March 26, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- Waltz takes responsibility for text debacle & what was said
- Social Security
- The biggest Ponzi scheme of all time
- Doctor pushes wife off cliff
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. I'm strong
and get and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
So you don't know what staffer is responsible for this
right now? Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible. And look,
I take full responsibility. I built the I built the
group to my job is to make sure everything's coordinated.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
But how did that's cute?
Speaker 2 (00:37):
I mean, I don't mean to be pedantic here, but
how did the number?
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Have you ever had?
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name
and then you have an and then you have somebody else? Right,
you've got somebody else's number on someone else's contact. So
of course I didn't see this loser in the group.
It looked like someone else. Now, whether he did it
deliberately or it happened in some other technical means something
we're trying.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
To figure out at your National Security Advisor Waltz on
Laura Ingram last night, taking full responsibility for adding the
journalist Jeffrey Goldberg into the chat that has been discussed
so much in the last uh thirty six hours.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
But then suggesting it was an innocent mistake anybody could
have made, or it was Jeffrey Goldberg's skullduggery that got
him in that group. I like Mike Waltz a lot.
I like him policy wise, I like him personally. I
like the cut of his jib that was weak.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Well, I don't want to get sidetracked by this, but
do you think he's wondering how the hell did this happen? Yes?
Speaker 3 (01:35):
Guaranteed, yes, some staffer of his put together the contact
card for say Marco Rubio or somebody else.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Rubio's already known what contact he was.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
But you know, okay, here is the Secretary of Energies
contact information, and somehow it was Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Why a lot of people say a lot of crap,
Like I've heard so much. You always know who's on
a call, or whenever you get on a call, you
check and see who else is on there? Whoever does that?
Who know what? Scrolls through and make sure who's JG
fifty two sixty two? That's me? Okay, who's who does that?
How many folks were on this string? Do you recall?
(02:16):
I don't know the total numbers. I keep hearing all
the big names means I keep hearing all the big
names SECT, deaf, SEC State, all that CIA director and
assuming that's it, But there might have been a whole
bunch of other people on there also. I don't know
Scarborough this morning on Morning Joe, that show makes me insane,
(02:39):
but I think I agree with him that the best
thing they could do on this is just like really
own it and move on and nobody would remember in
the week. The denying things that are pretty obviously true
is what is giving this story more legs. I agree
with Joe Scarborough. God help me.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
It's so early in the administration and the strike was
a success, So this is a really stupid the more
I read, a really stupid breach of security, I mean
really bad. But it was the dog that didn't bark,
and so it's the perfect opportunity to come clean, confess errors,
say we'll do better, and then move on. Don't offer
(03:21):
any resistance that continues the scandal.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Yeah, and just the whole this scumbag reporters sort of
thing you added him in and saying.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Over and over nothing classified was shared. Well, the Atlantic
is putting out what was shared, and it was one
hundred percent classified, highly classificed.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Well, that leads us to this, So I'm going to
read the New York Post version just because you know
they lean trumpy. So you're going to get the most
favorable view from the New York Post. And it's still damning.
The Atlantic magazine on Wednesday published even more in quotes
war plan text, laying out minute by minute operational details
and exact weapons to be used in the yem and strikes.
(04:00):
The Trump administration shot down claims that classified details were
ever shared in the signal chat snaff who. The magazine's
top editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, published additional snippets of the text
exchange that he says he says revealed the precise operational details.
The reason he's doing this is because they came out
so hard against him yesterday. Say no, we never know
(04:20):
that nothing was classified, and he's making this up and
he's a stumbag. Also, So here we go. This is
Pete Heggseth Team update time now eleven forty four Eastern time.
Whether it's favorable, just confirmed with Sentcom we are a
go for mission launch twelve fifteen Eastern time. F eighteen's
launch first Strike Package thirteen forty five that's the time
(04:43):
stamp trigger based F eighteen first strike windows starts. Target
terrorist is at his known location, shows should be on time.
Also strikes drone launch MQ nine's I don't know what
all this stuff means, but some bad people might know
what it all means. Fourteen ten more F eighteen's launched
second strike package fourteen to fifteen strike drones on target.
This is when the first bombs will definitely drop, pending
(05:05):
earlier trigger based targets. Fifteen thirty six eighteen second strike starts.
Also first sea based tomahawks launched. That is pretty specific. Yeah,
and as they right in the Atlantic. Let us pause
here for a moment to underscore a point.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
This signal message shows that the US Secretary of Defense
texted a group that included a phone number unknown to
him Goldberg's cell phone at eleven forty four am, thirty
one minutes before the first US warplanes launched, in two
hours and one minute before the beginning of the period
in which the primary target was expected to be killed.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
As a who the leader.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
If this text had been received by someone hostile to
American interests or merely someone indiscreet with access to social media,
the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what
was meant to be a surprise attack on the strongholds.
The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Director of National Intelligence Tulci Gabbard yesterday and the CIA
director John Ratcliffe were among eighteen officials in the signal
messaging channel. So there's your answer there. It was eighteen.
We're adamant that they didn't divulge classified information. Well, so
the question the hearing yesterday that never really got an
answer is well, if this wasn't classified, why he wasn't
(06:17):
it classified? It sure sounds like the sort of thing
that ought to be classified it And they kept getting hammered.
Mark Warner, the Democratic chair, kept saying, well, then shares
all the details, and they wouldn't do it in the
public hearing. So you won't share these in a public hearing.
But you're saying they're not classified. It's one or the other. Right, Yeah,
(06:38):
this is a floundering, it's amateur hour. It's embarrassing.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
And if you're tuning in hoping to hear Trump always right,
administration always right, Democrats always wrong.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
You know, we.
Speaker 3 (06:49):
On the right side of the Aisle have to do
better than this, like the tele what the hell? I
can never remember the name of the app Signal in December,
and we played a tape of a commentator on Fox
News yesterday saying this. In December, the federal government said, Hey,
signal is just fine. Put it on your phone, use
it for encrypted chats. But then in February the CIA
(07:14):
put out an advisory saying, hey, the Russians have figured
out a way to hack into signal, do not use it.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
That somebody must have missed.
Speaker 3 (07:22):
And Steve Whitkoff, who's the President's he's a friend from
New York. He's a businessman, a good negotiator, and he's
done some good stuff. But he was in Moscow using
signal under the nose of the Russians who listened to everything.
They know when you flush the toilet if you're any
sort of American official in Moscow. And so it was
(07:45):
just an own goal, as they say in soccer. It
was throwing three consecutive interceptions. And just because it's my team,
I'm not going to say those were good interceptions.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
We like interceptions. No, this was dumb. They got to
do better. So you were discussing civic war plans in
Moscow on a commercial text chat thingy, yes, that seems crazy.
