March 5, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- Getting government money is easy... or was
- Gladiator fights & California sober
- Democrats disrespect at SOTU & what's going on with Greenland?
- Dolly Parton's husband had a 10/10 life
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, arm Strong
and Getty, and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And to that end, I have created the brand new
Department of Government Efficiency.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Go perhaps you've heard of it.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Perhaps, thank you, Elan. You're working very hard. He didn't
need this. He didn't need this.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
We appreciate it. Everybody here, even this side, appreciates that.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
I believe.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
They just don't want to admit that. Just listen to
some of the appalling waste.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
We have already.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Identified two billion dollars from HHS to provide free housing
and cars for illegal aliens, Forty five million dollars for diversity,
equity and inclusion scholarships in Burma, forty million dollars to
improve the social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Nobody knows what that is. Eight million dollars to promote.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
He goes on and on with a whole bunch of
other good stuff that I'm happy they've cut out.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Sedentary migrants. Get off your ass what nobody knows what
that is? That's hilarious. And you know what one thing
I noticed during the speech last night I took one
for the team and watched like an hour of it,
was that Trump is so used to his raucous rallies
where people yell constantly while he's talking. He is utterly
unflapped by heckling. He doesn't care at all. He just
(01:55):
either addresses it or keeps going. It's up to him.
Very good at that.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
I think that fits in with something Paul mcgala, who
helped Bill Clinton get elected back in the day.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
He was on CNN yesterday showmanship. It is his great gift.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
His guy's a great showman, but he understands better than anybody,
probably even better than Ronald Reagan, how to command attention.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Yeah, well, he's a TV star.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Ronald Reagan was an actor, but that's different than being
a standing up in front of a live crowd all
the time TV star sort of guy.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
Right, Even he's just a showman through and through, and
even when Trump was ninety percent just a real estate developer,
he was the showman real estate developer. And other guys
who went about the gig more quietly and probably more
you know, effectively, or made more money. We're ill, I
was saying Trump's not that big a deal, but he's
a big deal when it comes to brand building.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
Anyway, what I wanted to bring up was the the
cutting waste thing in the doage thing. And I'm annoyed
by the cynics who say this is a drop in
the bucket, it's a rounding error, it will make no effect.
Oh I care. I want to deal with the real
debt and deficit.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
Sure, the structural stuff is, they say.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
I do want to deal with that, But why would
I not be in favor of getting rid of this
wasteful stuff.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
I just I don't get that.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
And I've been saying I've been saying for years, but
I said last week, just like in a parallel universe
or if I could come back in life, one thing
I'd like to try to do is, starting at age eighteen,
just try to get government money. I think if you,
if you put effort into it and work the system
and just paid attention to the news and saw where
the big chunks of money were going, you could fake
(03:47):
up a board or an organization or a charity or
a whatever and get big.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Chunks of that money so easy.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
And I think there are millions of people across the
country that do that at the county, state, and federal level.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
That's all they do. Well, right that Stacey, I know
that sure, Like that Stacy Abrams organization we talked about.
I think it was last week or early this week.
They got twenty million dollars as Biden was going out
the door. And their name is like it's a random
hip woke word generator string together of social green justice
(04:19):
Fairness coalition. Well, I'm allowed to get into doing anything
or nothing some of that.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
Barry Weiss tweeted this out yesterday, this story, and it's
a lot of that stuff. The Department of Justice is
investigating the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. It's a twenty seven
billion dollar program that was part of Biden's seven hundred
and forty billion dollar Inflation Reduction Act, which we all
know was the New Green Deal called the Inflation Reduction Act,
(04:46):
and everybody fell for it. Well people didn't fall for it,
but it passed. Created in the spring of twenty twenty
three and managed by the Environmental Protection Agency, the fund
was supposed to be a first of its kind program
to address the climate crisis while revitalizing communities that it
considered historically left behind. Man, there's a lot of phrases
there that make you want to grab your wallet. But
(05:09):
Barry Weiss goes on to say, but it appears that
little of the twenty seven billion dollars revitalized anything except
the coffers of a range of environmental nonprofits associated with
former Obama and Biden administration officials. The Biden administration used
so called climate equity, another phrase that makes me want
to grab my wallet. Make sure nobody steals it. The
(05:31):
Biden administration used so called climate equity to justify handouts
of billions of dollars to their far left friends Lee Zelden,
for instance, the Trump administration's new EPA administer told the
Financial Press, it's my utmost priority to get a handle
on every dollar that went out the door in this
scheme and once again restore oversight and accountability over these funds.
(05:54):
This shrawujah, this rush job operation is riddled with conflicts
of interest and corruption. A Free Press investigation reveals that
of the twenty seven billion, twenty billion was rushed out
the door. This is what you were talking about to
eight nonprofit groups after Biden lost the election, but before
Trump took office. As one former EPA official put it
(06:16):
on a secretly recorded video. It was akin to tossing
gold bars off the Titanic.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
It is grafted, pure and simple, and titanic amounts of it.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
I remember when these big trillion dollar deals passed and
Steve Hayes of the Dispatch said, they're going to be
unraveling for decades where this money went and how much
was just ripped off because there's just so much When
you have a trillion dollar deal, there's just so much money.
A billion here or it's certainly fifty million here or there,
(06:51):
nobody'll ever hear about. I mean, it's got a rise
to the level of billions before the lever even make
the news.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
But like sure, if you consider that a trillion dollars
is one thousand billion, but.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
Some individual guy ending up with, you know, twenty million dollars,
it would set you for life.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
Nobody will ever uncover that stuff.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Anyway, back to this, the eight groups were allocated sums
ranging from four hundred million to six point nine billion.
Several of them were formed in August twenty twenty three,
just one month after the grant applications went live. In
July of twenty twenty three, when it became clear that
the large nine and ten figure grants would be up
for grabs.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
The board. We are idiots. I too, I've gotten in
on that. I know. That's what I'm talking. I should
have designed a fake organization in an afternoon.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
Please, so this passes, you get wind from your friends
in Congress or whoever it is. That man, they've got
like one hundred billion dollar fund. They got to get
out the door. So you form some forty board the
save the planet from from greenhouse gas and help the
trans Commission. And you know me and my kids are
(07:56):
on it, and my parents and and if you're friends
with the righteo, they send fifty million dollars your way.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Throw the word equity in there. It's just it's all powerful. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
The boards and staff of these eight groups include Democratic donors,
people with connections to Obama and Biden administrations, and prominent
Democrats as you mentioned, like Stacy Abrams. These are some
of the biggest grants to individual organizations in American history.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
And in your tax dollars, you bust your ass all
week long. You look at your gross pay and your
net pay. That's where it went. Now, do we have
you tune in so we can make you angry. No,
not per se, but somebody needs to be angry about this.
We can't de fleeced. Like if you are complacent in
(08:45):
the face of thievery, this egregious. You deserve the thievery.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Would this be investigated, It's being investigated by the Justice Department.
Would this be investigated if Kamala had won?
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Of course not. That's hilarious. I know why I even
mention it.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
But the idea that when they've they had these twenty
billion dollars that rushed out the door after the election,
but before Trump took office, and some of these boards
were invented, you know, days after this happened, and they
got right anywhere between as she said, here road here
(09:24):
between four hundred million and six point nine billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
They exist to receive the money. That's why they exist.
