
One hundred year olds or more are able to delay
and avoid many major age related diseases rather than surviving them.
So it's not like, you know, they get whatever horrible
thing kills a lot of us and then the medical,
modern medical or whatever is able to take care of it.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
They just don't get it. They just don't get.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
Heart disease or you know, any of the horrible things
that can happen to you from whatever genetic reason. Yeah,
great genes. Yeah, and I've said this a thousand times,
but I remember it happened. I read about it roughly
the time I got cancer. There's a big article in
the Wall Street Journal the number one factor in getting
cancer bad luck.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
Still, it's just it's just we don't know why. Wow. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I was amongst a group of doctors who are all
smoking cigars, and I said, do you guys just not
care about mouth camp or whatever?
Speaker 2 (35:00):
And they're all in their.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
Fifty sixty seventies and they said no, if at this
point we've had no sign and blood.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
The nuns just geneix.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
Yeah, I'm not a doctor, so don't go start smoking
or anything. But you thought you were going to drive
people to start smoking with your flippant comment.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
I was afraid. Yeah, and then being sued for it.
Speaker 1 (35:19):
Yeah, if you missed a segment or an hour, get
the podcast. It's Armstrong and Getty on demand. You should
subscribe Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.