Now the new revelations from Jeffrey Goldberg, which again I
(08:17):
think he probably wasn't going to publish. I don't know
if he was or not, but he might not have
been going to publish until he got so much pushback
of people saying no, no, we didn't share anything. So
he put this stuff out today and both Tulsea Gabbard
and Ratcliffe that's your DNI and CIA director say they
deny any knowledge that the messages including details about weapons, packages,
(08:39):
targets or timing. Well, unless you think Goldberg's completely making
this up, and I don't it absolutely detailed packages and timing.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
I mean, so they're doubling down on Goldberg's making this up. Essentially, No,
this is so bad. Oh yeah, I guess it will. Yeah,
but you're you could do literally anything and still have
that chunk of people. Tell me, tell me what's wrong
with this, and feel free to if you want to
weigh in ba a text or email the text lines
(09:10):
four one five two niney five kftc uh. That's four
one five two nine five kftc or if you like email,
mail bag at Armstrong and Getty dot com.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
But if you were to say this was.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
A serious mistake, we are embarrassed.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
We will never do it again.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
We appreciate the Atlantic and mister Goldberg's restraint in not
publishing information that could be dangerous to American troops in
the field. Wouldn't this all peter out? Yes, And now
you're going with no, no, no, we didn't. No, it
wasn't classified. And so Goldber's like, you call me a liar. No,
I got to prove I'm not right. I don't what
(09:50):
is strategy at all?
Speaker 1 (09:52):
Your method? You know, on cable news channels they would
have continued to hammer it and look how incompetent they
are and bought. But but nobody watches those channels, knowing
no matter the over all how big a story this is,
would have dwindled a ton if that.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
One sided tennis match, if you stop hitting the ball
back to them.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
So here's the reality because of the way it was handled.
Tulsi Gabbard. As we speak, I'm looking at the cable news.
Today's the House version of the World Threats hearing that
they have every year. So it was the Senate version
yesterday it's a House Intelligence committee today. And are they
talking about worldwide threats? No, they're talking about this signal
chat thing and how it happened. And she's being questioned
(10:30):
right there, it says, up there, I'm looking at Fox
Intel chiefs testify as new chat details revealed. So they're
hammering Tulsi Gabbard over this new stuff. Excuse me? This
shear looks like war plans to me. So they could
have ended this by just you know, this is truth
through your whole life for everyone. We all know this.
Maybe you figured out in childhood. Maybe you don't figure
it out the lid. That's quicker. You just come clean
(10:52):
and say I screwed up. Your life is so much
better always.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
Or two, harken back to the nineteen What a fine
and exciting time that was. Inflation was rampant, Nixon was impeached,
Jerry Ford was walking into doorways and and something else happened.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
Just go rule the airwaves, disc go rule the air
thank you. Uh No, it's not the crime, it's the
cover up. It's the cover up that brings you down. Hey,
we screwed up, embarrassed, We've fixed it. It's into the
Atlantic and mister Goldberg, it's human nature on such an
interesting level. And it's true.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
Like picturing kids, you can picture the government stuff or whatever.
If your kid comes here and say, I just I
don't I took the cookies and I shouldn't have, and
I hate myself forward, I don't like eating that crab.
It makes me feel bad. I'm trying to stop and
I just but I saw him there, and I could say,
you feel bad for him, You feel compassionate. If they
say I didn't eat the cookies with crumbs around their lips,
(11:52):
you feel like they're calling you stupid. Yes, I mean
it for a liar. Yeah, uh goodness.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
If we screw this up, we don't get a chance
to do the good stuff. That's why I call, you know,
my own team for running a bad offense.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
To get back to the sports to metaphor, Yeah, so
this has got at least one more day in it,
and so I'm sure you're staying on top of the
answers they're giving to Okay, now we see more of
these are they are they claiming they're made up? Are
they claiming they're not real? It would be your only
home unless you're it's the only thing you could do.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
You know, I'm kind of disappointed in you, Jack, speaking
of calling fouls that you haven't hit me with a single.
So you wanted Kamla to win. And that's always such
a fun part of these discussions.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Oh my god, that is always good. We got a
lot more news all the way.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
Stay here switching gears to some business news apples so
that they're working on adding a camera to the Apple Watch.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
Yeah, out of commercial to say, look at this.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
For years, your iPhone camera has captured life's biggest moments,
and now we've added a camera to your Apple Watch,
so you can capture more new moments like your chin midsneed,
the inside of your jacket sleeve, the ceiling of your
dead is soften, an accidental close up of a stranger
scratch at Starbucks, the Apple Watch with camera and the
battery is dead.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
Oh you know, funny coincidence.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
Later this hour, I wanted to talk about I quit
Google for Chat, GPT and other AI search and I'm
not going back.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
This is the person who uses Apple device. Oh I
might be on board with that. Goodbye Google boy. In
mentioning that, so I talk a lot about the Apple Watch,
I just I just love all the stuff I can
do it. I have my car app on there, I
have my bank stuff, I pay for everything app. I
don't need a car. I don't really need anything in
(13:57):
my pocket. I just just as long as I got
my watch with But every I want to leave my
phone behind more often, just so I don't look at it.
But every time I leave it behind, it always turns
out to be a mistake. We headed out the other day,
we went on a bike ride downtown. I left my
phone behind, and my my high schooler, said, you're going
to regret it. I guarantee you're going to regret it,
and I said, I don't think so. I think I'll
(14:17):
be fine. Anyway, we get downtown, too tired to walk back.
Want to get ano uber. I don't have my phone,
so I can't get an uber or something else that
happened I need my phone for I wanted to take
a picture of something. Oh, that'd be cool. I get
it's right. I don't know my phone just every time,
and it's so frustrating to me. Oh that's how they
get you. That is how they get you. Anyway, we
(14:39):
got this text before we get to real news. Joe
has mentioned over the years. This seems to be true. People.
If people are going to refer to something we said,
one of us said, it's they get it wrong like
a hundred percent of the time. Yes, what's amazing. Why
it doesn't matter at all at all, But it's just
(15:00):
interesting that people always get it wrong. And I'm pretty
sure this one is backwards. Can you please ask Joe.
I think it was me to restate his strategy for
winning hockey getting a morbidly obese goalie, big fat goalie. Oh,
that's jack strategy. I thought of that just the other day.
I came up. I thought about that years ago. I
think it's when Manuel Eurebe was in the news all
the time. He was the world's fattest man, a guy
(15:21):
who lived in Mexico. He has since passed from being
thirteen hundred pounds right over one thousand pounds. Yea, And
I couldn't understand why a an NHL team wouldn't hire
a twelve hundred pound guy to just sit in the
goal and fill out the whole thing. I know it's
because I saw a picture of him in his bed
and he filled like an entire king sized bed. Put
him in the goal with some pads, your shut out
(15:43):
every opponent. Is there a reason this hasn't happened? It's
a fit MacB. But yeah, you've been touting that for years.