It's horrifying. It is the only way that you can
combat this is to be against taxes. It's your only
Who the rich going to pay their fair share of this?
S no kidding, God dang.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
It, it's so frustrating.
Speaker 1 (09:53):
I mean, it makes you so cynical.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Does it make you feel okay about cheating on your taxes?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
I don't know how it wouldn't if.
Speaker 3 (10:02):
You can, we certainly don't suggest that on any level. Yeah,
push it as hard as you can.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
A word from our friends and sponsors that simply save
home security. Every twenty six seconds, the burglary takes place
in the US according to the FBI. No, not the
one we've been describing that takes place. They're laws that
make that. Okay, good lord, but this is scumbags breaking
into your house and stealing your stuff, and traditional security
systems only take action after someone's already broken in. That's
too late. Simply safe, active guard outdoor protection can help
(10:31):
prevent breakings before they happen.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
AI powered cameras backed by live professional monitoring agents. Why
do I emphasize professional like they're not amateur? I should
emphasize the live. Sorry I got that wrong. It's AI
and live people monitoring this to catch people before they
break in, so you can stop them before they actually
get in your house.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Yeah, they can see them, talk to them, activate spotlights,
call the cops. Whatever you need. No long term contracts
or cancelation fees. They earn your business every day, and
listen to this crazy monitoring plans start affordably at around
a buck a day, visit simply safe dot com slash armstrong.
You can get fifty percent off a new system with
a professional monitoring plan and your first month free. Again
it's simplysafe dot com slash armstrong to get fifty percent off.
(11:16):
There's no safe like simply say.
Speaker 3 (11:18):
I depressed myself with that last story, and I read
it last night in bed and got all angry.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Oh, if we can just whip up the fervor a
little bit for more fiscal conservatism in this country, we'll
be doing our children and grandchildren of great service. And
I don't mean you and me, I mean all of us, friends,
all of us again, just oh, such SAPs. And this
(11:44):
is one of the reasons I subscribed to the Free Press.
They're doing a great job. Even when I don't agree
with their conclusions. They're making honest inquiries to try to
figure out what's happening, which is kind of what we
do around here.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Among things, we can get to this hour, quite a
bit of polling. Your snap polling came out last night
after the Trump's speech. Really good news for Trump, or
if you're a Trump fan, I'd say that, among other things,
all the way, stay.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Here thirty Los Angeles County detention officers charged for allegedly
facilitating these so called gladiator fights between juvenile detainees. The
Attorney General says from June to December of twenty twenty three,
there were sixty nine fights involving one hundred and forty
three teenagers, the youngest just twelve years old. Man officers
(12:32):
now facing charges ranging from child abuse and battery to conspiracy,
and the LA County Parole Department says all current staff
who have been charged are now on leave without paid.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
On leave are going to be fired.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
It's almost impossible to fire a lot of guards in
a lot of prisons.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
But that's why they're on leaf. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
I thought that story was disgusting when I thought it
was an adult. Geez, you're pitting children against each other.
Oh god, you are lots of them. You have been
around and ugly crowd prisoners for so long. You've lost
your humanity. You shouldn't be doing that job anymore.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
One of our listeners wrote, I think it was self
published a book years and years and years ago, and
he sent it to us, and I read part of
it and I kept it. It was I think it
was called how to create a monster. He'd worked in
the prison system for a long time, and his thesis
was that our prison system as it exists is almost
like it's designed to create the hardest, meanest people we
(13:29):
possibly can. And he was not coming at it from
some sort of liberal do good or turn them all
loose Gavin k newso nonsense. He was just thinking, we
really ought to reimagine this if we want to create,
you know, citizens that we want to have around because
ninety whatever percent of them will get out eventually. Anyway,
thought for evoking, Yeah, god, that's horrible. Yeah, it is
(13:51):
a totally different topic. Here.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
Target Jack big target man. Through the years, I'm a stockholder.
I go to Target at least once a week, sometimes multiple.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
It's determined to bring back some of its lost Tarje Mojo.
In fact, the CEO actually use the term targe on
a big call with investors. They want to refocus on
their traditional strengths, exciting merchandise and a great store experience.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
The original appeal for me was, it's not Walmart. It's
just a It's Walmart with better carts and a little cleaner.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
Oh wow, I'm working with the Rockefeller over here. Mister fancy.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
It's like it's like Nate Margatzi says Target. I don't
go to Target. I'm not We're not from old money.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
I've got to admit, and I tend to be a
forgiving person. I have a really hard time for giving them,
not just for like rainbow t shirts, but like selling
tucking your little boy's penis garments so he can expl
his transgenderism. Stuffy, it's pretty awful. That is way way,
(15:04):
way way beyond the pale. But you might see some
trying to class up the Target in a store near you.
Speaking of consumer the affairs, this is literally consuming. Meet
the Cali sober set. No booze, but drugs are fine.
California sober, Yeah, who are I mean?
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Levato? Nevato? What is that singer name? She invented enough
she went into rehab and then was asked about towd
rehabits going she said, well, I'm California sober.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
I still smoke pot. So that is caught on as
a term.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
Right.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Here's a thirty year old gal who they focus on
who has cut down her drinking since moving to southern
California in twenty nineteen, and then quote started doing big
doses of mushrooms instead. Now she's thirty, living in Topanga Canyon,
where she whole hosts alcohol free pop up parties in
the LA area where she serves mood enhancing mocktails and
(16:02):
mushroom chocolates. All right, so alcohol is largely off the table,
but psychedelics are a big part of the the social scene.
I'm not sure. I mean, if you were like drinking
to excess and you couldn't control it and you were
hurting your health and relationships and that sort of thing,
you know, what the heck, if you can just do
(16:22):
something a little bit, I get that. But the idea that, yeah,
I've given up alcohol because it's harmful and now I
take powerful psychoactive drugs all the time, I would I
would advise caution. They mentioned that she started dabbling with
quote unquote plant medicine after cutting back on alcohol because
(16:44):
she's tired of hangovers. Yeah, and wanted different experiences. There
you go, Okay, she man, she does like all of
this stuff. Yeah, California sober is mostly mocked. I think
I don't think it's a thing other than big moncked.
I'm a big to each your own guy. I will
(17:04):
just tell you this, and I've said this to young
people more than once. The idea of psychoactive drugs, which
you know can be fine to take if you believe that,
that's okay. The problem is the bargain you're striking is
I'm going to alter my brain chemistry and when I'm done,
it'll go back to normal. Then next week, I'm gonna
alter my brain chemistry and then it'll go back to normal.
And you repeat that over and over and over again,
(17:26):
and many people eventually their brain says, yeah, I'm not
going back to normal. I can't anymore.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Yeah, Joe Rogan Elon and a lot of people swear
by it changed their lives forever in a profound way.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
Yeah, I'm not cynical about it. I'm just again advising caution.
I'd hate to ruin my brain over it. You only
got to one what kind of you know, be minus
as it is, and sometimes you get ruined like the
first try. Right, it can happen. Yeah, that would suck.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
They did some snap polling on Trump's speech last night. Man,
pretty good reasons aults, breaking down different issues and everything
like that. He's got to be happy with that.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
Yeah, it's probably great results because it was so great
and kicks.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
If you miss this that's coming up. If you missed
a segment, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
Demand Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
We have Marco Rubio in charge.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Good luck Marco.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.