You'd be the world's greatest goalie. You'd make lots of money. Chick.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
I don't know, if chicks had throw themselves out, maybe,
oh yeah, let's hang on.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
I don't know. I still think it's a pretty good idea. Well,
you'd you'd.
Speaker 3 (16:02):
Make a lot of money until the other teams realized
they could do the same thing, and then they would
just I don't know, rule the grotesquely obese or Okay,
we're into prison them and feed them.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
I don't know. We're into season two of all zero
zero games because everybody's hired a big, bad goalie. We're
gonna have to change a rule somehow away in for goalies.
I don't know. Yes, I realize that's stupid, but I
still haven't heard of work around.
Speaker 3 (16:30):
Okay that I'm completely distracted now I want to get
into the hole.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Is social Security a Ponzi scheme? Conversation? Which is a dumb,
dumb conversation. I admit it has come up many times
over the decades, so many mentions so security being a
Ponzi scheme, and then the pushback and response is just
so over the top, even though it resembles a Ponzi
scheme in so many ways structurally, literally, absolutely so politically.
(17:00):
Elon said it the other day. There was a fact
check on him, and then a fact check with the
definition of a Ponzi scheme. It came up in a
hearing yesterday with Elizabeth Warren blah blah blah. Will play
it all out for you coming up. I hope you
can stick around, Armstrong and getty.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time. Basically,
people are living way longer than expected. There are a
few babies being born, so you have more people who
are retired and that live for a long time and
get retirement payments. So have a bad The financial situation
is right now for the federal government.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
It will be much worse in the future.
Speaker 6 (17:40):
Do you believe that sold security is a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 7 (17:43):
I believe it's a promise to pay. It's in eighty
nine your institution, so far it will continue.
Speaker 6 (17:51):
Yes, or now do you think it's a Ponzi scheme?
It's a promise to pay.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
So that's from a hearing yesterday with the Democrats grilling
the Republican who runs the Social Security trying to get
him to contradict to Elon Musk, who's you know, working
with the president on trying to cut costs and deal
with let's going bankrupt. Elon Musk said on Joe Rogan
fairly recently, what you just heard that Social Security is
(18:18):
upon this scheme. And I can't believe we're still having
this conversation. I mean we probably first had it two
thousand five.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
Hey, I'm sorry, that's twenty got to interrupted. I've got
to interrupt you. Based on that clip. I'm just jotting
this down from my personal notes from my memoir. March
twenty six, ten thirty six a m. Eastern time was
the moment I gave up on democracy. That exchange crushed
my spirit for your memoir.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Ah, good lord.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
So yeah, let's let's not talk about the structural problems
or the challenge. Let's just try to catch each other
and saying the thing we can embarrass each other over.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Good lord.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
I know it's so sorry, Doctor Franklin, Sorry General Washington.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
We mucked it up. So I was listening to uh,
some cable news hosts talking about George Bush taking on
Social Security and what a dumb plan it was, and
what a mistake it was political mistake, and they're just
talking about the politics of it. If you want to
just be very crass. Bottom line, all that matters is
(19:33):
getting re elected. Yes, it is stupid to take on
Social Security, and Trump knows that. That's why he always says,
not going to touch it, not going to touch it.
But if you want to live in reality at all,
what George Bush planned to do, I think it was
it was second term, so I think it was two
thousand and five when he started talking about privatizing it
and you could, you could take some of it and
(19:53):
invest it and make you know, more money and theory
in the stock market over time, almost guaranteed than the
three person I think it grows in the government barely.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
If you'd if that had gotten through at the time,
you'd be listening to the podcast on a yacht in
the Mediterranean and not getting crusts of bread from the
government every month. My retired friends, Oh.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
And he got killed and uh. And they referred to
it as a Ponzi scheme back then, and just got killed.
How dare you call FDR rescuing the working class calling
it a Ponzi scheme? Bob blah. First, I suppose we
should started here. How many of you know people that
don't know what a Ponzi scheme is. It's like, uh,
you know, if you're a selling water purifiers or tupperware
(20:37):
or I don't know. There's all kinds of different things
out there that are Ponzi schemes where.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
I actually the classic one is like the airplane thing
that was hot for a cup of coffee in college,
where you buy seats on the so called airplane, and
then as it fills up, the people who are in
the front of the plane become the co pilot and pilot.
Then they get paid off, make a huge amount of
money relative to their investment, and then as long as
(21:04):
more people are coming in at the bottom, right, the
people at the top get paid.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Yeah, And there's a I had friends that got into
the water purifier thing in the nineties or whatever, and
it was classic Ponzi scheme, and they'd come hit you with, say,
I'm making three hundred thousand dollars a month. You know
why I've had I've had two hundred people underneath me
selling water purifires, and it was true that they were.
I mean, it's not wasn't a lie. It's just that
the people underneath you need to also sign up a
(21:30):
whole bunch of people to sell water purifiers and this album.
And then but as soon as it stops, it all
falls apart. As soon as that lower level can add
in more people, the whole thing falls apart.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
Well. In the difference in social security is that it's
not a question of attracting people to what seems like
a profitable proposition. It's just the sheer number of young
workers versus retirees. It's a function of demographics, not like
sales persuasion.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
So that George bushmaier, hey there you go. Wow, I'll
be good to hear from you. But I hated that
the conversation I saw on cable news about what George
Bush to just labeled only as stupid. Again, if you're
just going to be cold, crass politics, which is what
most politicians are, it is stupid. But would somebody please
throw in a and completely necessary in there. Maybe it
(22:18):
was stupid politics, but one hundred percent necessary and patriotic
to stick your neck out politically to try to take
this on as opposed to it works, you'd be hailed
as a hero as opposed to kick the can on
down the road for someone else AnyWho. Uh to the
Ponzi scheme comment that Elon made on Rogan's podcast James
Freeman in the Wall Street Journal Political Political PolitiFact versus
(22:43):
Elon Musk, PolitiFact is, in fact, is grading the comment
from Elon Musk social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme
of all time as false because it's not a Ponzi scheme.
The headline from James Freeman is do victims of Ponzi
(23:04):
schemes feel better if the schemes are legal? As in,
it is a Ponzi scheme, but because it's guaranteed by
the government in certain ways, it's not. And you know,
there's no guarantee that the water purifier scheme. Somebody's going
to fill that in at the bottom of the at
the point of you know, a legal gun by law
at some point. Anyway. PolitiFact calls this statement false because
(23:28):
Alex Christie of Newsbuster notes much of PolitiFact's argument rests
on the fact that Social Security is a government program.
When it comes to describing how the program actually operates.