Marco has been amazing and he's going to do a
great job.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
So Marco Rubyo is the Secretary of State. A lot
going on foreign policy wise. But there was reporting yesterday,
although all with unnamed sources. See, you never have any
idea if there's a grain of truth that these stories
are not.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
But there was some reporting yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
I forget where I saw it, real publication that Marco
Ruby is not happy with how being Secretary of State
has turned out, because it seems like Trump and Vance
and others are making foreign policy decisions kind of on
the flow, saying them out loud without his input or
his knowledge of what direction they're doing. It wouldn't shock
(19:08):
me that that's true. No, that's not an insane thing
to claim. No, but get into the speech in general.
So what are you calling last night's.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
Speech the sootach the state of the ass kicking?
Speaker 3 (19:20):
So Trump gives the longest speech ever for one of
those things, and the Democrats sat for everything that's never
happened before. And that's a new deal, no matter what
that mean to me. Kid to beat cancer. They didn't
stand in cheer.
Speaker 1 (19:36):
I mean, okay, well, Debbie Dingle of Michigan, I'm not
stealing your thunder here, am I. She actually plugged her
ears and rolled her eyes as people were a plodding
for the little kid who's fighting cancer. Good look, Debbie. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
And then some of the issues that they won't stand for.
You know, we're gonna end men in women's sports. Nobody
stood really, not even one, not a single vote the
other day, not even in some of those districts, like
whatever that woman was that gave the the rebuttal speech
last night, she was pretty good from Michigan, but they
chose her because Trump won her district and she won
(20:16):
as a Democrat. Even districts like that, there's not somebody
that wants to stand up and say, you know, I
kind of think dudes shouldn't be in girls' sports either.
That's just shocking that they're that uniform on such a
what seemed to me settled issue anyway.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Yeah, No, dissent is allowed in the Democratic Party. Before
I get to some of the poet and even Politico
thought the democrats attempt at pushback fell flat. Politico wrote today,
Oh yeah, Rich Lowry.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
Rich Lowry, who's a man of the right but definitely
not a Trump fan, said, Uh, most people watching that
speech will be a loss for what they were supposed
to disagree with and wonder why Democrats were so glum
and disagreeable. Well, that would fit in with some of
the polling that came out the CNN snappole. Among speech
(21:08):
watcher views of Trump's speech, approve, seventy six percent disapproved
twenty three So seventy six twenty three approve. Among speech watchers'
issues you care about almost two thirds, a lot, twenty
eight percent, a little ten percent, none at all. So
(21:29):
speech made you feel hopeful, proud, worried, or angry. Those
are the options. Sixty eight percent hopeful, Uh, over half
prad for all of the quote unquote controversy, it had
a very positive vibe to it.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
In the speech, Trump was presidential, entertaining, inspiring, unifying, divisive.
Three quarters said presidential, three quarters said entertaining. Seventy one
percent inspiring, sixty two percent unifying, and less than half divisive. Now,
my first thought upon seeing these numbers was, well, maybe
(22:11):
only Republicans watched, and it's not only Republicans, but it
was heavily Republicans. Party identification of speech watchers fifty one
percent Republicans, and then you split it among independents and
Democrats for the rest. But I don't know.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
I don't know what the numbers are on that. Usually.
Speaker 3 (22:27):
I know, I've looked at these snap polls over the years,
and they're usually not that overwhelmingly favorable for a Democrat
or a Republican. I don't know about the makeup of
the audience. Do you remember is the Is it always
the case? I mean, I'm sure it's always the case
that if you have a democratic president, more Democrats watching
(22:49):
Republicans and vice versa.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Yes, sure, But is it overwhelmingly that way? I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
I don't remember either, have we Is that just like
part of the new era we're in where only Republicans
are going to watch a Republican president, only democrats away,
and so all of this will be skewed.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
I don't know about that. Given the fact that the
state of the Union address has just become a campaign speech,
you know, whether it's Joe Biden or halfway Kamala Harris
or Barack Obama. I heard they're jabbering plenty. I didn't.
You know, if I could do this for a living,
why do I want to tune into one of his
campaign speeches? So it's probably pretty heavily partisan.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
Yeah, so then if that's the fact, well, so it's
half Republicans. The fact that three quarters of people thought
the speech was great, that means you're doing better than
just Republicans.
Speaker 1 (23:44):
Uh. Yeah, Well again, depending on the distribution of the
audience Republicans, Independence, and Democrats, which isn't clear to me.
You didn't mention that, right, or did you?
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Over half Republicans watch the speech of watchers over half
a Republicans, Yeah, and then twenty seven percent Independence, twenty
percent Democrats.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Okay, sorry, I was thinking of other things and missed that.
But yeah, clearly I was going to say, yeah, Republicans
are watching, but a lot of you know, Trump agnostic
or Trump friendly independence, I'm sure watch too. It was
a really good the first chunk of it was a
really good speech. How he went deep into the night.
I don't get why he does that. Maybe you're right,
he's just trying to generate more sound bites because most
(24:26):
people take it in through the echo chamber. But it
was good. It was terrific. And I'm highly trump skeptical
on a lot of things. Everybody knows that, but as
a celebration of the progress and rallying the country behind
the things he's trying to do that we all agree on,
eliminating government waste, getting men out of women's sports and
(24:47):
women's private places, all that stuff. I thought he presented
it in a very down to earth, easy to digest way.
I thought it was very effective. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
I saw Jeff Greenfeld, he wrote a piece for Politico
fairly praising of Trump's speech from his standpoint, I mean,
because a smart pundit, if you're not just a naked partisan,
you would say, I mean, you would say, even if
you hate Trump, I hate Trump. I hate everything he's doing.
But that was good for him. That was a win
(25:21):
for him, which is I saw a number of people say, oh,
that's what everybody on the Dispatch said last night. Dispatch
is a conservative publication. If you don't know what website.
None of them like Trump, but they all thought it
was a net win for Trump.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
Definitely last night.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Politico writing today, the actual headline is giving Bingo Democrats
silent protest against Trump falls flat. That's the everybody holding
up the little signs that say various things. Looking at
the signs, must steals, save Medicaid, protect veterans.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
Okay, just false.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
One of the problems with those signs I saw pointed
out on social media was they were so easily mimable.
It takes very little pharoshop skill to change those signs
into all kinds of ridiculous things that a lot of
people write, right, I'm a moron or whatever.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Well, and the great grand standing moment at the beginning
of the thing where al Green, the ancient lunatic who
even Democrats wish would die. They don't say that on
the record, of course, but they want it, the fact
that he was the big grand standy I'm against Trump leader,
an ancient lunatic shaking his cane. I mean, it was
(26:40):
beyond parody. It was the stuff of like a really
good Saturday Night Live sketch.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Well, an ancient lunatic I'd never heard of. And I
follow politics more closely obviously than most people do the
pulling on that. Seventy six percent of people approved of
carrying that old guy out of there. I was hoping
he was gonna like shove one of those dudes or like,
you know, make a real.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Scene, right, try to turn it into you know, the
Selma March or something like that, because that was the thing.
I wasn't sure how I was gonna go because it
was so obviously performing, right, I mean, it was new
he was gonna get kicked out for that.