The following political fact passage is bound to convince a
number of readers that mister Musk has spoken the truth,
and they go through how social security works. Then, uh,
(23:50):
this university professor said, this structure of social security, where
you have workers coming in, you're not getting your money back. No,
I don't know how many people don't understand that. Surely
you understand that by now. And this goes back to
the two thousand election and Al Gore talking about a
lock box, this idea that I'm paying into Social Security.
It's an account somewhere and it's growing, and then they're
(24:14):
going to start sending me checks when I retire. No,
they spent that money that I sent them when I
was twenty two working to retirees in nineteen whatever that
was eighty seven, and to just other crap too, just expenditures. Yeah,
they are any other debts, probably interest payments in a
lot of cases. The university professor said. This structure has
(24:37):
similarities to how Ponzi scheme investors provide payouts to earlier
investors if they're no longer enough workers to provide enough
payroll contributions to pay out benefits to retired workers. Then
this system would fail similar exactly to how a Ponzi
scheme would fail in the same manner, said the university professor.
So it's exactly a Ponzi scheme. It's only different than
(24:58):
it's backed by the federal government and they're going to
have to take the money from somewhere or by law
change the amount that you're going to receive in payments.
This is why I've given up on democracy.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Even a question so clearly, I mean, there's there's true
and there's false in this. It's not like how strong
should America's military be and how much should we spend money,
where honest people can disagree. This is just a question
of fact and and people calling it a spont a
Ponzi scheme, a Ponzi scheme. They're talking about the structure,
(25:30):
and then phony liar Elizabeth Warren acts as though they're
talking about the intent of it. That's this is not criminal,
This is the government. This is the promise to No,
we're talking about the structure. We're only talking about the structure.
You lying, fake Indian.
Speaker 6 (25:45):
Do you believe that solid Security is a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 7 (25:48):
I believe it's a promise to pay. It's an eighty
nine your institution. So far it will continue?
Speaker 1 (25:56):
Yes?
Speaker 6 (25:56):
Or now do you think it's a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yes, they're no, it's a promise to pay.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
I hate you. I hate this process. It's stabbing democracy
in the liver. I despise every moment of this. I'm
counting the seconds until I get out of this stupid.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Stupid hearing. Yeah, and well, we'll play this first. This
is Elizabeth Warren grilling the Social Security Republican a little more.
Speaker 8 (26:19):
If you are confirmed in this job, will you commit
to reversing these cuts so that seniors get the money
that the law says they are entitled to.
Speaker 7 (26:31):
What I will commit to is that I will run
the agency, and I will be in charge of the agency,
and I will look at every item you want me
to look at.
Speaker 8 (26:41):
That's not what I'm asking you. I'm asking you just
answered the previous questions by saying you.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Would follow the law.
Speaker 8 (26:49):
The law is to deliver the benefits that people are
legally entitled to. If you don't have the staff, if
you don't answer the phones, if you don't fix the mistakes,
people don't get what they're legally entitled to. So I
want to know, are you willing to commit right now
that you will put enough people back to work so
(27:12):
they can do the job of delivering the benefits that
Americans earned.
Speaker 7 (27:16):
I'll guess or no, I'll commit to have the right
stuff and to get the job done.
Speaker 8 (27:21):
To get the job done, meaning delivering the benefits people
are entitled to.
Speaker 1 (27:25):
Yes, I'm going to hold you to that.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
I promise that they'll get all the wampum and blankets
to us they're entitled.
Speaker 1 (27:34):
Michael just said, in my ear, she's bringing the firewater.
I don't know if that's an expression. I tell you what.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
The only thing I hate Elizabeth Warren. She is such
a lying phony. But the Doge guys have cut like
the customer service end of Social Security right now, and
it's become a bit of a nightmare to deal with.
I have a friend who's been telling me about it. Guys,
be smart in near cuts, be strategic, add those people
back in.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
It still gets down to there have to be cuts.
You either have to raise taxes or cut the program,
or we have to make major changes. It doesn't work.
And the fact that we can't talk about that is
so nuts. I mean, you're inside conversation. He's having his head.
I'll continue to answer your questions. You know you're lying,
(28:19):
you're playing to your stupidest voters, and you know what
you're doing. I know what you're doing. Everybody in this
room knows what we're doing. We're going to continue to
do this kabuki theater because this is how it works.
And luckily I'm old and I'll die before I have
to see how it bleeds out. I mean, that's actually
what they're thinking. Yeah, yeah, boy, well I'm not sure
(28:40):
I can go on, Michael. I mean, that's just ivan.
You would think that in a room full of people
you could get one Republican and one Democrat because it
flips back and forth. True, because you saw when Republicans
were screaming at Biden because he was going to cut
social Security in theory and he wasn't at the State
of the Union address. I mean, so it works on
(29:02):
both sides. But anyway, you think you could get in
these hearings one Republican one Democrat? At some point, say
how about a GM you and me or Linda or
whatever could be a woman. Let's you and I just
have a conversation separate from all these politics, that it's
going broke. It doesn't work, the math doesn't work. We've
got to make radical changes one way or got any ideas? Yeah,
what do you think we ought to do? And let's
have this conversation separate from all these people who are
(29:24):
playing to their voters and acting like this isn't true.
But you can't even get two people to say that, Yeah,
I appreciate your you're even trying. It's cute.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
Democracy has failed. Monarchy now, so springtime is here. Baseball
season officially underway. Word from our friends in Prize Picks,
do not miss your chance to add to your favorite
players from the diamond in your Prize Picks lineup, whether
it's strikeouts, RBI's first inning runs, even take your pick
of more or less for your shot to win up
a thousand up to a thousand times your cash today
on Prize pick yep, so.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Download the app. It's super easy to use. Turn your
sports opinion. You probably have strong opinions heading into a
new baseball season or whatever, and turn those into cash.
You can do it fast.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
Yeah, and on Prize Picks you can mix and match
player projections from different sports. So combine your favorite baseball
players with players from basketball, hockey, e sports, even and
much more. Second half of the basketball seasons here, they're
starting to play like they mean it. The playoffs will
be heating up on Prize Picks, the best place to
cash in none of your favorite sports. So download that
app today, Prize Pick. She's the code Armstrong. They'll give
(30:27):
you a fifty bucks instantly after you play just a
five dollars lineup again. You don't have to win. They
give you that money to play around with. After you
play five dollars Prize Picks, run your game. Remember that
code Armstrong. Prize Picks, Run your game.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
I would say calling it the biggest Ponzi scheme of
all time is one hundred percent accurate. The amount of money,
the biggest ponzee scheme of all time, and it's going
to crash in my kids generation. Certainly we got more
on the way Armstrong, Honey, Lucy say.
Speaker 9 (30:58):
Forty six year old Gerhard Cone was hiking a poly
trail in o' Wahoo with his wife, thirty six year
old Ariel Koenig, when he struck her in the head
with a rock and tried to push her off the ledge.