Speaker 3 (27:17):
He was told Stopper, he'll get kicked out, and he
kept on with the hopes that he would get kicked out.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Right, exactly, it was just so according to an obvious script.
Mostly it was eye rolling and chuckling at the whole
idiotic exhibition. And then Annie went on. Trump went with
a speech.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Yeah, AnyWho, that's that. Nobody will even remember. It happened
by Friday.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Oh, the getting kicked out of the speech now the
whole speech. Yeah. The only effect it might have is
it was a bigger audience than usual for look at
the crazy s we've found in the budget, or trying
to save your taxpayer dollars. That part was really effective.
Could nudge the needle We've.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Got such big stories, like real stories going on right now.
The tariff thing, depending on how long that lasts, that's
going to be the talk of the country if it
lasts very long and people start seeing significant price increases.
And then the whole Ukraine Russia thing, which could go.
Who knows how that's going.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
To turn out, and that might just be a single
theater of the alleged greater scheme to switch away from
the American led rules based international order to more spheres
of influence great nations, old timey way to arrange the globe.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
Am I right that Trump said We're going to get
Greenland last night? I don't know I read that up there.
I don't know if we have that we have that clip, Penson,
but I read it up on the sorry one about it.
Trump said to Greenland will be ours. Oh, here you
go seventy six.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
And I also have a message tonight for the incredible
people of Greenland. We strongly support your right to determine
your own future, and if you choose, we welcome you
into the United States of America. We need Greenland for
national security and even international security, and we're working with
(29:09):
everybody involved to try and get it, but we need
it really for international world security. And I think we're
going to get it one.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
Way or the other. We're going to get it one
way or the other. Okay, there you go.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
We will keep you say, we will make you rich,
and together we will take Greenland to heights like you
have never thought possible before.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
Yeah, just to install fifty million space heaters around to
warm the place up, that'd be a start. Well, it
reminds me of the Panama strategy where he's talking about
taking the canal back by force. And yesterday, if you
didn't hear this, we mentioned it lay Dish in the
show that an American company, well black Rock Investments, that
the investment giant had bought the port facilities at either
end of the canal from the Hong Kong based company
(29:54):
that had been running them. So you know, and I've
said this from the beginning, he's angling toward an enhanced
security agreement with Greenland and it's Danish overlords. I can
hardly see the road with the heat rising up on
the horizon. Panama, Wow, Greenland.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
So he actually wants Greenland, though I don't think this
is just a point and I as a what a
territory or whatever. We would make it like something like
what Guam is or something. But I've read a number
of pundits that I was surprised that were like, all in, oh, yeah,
we should absolutely find a way to get Greenland. It's
very important to the future of the safety.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
Of the world and everything like that. Now, but I
agree completely for the record.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
It's not up to the green Greenlanders, is isn't it
up to the Danes? Don't they own Greenland or someone?
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Well, they've got a pretty good right of self determination
to the extent that I understand the Danish system. I
understand a nice Danish with a cup of coffee. But yeah,
the people of Greenland decide there faith.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
The population of fifty six thousand. Buy them each car,
vote for it. I'll buy a car. Well, it cost
us nothing. Why are you so belligerent? You are the
ugly American. This disgusts me.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
Here's what's going to happen. Here's all Trump is saying.
And this goes again to the here's our sphere of influence,
there's your sphere of influence. We won't screw with yours.
You don't screw with ours. New world order that they're
talking about building. We have to have Greenland to protect
the Arctic Circle and the northern shipping and military passages.
(31:35):
And it might be some sort of protectorate status. It
might just be here's what he's going for, a one
hundred percent certain alliance with Greenland or Denmark, or we
own it so that we always know it's on our
side in our sphere of influence, in whatever shape that takes.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
You want Santa under the control of the Chinese, We
need Greenland?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
Is that what you want? I was reading some really
interesting stuff about Greenland the other day. Do we have
time for this? I find that hard to believe. Uh
what No, I was super interesting. If you're into mining logistics,
and you know me mining logistics, getting the crap out
of the ground there may be one of the most
logistically daunting tasks anybody's ever imagined. Giant mining company after
(32:25):
mining companies looked into it, seen the enormous wealth to
be extracted and said no.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
But couldn't we not literally bribe them, like give you
a car, but make it clear to him your economy's
going to be so different if you come under the
sway of the United States, You're all going to be.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
Wealthy for one thing. Yeah, if we could promise them that,
I think we can. Can we sure? What do you
know about mining logistics? Nothing? And I wasn't reading about
it the other day and the adults are talking all
right here? Who are twenty six twenty point games this year?
(33:06):
Lebron col for three twenty two seasons, forty years of age,
what contests fifty thousand and two.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
Points is already the leading scorer in NBA history. Now
he is by a lot, hitting fifty thousand points. Nobody
thought that would ever be possible. It helps if you
start when you're eighteen and are really really good, but.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Until you're sixty five. Apparently that seems to be the plan.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
He's forty, and they are in first place in their division,
and they got one of the best players in the
NBA to join him, and he's young Luka Doncic, and
they're gonna be a finals contender.
Speaker 1 (33:47):
That'll be fun to watch. I think.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
I was just watching some news, and you know how
during COVID, people weren't going into studios, so guests on
TV were doing their thing from home, which was new,
but it is continued. A lot of people or organizations
have decided, what do we make an you drive clear
across New York or DC, or fly across the country
(34:12):
or whatever to be in the studio when you can
just do it from home. And then also the whole
not only am I not gonna throw on a suit,
I'm not even gonna throw on a decent shirt.
Speaker 1 (34:24):
Or put away the cereal bowl on the counter behind me.
Speaker 3 (34:28):
It's just amazing how many people just don't care.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
And I'm not sure it matters. So what difference does
it make? Yeah, it's funny. I've done enough of that.
I've tried to come up with a perfect background, you know,
the right books and the right look and all that. Eh.
Then I see some like great pundits whore and this
is true a lot in DC. You see their background
(34:53):
and you realize, oh, you have much more influence than
money because they're you know, doing their shot from a
very very modest basement room there in Dcah. Hey, I
want to mention this.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
So I met brought up on the show yesterday that
Dolly Parton's husband died of all weird stories, but she
had been married to the same guy for sixty years
and met him when at the laundromat when she was eighteen.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
He saw her devil too. I've seen pictures back in
the day.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
He saw him for the first saw her for the
first time, thought I'm going to marry that girl. And
he did two years later, and they stayed married the
whole time, and very happily married from all accounts from
both of them. But this, yes, interesting. Yesterday I saw this,
tweeted out Carl Dean. That's Dolly Parton's husband. Married young,
gave zero fs about fame and fortune. He laid us
(35:39):
asphalt for a living. He ran an asphalt laying company
for sixty years, married to a very famous woman. Zero
Facebook posts, zero tweets, ten for ten life legend. Yeah,
just so somebody you had no interest in putting his
(36:00):
opinion out there about everything that happens in the world,
or any opinions about anything. Just gonna live my life.
I don't care how famous I could be or how
much attention I could get.
Speaker 1 (36:07):
I just don't care. Worked hard and loved a woman,
It's all right. Why don't more people do that? You'd
be happier. Lust for fame is difficult to explain. It
seems to be damn near Universe. We do four hours.
Speaker 3 (36:23):
If you miss an hour, get the podcast Armstrong and
Getty on demand Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty, arm Strong
and Getty, and now he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And to that end, I have created the brand new
Department of Government Efficiency.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Go perhaps you've heard of it.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Perhaps, thank you, Elan. You're working very hard. He didn't
need this. He didn't need this.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
We appreciate it. Everybody here, even this side, appreciates that.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
I believe.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
They just don't want to admit that. Just listen to
some of the appalling waste.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
We have already.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Identified two billion dollars from HHS to provide free housing
and cars for illegal aliens, Forty five million dollars for diversity,
equity and inclusion scholarships in Burma, forty million dollars to
improve the social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Nobody knows what that is. Eight million dollars to promote.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
He goes on and on with a whole bunch of
other good stuff that I'm happy they've cut out.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Sedentary migrants. Get off your ass what nobody knows what
that is? That's hilarious. And you know what one thing
I noticed during the speech last night I took one
for the team and watched like an hour of it,
was that Trump is so used to his raucous rallies
where people yell constantly while he's talking. He is utterly
unflapped by heckling. He doesn't care at all. He just
(01:55):
either addresses it or keeps going. It's up to him.
Very good at that.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
I think that fits in with something Paul mcgala, who
helped Bill Clinton get elected back in the day.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
He was on CNN yesterday showmanship. It is his great gift.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
His guy's a great showman, but he understands better than anybody,
probably even better than Ronald Reagan, how to command attention.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Yeah, well, he's a TV star.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Ronald Reagan was an actor, but that's different than being
a standing up in front of a live crowd all
the time TV star sort of guy.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
Right, Even he's just a showman through and through, and
even when Trump was ninety percent just a real estate developer,
he was the showman real estate developer. And other guys
who went about the gig more quietly and probably more
you know, effectively, or made more money. We're ill, I
was saying Trump's not that big a deal, but he's
a big deal when it comes to brand building.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
Anyway, what I wanted to bring up was the the
cutting waste thing in the doage thing. And I'm annoyed
by the cynics who say this is a drop in
the bucket, it's a rounding error, it will make no effect.
Oh I care. I want to deal with the real
debt and deficit.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
Sure, the structural stuff is, they say.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
I do want to deal with that, But why would
I not be in favor of getting rid of this
wasteful stuff.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
I just I don't get that.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
And I've been saying I've been saying for years, but
I said last week, just like in a parallel universe
or if I could come back in life, one thing
I'd like to try to do is, starting at age eighteen,
just try to get government money. I think if you,
if you put effort into it and work the system
and just paid attention to the news and saw where
the big chunks of money were going, you could fake
(03:47):
up a board or an organization or a charity or
a whatever and get big.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Chunks of that money so easy.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
And I think there are millions of people across the
country that do that at the county, state, and federal level.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
That's all they do. Well, right that Stacey, I know
that sure, Like that Stacy Abrams organization we talked about.
I think it was last week or early this week.
They got twenty million dollars as Biden was going out
the door. And their name is like it's a random
hip woke word generator string together of social green justice
(04:19):
Fairness coalition. Well, I'm allowed to get into doing anything
or nothing some of that.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
Barry Weiss tweeted this out yesterday, this story, and it's
a lot of that stuff. The Department of Justice is
investigating the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. It's a twenty seven
billion dollar program that was part of Biden's seven hundred
and forty billion dollar Inflation Reduction Act, which we all
know was the New Green Deal called the Inflation Reduction Act,
(04:46):
and everybody fell for it. Well people didn't fall for it,
but it passed. Created in the spring of twenty twenty
three and managed by the Environmental Protection Agency, the fund
was supposed to be a first of its kind program
to address the climate crisis while revitalizing communities that it
considered historically left behind. Man, there's a lot of phrases
there that make you want to grab your wallet. But
(05:09):
Barry Weiss goes on to say, but it appears that
little of the twenty seven billion dollars revitalized anything except
the coffers of a range of environmental nonprofits associated with
former Obama and Biden administration officials. The Biden administration used
so called climate equity, another phrase that makes me want
to grab my wallet. Make sure nobody steals it. The
(05:31):
Biden administration used so called climate equity to justify handouts
of billions of dollars to their far left friends Lee Zelden,
for instance, the Trump administration's new EPA administer told the
Financial Press, it's my utmost priority to get a handle
on every dollar that went out the door in this
scheme and once again restore oversight and accountability over these funds.
(05:54):
This shrawujah, this rush job operation is riddled with conflicts
of interest and corruption. A Free Press investigation reveals that
of the twenty seven billion, twenty billion was rushed out
the door. This is what you were talking about to
eight nonprofit groups after Biden lost the election, but before
Trump took office. As one former EPA official put it
(06:16):
on a secretly recorded video. It was akin to tossing
gold bars off the Titanic.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
It is grafted, pure and simple, and titanic amounts of it.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
I remember when these big trillion dollar deals passed and
Steve Hayes of the Dispatch said, they're going to be
unraveling for decades where this money went and how much
was just ripped off because there's just so much When
you have a trillion dollar deal, there's just so much money.
A billion here or it's certainly fifty million here or there,
(06:51):
nobody'll ever hear about. I mean, it's got a rise
to the level of billions before the lever even make
the news.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
But like sure, if you consider that a trillion dollars
is one thousand billion, but.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
Some individual guy ending up with, you know, twenty million dollars,
it would set you for life.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
Nobody will ever uncover that stuff.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Anyway, back to this, the eight groups were allocated sums
ranging from four hundred million to six point nine billion.
Several of them were formed in August twenty twenty three,
just one month after the grant applications went live. In
July of twenty twenty three, when it became clear that
the large nine and ten figure grants would be up
for grabs.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
The board. We are idiots. I too, I've gotten in
on that. I know. That's what I'm talking. I should
have designed a fake organization in an afternoon.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
Please, so this passes, you get wind from your friends
in Congress or whoever it is. That man, they've got
like one hundred billion dollar fund. They got to get
out the door. So you form some forty board the
save the planet from from greenhouse gas and help the
trans Commission. And you know me and my kids are
(07:56):
on it, and my parents and and if you're friends
with the righteo, they send fifty million dollars your way.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Throw the word equity in there. It's just it's all powerful. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
The boards and staff of these eight groups include Democratic donors,
people with connections to Obama and Biden administrations, and prominent
Democrats as you mentioned, like Stacy Abrams. These are some
of the biggest grants to individual organizations in American history.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
And in your tax dollars, you bust your ass all
week long. You look at your gross pay and your
net pay. That's where it went. Now, do we have
you tune in so we can make you angry. No,
not per se, but somebody needs to be angry about this.
We can't de fleeced. Like if you are complacent in
(08:45):
the face of thievery, this egregious. You deserve the thievery.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Would this be investigated, It's being investigated by the Justice Department.
Would this be investigated if Kamala had won?
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Of course not. That's hilarious. I know why I even
mention it.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
But the idea that when they've they had these twenty
billion dollars that rushed out the door after the election,
but before Trump took office, and some of these boards
were invented, you know, days after this happened, and they
got right anywhere between as she said, here road here
(09:24):
between four hundred million and six point nine billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
They exist to receive the money. That's why they exist.