Polly Say, the attack hambage around ten am on Monday,
when the couple was visiting the tourist site located just
outside Honolulu. She was taken to a local hospital with
multiple injuries to the head and face, where police say
(31:18):
she remains in critical condition. After a day long manhunt,
Hawaiian police confirmed they arrested Koenig after chasing him on foot.
He's being held behind bars and criminal charges are pending.
Speaker 1 (31:29):
So where'd you get the detail you threw in about that, Katie?
About what they the argument that ensued. Where'd you come
up with? Then? That was attached to a couple of articles.
So the story, what's the story you have? They're out hiking,
husband and wife, and what happens they're out hiking. He
wants to take a picture with her and she said no,
(31:51):
and he lost it so hit her with a rock
and heaved her over the cliff. Sure he did the
next logical thing, tried to push her off a cliff.
Why didn't she just get her picture taken? I don't know.
I'll ask her.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
Wow, wow, wow, good looking couple too, But who knows
what evil lurks in the hearts of mess.
Speaker 1 (32:12):
Should hit her in the head with a rock? But hey,
why are you being so obstinate. We're on vacation, we
want memorials.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
And he's an anesthesiologist, so he knows that hitting someone
in the head with a rock is not anesthesia. I
mean it has a similar effect ultimately.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
But wow.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
So this is a moneyed couple, highly educated. His wife's
a nuclear engineer.
Speaker 1 (32:37):
Wow. And it's not being portrayed as like it was
a plan. You know, he's he's got a mistress or
insurance money or because we've heard this sort of thing before.
It was an all of a sudden, lose your temper
thing that I don't remember hearing, especially among older successful people.
Not like it's a couple of meth heads.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
Well right, yeah, exactly. They've been married six and a half,
seven year or something like that.
Speaker 1 (33:03):
Not another picture, she says, I want a nice picture
with the sunset and you in front. I'm not doing it.
Where's a rock? Wow, that's just nutty. No, he was
planning to killer, it's gotta be. That's why I think
that detail is a red herring. Canard.
Speaker 3 (33:20):
Yeah, it's a well, it is a red herring. He's
he's trying to come up with oh my god, I'm
busted crime of passion is my only defense. Yeah, and
just to reduce the sentence because premeditated you're done.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
Yeah, yeah, exactly exactly. I know you like this story, Katie.
I know a woman, so she would have been at
the time mid twenties, very serious boyfriend and they were
out hiking it. He said to her, they're on standby cliff.
He said, Man, if I pushed you off this cliff,
(33:54):
nobody would ever know. Yeah, and she broke up with
him over that. Good very serious too. What a weird
thought and thing to say. You should say that. Not
(34:14):
everybody's got weird thoughts, but to go ay by the
way and not standing next to the cliff and make
me a little. I think I'll ease away from this cliff, and.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
How about you walk in front of me for the
rest of the hike. And I taught my daughter daughters, Katie.
I heard a self defense expert talking about this. Women,
if you have the urge to cross the street or
you're concerned in a parking lot, don't turn that voice
off because of either political correctness or no I need
(34:43):
to be brave. No, listen to that voice. Likewise, with dudes,
if you're getting the this is wrong. This is not right.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Don't touch yourself out of it. Don't even worry about why, yeah,
or if the guy you're with, I just.
Speaker 3 (34:57):
Show you right off this cliff and I never get caught. Boy,
I don't know if he used that menacing tone.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Okay, by the way, this did you know I could
make you disappear? Yeah? No, not a good good thing. Yeah.
And they were like, uh, they were a long way
away on vacation. I want to say where because I
want to give away who is. But uh, they were
like way far away into vacation, so they had to
fly back and everything like that. I don't remember she
broke up with him there and they came back or
(35:27):
after we got back or what. But oh geez, I'm
glad this guy got I'm glad this guy wasn't successful
because it would have been pretty hard to prove, you know,
if she stumbled and fell off the cliff, come back
and weep and gnash your.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Teeth that, oh my god, my wife, and then keep
your story consistent.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
That's how they always get you. But especially in the
with the in the modern area, there's so many stories
you know of people doing selfies or taking pictures and
falling off cliffs and whatnot. It happens for real. I
told her step back. I didn't know she was Oh yeah.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
Selfie deaths are rampant these days. Charles Darwin his hand
in the events for sure coming up. Get rid of Google,
It's time for the artificial intelligence on your phone. Plus
people mad at her take about the signal scandal, We'll
let their voices be heard as well.
Speaker 9 (36:17):
Stay with us, Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. I'm strong
and get and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
So you don't know what staffer is responsible for this
right now? Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible. And look,
I take full responsibility. I built the I built the
group to my job is to make sure everything's coordinated.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
But how did that's cute?
Speaker 2 (00:37):
I mean, I don't mean to be pedantic here, but
how did the number?
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Have you ever had?
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name
and then you have an and then you have somebody else? Right,
you've got somebody else's number on someone else's contact. So
of course I didn't see this loser in the group.
It looked like someone else. Now, whether he did it
deliberately or it happened in some other technical means something
we're trying.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
To figure out at your National Security Advisor Waltz on
Laura Ingram last night, taking full responsibility for adding the
journalist Jeffrey Goldberg into the chat that has been discussed
so much in the last uh thirty six hours.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
But then suggesting it was an innocent mistake anybody could
have made, or it was Jeffrey Goldberg's skullduggery that got
him in that group. I like Mike Waltz a lot.
I like him policy wise, I like him personally. I
like the cut of his jib that was weak.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Well, I don't want to get sidetracked by this, but
do you think he's wondering how the hell did this happen? Yes?
Speaker 3 (01:35):
Guaranteed, yes, some staffer of his put together the contact
card for say Marco Rubio or somebody else.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Rubio's already known what contact he was.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
But you know, okay, here is the Secretary of Energies
contact information, and somehow it was Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Why a lot of people say a lot of crap,
Like I've heard so much. You always know who's on
a call, or whenever you get on a call, you
check and see who else is on there? Whoever does that?
Who know what? Scrolls through and make sure who's JG
fifty two sixty two? That's me? Okay, who's who does that?
How many folks were on this string? Do you recall?