It's horrifying. It is the only way that you can
combat this is to be against taxes. It's your only
Who the rich going to pay their fair share of this?
S no kidding, God dang.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
It, it's so frustrating.
Speaker 1 (09:53):
I mean, it makes you so cynical.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Does it make you feel okay about cheating on your taxes?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
I don't know how it wouldn't if.
Speaker 3 (10:02):
You can, we certainly don't suggest that on any level. Yeah,
push it as hard as you can.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
A word from our friends and sponsors that simply save
home security. Every twenty six seconds, the burglary takes place
in the US according to the FBI. No, not the
one we've been describing that takes place. They're laws that
make that. Okay, good lord, but this is scumbags breaking
into your house and stealing your stuff, and traditional security
systems only take action after someone's already broken in. That's
too late. Simply safe, active guard outdoor protection can help
(10:31):
prevent breakings before they happen.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
AI powered cameras backed by live professional monitoring agents. Why
do I emphasize professional like they're not amateur? I should
emphasize the live. Sorry I got that wrong. It's AI
and live people monitoring this to catch people before they
break in, so you can stop them before they actually
get in your house.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Yeah, they can see them, talk to them, activate spotlights,
call the cops. Whatever you need. No long term contracts
or cancelation fees. They earn your business every day, and
listen to this crazy monitoring plans start affordably at around
a buck a day, visit simply safe dot com slash armstrong.
You can get fifty percent off a new system with
a professional monitoring plan and your first month free. Again
it's simplysafe dot com slash armstrong to get fifty percent off.
(11:16):
There's no safe like simply say.
Speaker 3 (11:18):
I depressed myself with that last story, and I read
it last night in bed and got all angry.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Oh, if we can just whip up the fervor a
little bit for more fiscal conservatism in this country, we'll
be doing our children and grandchildren of great service. And
I don't mean you and me, I mean all of us, friends,
all of us again, just oh, such SAPs. And this
(11:44):
is one of the reasons I subscribed to the Free Press.
They're doing a great job. Even when I don't agree
with their conclusions. They're making honest inquiries to try to
figure out what's happening, which is kind of what we
do around here.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Among things, we can get to this hour, quite a
bit of polling. Your snap polling came out last night
after the Trump's speech. Really good news for Trump, or
if you're a Trump fan, I'd say that, among other things,
all the way, stay.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Here thirty Los Angeles County detention officers charged for allegedly
facilitating these so called gladiator fights between juvenile detainees. The
Attorney General says from June to December of twenty twenty three,
there were sixty nine fights involving one hundred and forty
three teenagers, the youngest just twelve years old. Man officers
(12:32):
now facing charges ranging from child abuse and battery to conspiracy,
and the LA County Parole Department says all current staff
who have been charged are now on leave without paid.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
On leave are going to be fired.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
It's almost impossible to fire a lot of guards in
a lot of prisons.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
But that's why they're on leaf. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
I thought that story was disgusting when I thought it
was an adult. Geez, you're pitting children against each other.
Oh god, you are lots of them. You have been
around and ugly crowd prisoners for so long. You've lost
your humanity. You shouldn't be doing that job anymore.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
One of our listeners wrote, I think it was self
published a book years and years and years ago, and
he sent it to us, and I read part of
it and I kept it. It was I think it
was called how to create a monster. He'd worked in
the prison system for a long time, and his thesis
was that our prison system as it exists is almost
like it's designed to create the hardest, meanest people we
(13:29):
possibly can. And he was not coming at it from
some sort of liberal do good or turn them all
loose Gavin k newso nonsense. He was just thinking, we
really ought to reimagine this if we want to create,
you know, citizens that we want to have around because
ninety whatever percent of them will get out eventually. Anyway,
thought for evoking, Yeah, god, that's horrible. Yeah, it is
(13:51):
a totally different topic. Here.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
Target Jack big target man. Through the years, I'm a stockholder.
I go to Target at least once a week, sometimes multiple.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
It's determined to bring back some of its lost Tarje Mojo.
In fact, the CEO actually use the term targe on
a big call with investors. They want to refocus on
their traditional strengths, exciting merchandise and a great store experience.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
The original appeal for me was, it's not Walmart. It's
just a It's Walmart with better carts and a little cleaner.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
Oh wow, I'm working with the Rockefeller over here. Mister fancy.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
It's like it's like Nate Margatzi says Target. I don't
go to Target. I'm not We're not from old money.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
I've got to admit, and I tend to be a
forgiving person. I have a really hard time for giving them,
not just for like rainbow t shirts, but like selling
tucking your little boy's penis garments so he can expl
his transgenderism. Stuffy, it's pretty awful. That is way way,
(15:04):
way way beyond the pale. But you might see some
trying to class up the Target in a store near you.
Speaking of consumer the affairs, this is literally consuming. Meet
the Cali sober set. No booze, but drugs are fine.
California sober, Yeah, who are I mean?
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Levato? Nevato? What is that singer name? She invented enough
she went into rehab and then was asked about towd
rehabits going she said, well, I'm California sober.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
I still smoke pot. So that is caught on as
a term.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
Right.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Here's a thirty year old gal who they focus on
who has cut down her drinking since moving to southern
California in twenty nineteen, and then quote started doing big
doses of mushrooms instead. Now she's thirty, living in Topanga Canyon,
where she whole hosts alcohol free pop up parties in
the LA area where she serves mood enhancing mocktails and
(16:02):
mushroom chocolates. All right, so alcohol is largely off the table,
but psychedelics are a big part of the the social scene.
I'm not sure. I mean, if you were like drinking
to excess and you couldn't control it and you were
hurting your health and relationships and that sort of thing,
you know, what the heck, if you can just do
(16:22):
something a little bit, I get that. But the idea that, yeah,
I've given up alcohol because it's harmful and now I
take powerful psychoactive drugs all the time, I would I
would advise caution. They mentioned that she started dabbling with
quote unquote plant medicine after cutting back on alcohol because
(16:44):
she's tired of hangovers. Yeah, and wanted different experiences. There
you go, Okay, she man, she does like all of
this stuff. Yeah, California sober is mostly mocked. I think
I don't think it's a thing other than big moncked.
I'm a big to each your own guy. I will
(17:04):
just tell you this, and I've said this to young
people more than once. The idea of psychoactive drugs, which
you know can be fine to take if you believe that,
that's okay. The problem is the bargain you're striking is
I'm going to alter my brain chemistry and when I'm done,
it'll go back to normal. Then next week, I'm gonna
alter my brain chemistry and then it'll go back to normal.
And you repeat that over and over and over again,
(17:26):
and many people eventually their brain says, yeah, I'm not
going back to normal. I can't anymore.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Yeah, Joe Rogan Elon and a lot of people swear
by it changed their lives forever in a profound way.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
Yeah, I'm not cynical about it. I'm just again advising caution.
I'd hate to ruin my brain over it. You only
got to one what kind of you know, be minus
as it is, and sometimes you get ruined like the
first try. Right, it can happen. Yeah, that would suck.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
They did some snap polling on Trump's speech last night. Man,
pretty good reasons aults, breaking down different issues and everything
like that. He's got to be happy with that.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
Yeah, it's probably great results because it was so great
and kicks.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
If you miss this that's coming up. If you missed
a segment, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
Demand Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
We have Marco Rubio in charge.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Good luck Marco.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.
Marco has been amazing and he's going to do a
great job.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
So Marco Rubyo is the Secretary of State. A lot
going on foreign policy wise. But there was reporting yesterday,
although all with unnamed sources. See, you never have any
idea if there's a grain of truth that these stories
are not.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
But there was some reporting yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
I forget where I saw it, real publication that Marco
Ruby is not happy with how being Secretary of State
has turned out, because it seems like Trump and Vance
and others are making foreign policy decisions kind of on
the flow, saying them out loud without his input or
his knowledge of what direction they're doing. It wouldn't shock
(19:08):
me that that's true. No, that's not an insane thing
to claim. No, but get into the speech in general.
So what are you calling last night's.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
Speech the sootach the state of the ass kicking?
Speaker 3 (19:20):
So Trump gives the longest speech ever for one of
those things, and the Democrats sat for everything that's never
happened before. And that's a new deal, no matter what
that mean to me. Kid to beat cancer. They didn't
stand in cheer.
Speaker 1 (19:36):
I mean, okay, well, Debbie Dingle of Michigan, I'm not
stealing your thunder here, am I. She actually plugged her
ears and rolled her eyes as people were a plodding
for the little kid who's fighting cancer. Good look, Debbie. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
And then some of the issues that they won't stand for.
You know, we're gonna end men in women's sports. Nobody
stood really, not even one, not a single vote the
other day, not even in some of those districts, like
whatever that woman was that gave the the rebuttal speech
last night, she was pretty good from Michigan, but they
chose her because Trump won her district and she won
(20:16):
as a Democrat. Even districts like that, there's not somebody
that wants to stand up and say, you know, I
kind of think dudes shouldn't be in girls' sports either.
That's just shocking that they're that uniform on such a
what seemed to me settled issue anyway.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Yeah, No, dissent is allowed in the Democratic Party. Before
I get to some of the poet and even Politico
thought the democrats attempt at pushback fell flat. Politico wrote today,
Oh yeah, Rich Lowry.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
Rich Lowry, who's a man of the right but definitely
not a Trump fan, said, Uh, most people watching that
speech will be a loss for what they were supposed
to disagree with and wonder why Democrats were so glum
and disagreeable. Well, that would fit in with some of
the polling that came out the CNN snappole. Among speech
(21:08):
watcher views of Trump's speech, approve, seventy six percent disapproved
twenty three So seventy six twenty three approve. Among speech watchers'
issues you care about almost two thirds, a lot, twenty
eight percent, a little ten percent, none at all. So
(21:29):
speech made you feel hopeful, proud, worried, or angry. Those
are the options. Sixty eight percent hopeful, Uh, over half
prad for all of the quote unquote controversy, it had
a very positive vibe to it.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
In the speech, Trump was presidential, entertaining, inspiring, unifying, divisive.
Three quarters said presidential, three quarters said entertaining. Seventy one
percent inspiring, sixty two percent unifying, and less than half divisive. Now,
my first thought upon seeing these numbers was, well, maybe
(22:11):
only Republicans watched, and it's not only Republicans, but it
was heavily Republicans. Party identification of speech watchers fifty one
percent Republicans, and then you split it among independents and
Democrats for the rest. But I don't know.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
I don't know what the numbers are on that. Usually.
Speaker 3 (22:27):
I know, I've looked at these snap polls over the years,
and they're usually not that overwhelmingly favorable for a Democrat
or a Republican. I don't know about the makeup of
the audience. Do you remember is the Is it always
the case? I mean, I'm sure it's always the case
that if you have a democratic president, more Democrats watching
(22:49):
Republicans and vice versa.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Yes, sure, But is it overwhelmingly that way? I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
I don't remember either, have we Is that just like
part of the new era we're in where only Republicans
are going to watch a Republican president, only democrats away,
and so all of this will be skewed.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
I don't know about that. Given the fact that the
state of the Union address has just become a campaign speech,
you know, whether it's Joe Biden or halfway Kamala Harris
or Barack Obama. I heard they're jabbering plenty. I didn't.
You know, if I could do this for a living,
why do I want to tune into one of his
campaign speeches? So it's probably pretty heavily partisan.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
Yeah, so then if that's the fact, well, so it's
half Republicans. The fact that three quarters of people thought
the speech was great, that means you're doing better than
just Republicans.
Speaker 1 (23:44):
Uh. Yeah, Well again, depending on the distribution of the
audience Republicans, Independence, and Democrats, which isn't clear to me.
You didn't mention that, right, or did you?
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Over half Republicans watch the speech of watchers over half
a Republicans, Yeah, and then twenty seven percent Independence, twenty
percent Democrats.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Okay, sorry, I was thinking of other things and missed that.
But yeah, clearly I was going to say, yeah, Republicans
are watching, but a lot of you know, Trump agnostic
or Trump friendly independence, I'm sure watch too. It was
a really good the first chunk of it was a
really good speech. How he went deep into the night.
I don't get why he does that. Maybe you're right,
he's just trying to generate more sound bites because most
(24:26):
people take it in through the echo chamber. But it
was good. It was terrific. And I'm highly trump skeptical
on a lot of things. Everybody knows that, but as
a celebration of the progress and rallying the country behind
the things he's trying to do that we all agree on,
eliminating government waste, getting men out of women's sports and
(24:47):
women's private places, all that stuff. I thought he presented
it in a very down to earth, easy to digest way.
I thought it was very effective. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
I saw Jeff Greenfeld, he wrote a piece for Politico
fairly praising of Trump's speech from his standpoint, I mean,
because a smart pundit, if you're not just a naked partisan,
you would say, I mean, you would say, even if
you hate Trump, I hate Trump. I hate everything he's doing.
But that was good for him. That was a win
(25:21):
for him, which is I saw a number of people say, oh,
that's what everybody on the Dispatch said last night. Dispatch
is a conservative publication. If you don't know what website.
None of them like Trump, but they all thought it
was a net win for Trump.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
Definitely last night.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Politico writing today, the actual headline is giving Bingo Democrats
silent protest against Trump falls flat. That's the everybody holding
up the little signs that say various things. Looking at
the signs, must steals, save Medicaid, protect veterans.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
Okay, just false.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
One of the problems with those signs I saw pointed
out on social media was they were so easily mimable.
It takes very little pharoshop skill to change those signs
into all kinds of ridiculous things that a lot of
people write, right, I'm a moron or whatever.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Well, and the great grand standing moment at the beginning
of the thing where al Green, the ancient lunatic who
even Democrats wish would die. They don't say that on
the record, of course, but they want it, the fact
that he was the big grand standy I'm against Trump leader,
an ancient lunatic shaking his cane. I mean, it was
(26:40):
beyond parody. It was the stuff of like a really
good Saturday Night Live sketch.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Well, an ancient lunatic I'd never heard of. And I
follow politics more closely obviously than most people do the
pulling on that. Seventy six percent of people approved of
carrying that old guy out of there. I was hoping
he was gonna like shove one of those dudes or like,
you know, make a real.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Scene, right, try to turn it into you know, the
Selma March or something like that, because that was the thing.
I wasn't sure how I was gonna go because it
was so obviously performing, right, I mean, it was new
he was gonna get kicked out for that.