(02:16):
I don't know the total numbers. I keep hearing all
the big names means I keep hearing all the big
names SECT, deaf, SEC State, all that CIA director and
assuming that's it, But there might have been a whole
bunch of other people on there also. I don't know
Scarborough this morning on Morning Joe, that show makes me insane,
(02:39):
but I think I agree with him that the best
thing they could do on this is just like really
own it and move on and nobody would remember in
the week. The denying things that are pretty obviously true
is what is giving this story more legs. I agree
with Joe Scarborough. God help me.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
It's so early in the administration and the strike was
a success, So this is a really stupid the more
I read, a really stupid breach of security, I mean
really bad. But it was the dog that didn't bark,
and so it's the perfect opportunity to come clean, confess errors,
say we'll do better, and then move on. Don't offer
(03:21):
any resistance that continues the scandal.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Yeah, and just the whole this scumbag reporters sort of
thing you added him in and saying.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Over and over nothing classified was shared. Well, the Atlantic
is putting out what was shared, and it was one
hundred percent classified, highly classificed.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Well, that leads us to this, So I'm going to
read the New York Post version just because you know
they lean trumpy. So you're going to get the most
favorable view from the New York Post. And it's still damning.
The Atlantic magazine on Wednesday published even more in quotes
war plan text, laying out minute by minute operational details
and exact weapons to be used in the yem and strikes.
(04:00):
The Trump administration shot down claims that classified details were
ever shared in the signal chat snaff who. The magazine's
top editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, published additional snippets of the text
exchange that he says he says revealed the precise operational details.
The reason he's doing this is because they came out
so hard against him yesterday. Say no, we never know
(04:20):
that nothing was classified, and he's making this up and
he's a stumbag. Also, So here we go. This is
Pete Heggseth Team update time now eleven forty four Eastern time.
Whether it's favorable, just confirmed with Sentcom we are a
go for mission launch twelve fifteen Eastern time. F eighteen's
launch first Strike Package thirteen forty five that's the time
(04:43):
stamp trigger based F eighteen first strike windows starts. Target
terrorist is at his known location, shows should be on time.
Also strikes drone launch MQ nine's I don't know what
all this stuff means, but some bad people might know
what it all means. Fourteen ten more F eighteen's launched
second strike package fourteen to fifteen strike drones on target.
This is when the first bombs will definitely drop, pending
(05:05):
earlier trigger based targets. Fifteen thirty six eighteen second strike starts.
Also first sea based tomahawks launched. That is pretty specific. Yeah,
and as they right in the Atlantic. Let us pause
here for a moment to underscore a point.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
This signal message shows that the US Secretary of Defense
texted a group that included a phone number unknown to
him Goldberg's cell phone at eleven forty four am, thirty
one minutes before the first US warplanes launched, in two
hours and one minute before the beginning of the period
in which the primary target was expected to be killed.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
As a who the leader.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
If this text had been received by someone hostile to
American interests or merely someone indiscreet with access to social media,
the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what
was meant to be a surprise attack on the strongholds.
The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Director of National Intelligence Tulci Gabbard yesterday and the CIA
director John Ratcliffe were among eighteen officials in the signal
messaging channel. So there's your answer there. It was eighteen.
We're adamant that they didn't divulge classified information. Well, so
the question the hearing yesterday that never really got an
answer is well, if this wasn't classified, why he wasn't
(06:17):
it classified? It sure sounds like the sort of thing
that ought to be classified it And they kept getting hammered.
Mark Warner, the Democratic chair, kept saying, well, then shares
all the details, and they wouldn't do it in the
public hearing. So you won't share these in a public hearing.
But you're saying they're not classified. It's one or the other. Right, Yeah,
(06:38):
this is a floundering, it's amateur hour. It's embarrassing.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
And if you're tuning in hoping to hear Trump always right,
administration always right, Democrats always wrong.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
You know, we.
Speaker 3 (06:49):
On the right side of the Aisle have to do
better than this, like the tele what the hell? I
can never remember the name of the app Signal in December,
and we played a tape of a commentator on Fox
News yesterday saying this. In December, the federal government said, Hey,
signal is just fine. Put it on your phone, use
it for encrypted chats. But then in February the CIA
(07:14):
put out an advisory saying, hey, the Russians have figured
out a way to hack into signal, do not use it.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
That somebody must have missed.
Speaker 3 (07:22):
And Steve Whitkoff, who's the President's he's a friend from
New York. He's a businessman, a good negotiator, and he's
done some good stuff. But he was in Moscow using
signal under the nose of the Russians who listened to everything.
They know when you flush the toilet if you're any
sort of American official in Moscow. And so it was
(07:45):
just an own goal, as they say in soccer. It
was throwing three consecutive interceptions. And just because it's my team,
I'm not going to say those were good interceptions.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
We like interceptions. No, this was dumb. They got to
do better. So you were discussing civic war plans in
Moscow on a commercial text chat thingy, yes, that seems crazy.
Now the new revelations from Jeffrey Goldberg, which again I
(08:17):
think he probably wasn't going to publish. I don't know
if he was or not, but he might not have
been going to publish until he got so much pushback
of people saying no, no, we didn't share anything. So
he put this stuff out today and both Tulsea Gabbard
and Ratcliffe that's your DNI and CIA director say they
deny any knowledge that the messages including details about weapons, packages,
(08:39):
targets or timing. Well, unless you think Goldberg's completely making
this up, and I don't it absolutely detailed packages and timing.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
I mean, so they're doubling down on Goldberg's making this up. Essentially, No,
this is so bad. Oh yeah, I guess it will. Yeah,
but you're you could do literally anything and still have
that chunk of people. Tell me, tell me what's wrong
with this, and feel free to if you want to
weigh in ba a text or email the text lines
(09:10):
four one five two niney five kftc uh. That's four
one five two nine five kftc or if you like email,
mail bag at Armstrong and Getty dot com.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
But if you were to say this was.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
A serious mistake, we are embarrassed.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
We will never do it again.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
We appreciate the Atlantic and mister Goldberg's restraint in not
publishing information that could be dangerous to American troops in
the field. Wouldn't this all peter out? Yes, And now
you're going with no, no, no, we didn't. No, it
wasn't classified. And so Goldber's like, you call me a liar. No,
I got to prove I'm not right. I don't what
(09:50):
is strategy at all?
Speaker 1 (09:52):
Your method? You know, on cable news channels they would
have continued to hammer it and look how incompetent they
are and bought. But but nobody watches those channels, knowing
no matter the over all how big a story this is,
would have dwindled a ton if that.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
One sided tennis match, if you stop hitting the ball
back to them.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
So here's the reality because of the way it was handled.
Tulsi Gabbard. As we speak, I'm looking at the cable news.
Today's the House version of the World Threats hearing that
they have every year. So it was the Senate version
yesterday it's a House Intelligence committee today. And are they
talking about worldwide threats? No, they're talking about this signal
chat thing and how it happened. And she's being questioned
(10:30):
right there, it says, up there, I'm looking at Fox
Intel chiefs testify as new chat details revealed. So they're
hammering Tulsi Gabbard over this new stuff. Excuse me? This
shear looks like war plans to me. So they could
have ended this by just you know, this is truth
through your whole life for everyone. We all know this.
Maybe you figured out in childhood. Maybe you don't figure
it out the lid. That's quicker. You just come clean
(10:52):
and say I screwed up. Your life is so much
better always.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
Or two, harken back to the nineteen What a fine
and exciting time that was. Inflation was rampant, Nixon was impeached,
Jerry Ford was walking into doorways and and something else happened.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
Just go rule the airwaves, disc go rule the air
thank you. Uh No, it's not the crime, it's the
cover up. It's the cover up that brings you down. Hey,
we screwed up, embarrassed, We've fixed it. It's into the
Atlantic and mister Goldberg, it's human nature on such an
interesting level. And it's true.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
Like picturing kids, you can picture the government stuff or whatever.
If your kid comes here and say, I just I
don't I took the cookies and I shouldn't have, and
I hate myself forward, I don't like eating that crab.
It makes me feel bad. I'm trying to stop and
I just but I saw him there, and I could say,
you feel bad for him, You feel compassionate. If they
say I didn't eat the cookies with crumbs around their lips,
(11:52):
you feel like they're calling you stupid. Yes, I mean
it for a liar. Yeah, uh goodness.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
If we screw this up, we don't get a chance
to do the good stuff. That's why I call, you know,
my own team for running a bad offense.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
To get back to the sports to metaphor, Yeah, so
this has got at least one more day in it,
and so I'm sure you're staying on top of the
answers they're giving to Okay, now we see more of
these are they are they claiming they're made up? Are
they claiming they're not real? It would be your only
home unless you're it's the only thing you could do.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
You know, I'm kind of disappointed in you, Jack, speaking
of calling fouls that you haven't hit me with a single.
So you wanted Kamla to win. And that's always such
a fun part of these discussions.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Oh my god, that is always good. We got a
lot more news all the way.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
Stay here switching gears to some business news apples so
that they're working on adding a camera to the Apple Watch.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
Yeah, out of commercial to say, look at this.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
For years, your iPhone camera has captured life's biggest moments,
and now we've added a camera to your Apple Watch,
so you can capture more new moments like your chin midsneed,
the inside of your jacket sleeve, the ceiling of your
dead is soften, an accidental close up of a stranger
scratch at Starbucks, the Apple Watch with camera and the
battery is dead.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
Oh you know, funny coincidence.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
Later this hour, I wanted to talk about I quit
Google for Chat, GPT and other AI search and I'm
not going back.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
This is the person who uses Apple device. Oh I
might be on board with that. Goodbye Google boy. In
mentioning that, so I talk a lot about the Apple Watch,
I just I just love all the stuff I can
do it. I have my car app on there, I
have my bank stuff, I pay for everything app. I
don't need a car. I don't really need anything in
(13:57):
my pocket. I just just as long as I got
my watch with But every I want to leave my
phone behind more often, just so I don't look at it.
But every time I leave it behind, it always turns
out to be a mistake. We headed out the other day,
we went on a bike ride downtown. I left my
phone behind, and my my high schooler, said, you're going
to regret it. I guarantee you're going to regret it,
and I said, I don't think so. I think I'll
(14:17):
be fine. Anyway, we get downtown, too tired to walk back.
Want to get ano uber. I don't have my phone,
so I can't get an uber or something else that
happened I need my phone for I wanted to take
a picture of something. Oh, that'd be cool. I get
it's right. I don't know my phone just every time,
and it's so frustrating to me. Oh that's how they
get you. That is how they get you. Anyway, we
(14:39):
got this text before we get to real news. Joe
has mentioned over the years. This seems to be true. People.
If people are going to refer to something we said,
one of us said, it's they get it wrong like
a hundred percent of the time. Yes, what's amazing. Why
it doesn't matter at all at all, But it's just
(15:00):
interesting that people always get it wrong. And I'm pretty
sure this one is backwards. Can you please ask Joe.
I think it was me to restate his strategy for
winning hockey getting a morbidly obese goalie, big fat goalie. Oh,
that's jack strategy. I thought of that just the other day.
I came up. I thought about that years ago. I
think it's when Manuel Eurebe was in the news all
the time. He was the world's fattest man, a guy
(15:21):
who lived in Mexico. He has since passed from being
thirteen hundred pounds right over one thousand pounds. Yea, And
I couldn't understand why a an NHL team wouldn't hire
a twelve hundred pound guy to just sit in the
goal and fill out the whole thing. I know it's
because I saw a picture of him in his bed
and he filled like an entire king sized bed. Put
him in the goal with some pads, your shut out
(15:43):
every opponent. Is there a reason this hasn't happened? It's
a fit MacB. But yeah, you've been touting that for years.
You'd be the world's greatest goalie. You'd make lots of money. Chick.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
I don't know, if chicks had throw themselves out, maybe,
oh yeah, let's hang on.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
I don't know. I still think it's a pretty good idea. Well,
you'd you'd.
Speaker 3 (16:02):
Make a lot of money until the other teams realized
they could do the same thing, and then they would
just I don't know, rule the grotesquely obese or Okay,
we're into prison them and feed them.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
I don't know. We're into season two of all zero
zero games because everybody's hired a big, bad goalie. We're
gonna have to change a rule somehow away in for goalies.
I don't know. Yes, I realize that's stupid, but I
still haven't heard of work around.
Speaker 3 (16:30):
Okay that I'm completely distracted now I want to get
into the hole.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Is social Security a Ponzi scheme? Conversation? Which is a dumb,
dumb conversation. I admit it has come up many times
over the decades, so many mentions so security being a
Ponzi scheme, and then the pushback and response is just
so over the top, even though it resembles a Ponzi
scheme in so many ways structurally, literally, absolutely so politically.
(17:00):
Elon said it the other day. There was a fact
check on him, and then a fact check with the
definition of a Ponzi scheme. It came up in a
hearing yesterday with Elizabeth Warren blah blah blah. Will play
it all out for you coming up. I hope you
can stick around, Armstrong and getty.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time. Basically,
people are living way longer than expected. There are a
few babies being born, so you have more people who
are retired and that live for a long time and
get retirement payments. So have a bad The financial situation
is right now for the federal government.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
It will be much worse in the future.
Speaker 6 (17:40):
Do you believe that sold security is a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 7 (17:43):
I believe it's a promise to pay. It's in eighty
nine your institution, so far it will continue.
Speaker 6 (17:51):
Yes, or now do you think it's a Ponzi scheme?