Speaker 3 (27:17):
He was told Stopper, he'll get kicked out, and he
kept on with the hopes that he would get kicked out.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Right, exactly, it was just so according to an obvious script.
Mostly it was eye rolling and chuckling at the whole
idiotic exhibition. And then Annie went on. Trump went with
a speech.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Yeah, AnyWho, that's that. Nobody will even remember. It happened
by Friday.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Oh, the getting kicked out of the speech now the
whole speech. Yeah. The only effect it might have is
it was a bigger audience than usual for look at
the crazy s we've found in the budget, or trying
to save your taxpayer dollars. That part was really effective.
Could nudge the needle We've.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Got such big stories, like real stories going on right now.
The tariff thing, depending on how long that lasts, that's
going to be the talk of the country if it
lasts very long and people start seeing significant price increases.
And then the whole Ukraine Russia thing, which could go.
Who knows how that's going.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
To turn out, and that might just be a single
theater of the alleged greater scheme to switch away from
the American led rules based international order to more spheres
of influence great nations, old timey way to arrange the globe.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
Am I right that Trump said We're going to get
Greenland last night? I don't know I read that up there.
I don't know if we have that we have that clip, Penson,
but I read it up on the sorry one about it.
Trump said to Greenland will be ours. Oh, here you
go seventy six.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
And I also have a message tonight for the incredible
people of Greenland. We strongly support your right to determine
your own future, and if you choose, we welcome you
into the United States of America. We need Greenland for
national security and even international security, and we're working with
(29:09):
everybody involved to try and get it, but we need
it really for international world security. And I think we're
going to get it one.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
Way or the other. We're going to get it one
way or the other. Okay, there you go.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
We will keep you say, we will make you rich,
and together we will take Greenland to heights like you
have never thought possible before.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
Yeah, just to install fifty million space heaters around to
warm the place up, that'd be a start. Well, it
reminds me of the Panama strategy where he's talking about
taking the canal back by force. And yesterday, if you
didn't hear this, we mentioned it lay Dish in the
show that an American company, well black Rock Investments, that
the investment giant had bought the port facilities at either
end of the canal from the Hong Kong based company
(29:54):
that had been running them. So you know, and I've
said this from the beginning, he's angling toward an enhanced
security agreement with Greenland and it's Danish overlords. I can
hardly see the road with the heat rising up on
the horizon. Panama, Wow, Greenland.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
So he actually wants Greenland, though I don't think this
is just a point and I as a what a
territory or whatever. We would make it like something like
what Guam is or something. But I've read a number
of pundits that I was surprised that were like, all in, oh, yeah,
we should absolutely find a way to get Greenland. It's
very important to the future of the safety.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
Of the world and everything like that. Now, but I
agree completely for the record.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
It's not up to the green Greenlanders, is isn't it
up to the Danes? Don't they own Greenland or someone?
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Well, they've got a pretty good right of self determination
to the extent that I understand the Danish system. I
understand a nice Danish with a cup of coffee. But yeah,
the people of Greenland decide there faith.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
The population of fifty six thousand. Buy them each car,
vote for it. I'll buy a car. Well, it cost
us nothing. Why are you so belligerent? You are the
ugly American. This disgusts me.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
Here's what's going to happen. Here's all Trump is saying.
And this goes again to the here's our sphere of influence,
there's your sphere of influence. We won't screw with yours.
You don't screw with ours. New world order that they're
talking about building. We have to have Greenland to protect
the Arctic Circle and the northern shipping and military passages.
(31:35):
And it might be some sort of protectorate status. It
might just be here's what he's going for, a one
hundred percent certain alliance with Greenland or Denmark, or we
own it so that we always know it's on our
side in our sphere of influence, in whatever shape that takes.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
You want Santa under the control of the Chinese, We
need Greenland?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
Is that what you want? I was reading some really
interesting stuff about Greenland the other day. Do we have
time for this? I find that hard to believe. Uh
what No, I was super interesting. If you're into mining logistics,
and you know me mining logistics, getting the crap out
of the ground there may be one of the most
logistically daunting tasks anybody's ever imagined. Giant mining company after
(32:25):
mining companies looked into it, seen the enormous wealth to
be extracted and said no.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
But couldn't we not literally bribe them, like give you
a car, but make it clear to him your economy's
going to be so different if you come under the
sway of the United States, You're all going to be.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
Wealthy for one thing. Yeah, if we could promise them that,
I think we can. Can we sure? What do you
know about mining logistics? Nothing? And I wasn't reading about
it the other day and the adults are talking all
right here? Who are twenty six twenty point games this year?
(33:06):
Lebron col for three twenty two seasons, forty years of age,
what contests fifty thousand and two.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
Points is already the leading scorer in NBA history. Now
he is by a lot, hitting fifty thousand points. Nobody
thought that would ever be possible. It helps if you
start when you're eighteen and are really really good, but.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Until you're sixty five. Apparently that seems to be the plan.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
He's forty, and they are in first place in their division,
and they got one of the best players in the
NBA to join him, and he's young Luka Doncic, and
they're gonna be a finals contender.
Speaker 1 (33:47):
That'll be fun to watch. I think.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
I was just watching some news, and you know how
during COVID, people weren't going into studios, so guests on
TV were doing their thing from home, which was new,
but it is continued. A lot of people or organizations
have decided, what do we make an you drive clear
across New York or DC, or fly across the country
(34:12):
or whatever to be in the studio when you can
just do it from home. And then also the whole
not only am I not gonna throw on a suit,
I'm not even gonna throw on a decent shirt.
Speaker 1 (34:24):
Or put away the cereal bowl on the counter behind me.
Speaker 3 (34:28):
It's just amazing how many people just don't care.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
And I'm not sure it matters. So what difference does
it make? Yeah, it's funny. I've done enough of that.
I've tried to come up with a perfect background, you know,
the right books and the right look and all that. Eh.
Then I see some like great pundits whore and this
is true a lot in DC. You see their background
(34:53):
and you realize, oh, you have much more influence than
money because they're you know, doing their shot from a
very very modest basement room there in Dcah. Hey, I
want to mention this.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
So I met brought up on the show yesterday that
Dolly Parton's husband died of all weird stories, but she
had been married to the same guy for sixty years
and met him when at the laundromat when she was eighteen.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
He saw her devil too. I've seen pictures back in
the day.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
He saw him for the first saw her for the
first time, thought I'm going to marry that girl. And
he did two years later, and they stayed married the
whole time, and very happily married from all accounts from
both of them. But this, yes, interesting. Yesterday I saw this,
tweeted out Carl Dean. That's Dolly Parton's husband. Married young,
gave zero fs about fame and fortune. He laid us
(35:39):
asphalt for a living. He ran an asphalt laying company
for sixty years, married to a very famous woman. Zero
Facebook posts, zero tweets, ten for ten life legend. Yeah,
just so somebody you had no interest in putting his
(36:00):
opinion out there about everything that happens in the world,
or any opinions about anything. Just gonna live my life.
I don't care how famous I could be or how
much attention I could get.
Speaker 1 (36:07):
I just don't care. Worked hard and loved a woman,
It's all right. Why don't more people do that? You'd
be happier. Lust for fame is difficult to explain. It
seems to be damn near Universe. We do four hours.
Speaker 3 (36:23):
If you miss an hour, get the podcast Armstrong and
Getty on demand 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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.