It's a promise to pay.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
So that's from a hearing yesterday with the Democrats grilling
the Republican who runs the Social Security trying to get
him to contradict to Elon Musk, who's you know, working
with the president on trying to cut costs and deal
with let's going bankrupt. Elon Musk said on Joe Rogan
fairly recently, what you just heard that Social Security is
(18:18):
upon this scheme. And I can't believe we're still having
this conversation. I mean we probably first had it two
thousand five.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
Hey, I'm sorry, that's twenty got to interrupted. I've got
to interrupt you. Based on that clip. I'm just jotting
this down from my personal notes from my memoir. March
twenty six, ten thirty six a m. Eastern time was
the moment I gave up on democracy. That exchange crushed
my spirit for your memoir.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Ah, good lord.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
So yeah, let's let's not talk about the structural problems
or the challenge. Let's just try to catch each other
and saying the thing we can embarrass each other over.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Good lord.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
I know it's so sorry, Doctor Franklin, Sorry General Washington.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
We mucked it up. So I was listening to uh,
some cable news hosts talking about George Bush taking on
Social Security and what a dumb plan it was, and
what a mistake it was political mistake, and they're just
talking about the politics of it. If you want to
just be very crass. Bottom line, all that matters is
(19:33):
getting re elected. Yes, it is stupid to take on
Social Security, and Trump knows that. That's why he always says,
not going to touch it, not going to touch it.
But if you want to live in reality at all,
what George Bush planned to do, I think it was
it was second term, so I think it was two
thousand and five when he started talking about privatizing it
and you could, you could take some of it and
(19:53):
invest it and make you know, more money and theory
in the stock market over time, almost guaranteed than the
three person I think it grows in the government barely.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
If you'd if that had gotten through at the time,
you'd be listening to the podcast on a yacht in
the Mediterranean and not getting crusts of bread from the
government every month. My retired friends, Oh.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
And he got killed and uh. And they referred to
it as a Ponzi scheme back then, and just got killed.
How dare you call FDR rescuing the working class calling
it a Ponzi scheme? Bob blah. First, I suppose we
should started here. How many of you know people that
don't know what a Ponzi scheme is. It's like, uh,
you know, if you're a selling water purifiers or tupperware
(20:37):
or I don't know. There's all kinds of different things
out there that are Ponzi schemes where.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
I actually the classic one is like the airplane thing
that was hot for a cup of coffee in college,
where you buy seats on the so called airplane, and
then as it fills up, the people who are in
the front of the plane become the co pilot and pilot.
Then they get paid off, make a huge amount of
money relative to their investment, and then as long as
(21:04):
more people are coming in at the bottom, right, the
people at the top get paid.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Yeah, And there's a I had friends that got into
the water purifier thing in the nineties or whatever, and
it was classic Ponzi scheme, and they'd come hit you with, say,
I'm making three hundred thousand dollars a month. You know
why I've had I've had two hundred people underneath me
selling water purifires, and it was true that they were.
I mean, it's not wasn't a lie. It's just that
the people underneath you need to also sign up a
(21:30):
whole bunch of people to sell water purifiers and this album.
And then but as soon as it stops, it all
falls apart. As soon as that lower level can add
in more people, the whole thing falls apart.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
Well. In the difference in social security is that it's
not a question of attracting people to what seems like
a profitable proposition. It's just the sheer number of young
workers versus retirees. It's a function of demographics, not like
sales persuasion.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
So that George bushmaier, hey there you go. Wow, I'll
be good to hear from you. But I hated that
the conversation I saw on cable news about what George
Bush to just labeled only as stupid. Again, if you're
just going to be cold, crass politics, which is what
most politicians are, it is stupid. But would somebody please
throw in a and completely necessary in there. Maybe it
(22:18):
was stupid politics, but one hundred percent necessary and patriotic
to stick your neck out politically to try to take
this on as opposed to it works, you'd be hailed
as a hero as opposed to kick the can on
down the road for someone else AnyWho. Uh to the
Ponzi scheme comment that Elon made on Rogan's podcast James
Freeman in the Wall Street Journal Political Political PolitiFact versus
(22:43):
Elon Musk, PolitiFact is, in fact, is grading the comment
from Elon Musk social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme
of all time as false because it's not a Ponzi scheme.
The headline from James Freeman is do victims of Ponzi
(23:04):
schemes feel better if the schemes are legal? As in,
it is a Ponzi scheme, but because it's guaranteed by
the government in certain ways, it's not. And you know,
there's no guarantee that the water purifier scheme. Somebody's going
to fill that in at the bottom of the at
the point of you know, a legal gun by law
at some point. Anyway. PolitiFact calls this statement false because
(23:28):
Alex Christie of Newsbuster notes much of PolitiFact's argument rests
on the fact that Social Security is a government program.
When it comes to describing how the program actually operates.
The following political fact passage is bound to convince a
number of readers that mister Musk has spoken the truth,
and they go through how social security works. Then, uh,
(23:50):
this university professor said, this structure of social security, where
you have workers coming in, you're not getting your money back. No,
I don't know how many people don't understand that. Surely
you understand that by now. And this goes back to
the two thousand election and Al Gore talking about a
lock box, this idea that I'm paying into Social Security.
It's an account somewhere and it's growing, and then they're
(24:14):
going to start sending me checks when I retire. No,
they spent that money that I sent them when I
was twenty two working to retirees in nineteen whatever that
was eighty seven, and to just other crap too, just expenditures. Yeah,
they are any other debts, probably interest payments in a
lot of cases. The university professor said. This structure has
(24:37):
similarities to how Ponzi scheme investors provide payouts to earlier
investors if they're no longer enough workers to provide enough
payroll contributions to pay out benefits to retired workers. Then
this system would fail similar exactly to how a Ponzi
scheme would fail in the same manner, said the university professor.
So it's exactly a Ponzi scheme. It's only different than
(24:58):
it's backed by the federal government and they're going to
have to take the money from somewhere or by law
change the amount that you're going to receive in payments.
This is why I've given up on democracy.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Even a question so clearly, I mean, there's there's true
and there's false in this. It's not like how strong
should America's military be and how much should we spend money,
where honest people can disagree. This is just a question
of fact and and people calling it a spont a
Ponzi scheme, a Ponzi scheme. They're talking about the structure,
(25:30):
and then phony liar Elizabeth Warren acts as though they're
talking about the intent of it. That's this is not criminal,
This is the government. This is the promise to No,
we're talking about the structure. We're only talking about the structure.
You lying, fake Indian.
Speaker 6 (25:45):
Do you believe that solid Security is a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 7 (25:48):
I believe it's a promise to pay. It's an eighty
nine your institution. So far it will continue?
Speaker 1 (25:56):
Yes?
Speaker 6 (25:56):
Or now do you think it's a Ponzi scheme?
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yes, they're no, it's a promise to pay.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
I hate you. I hate this process. It's stabbing democracy
in the liver. I despise every moment of this. I'm
counting the seconds until I get out of this stupid.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Stupid hearing. Yeah, and well, we'll play this first. This
is Elizabeth Warren grilling the Social Security Republican a little more.
Speaker 8 (26:19):
If you are confirmed in this job, will you commit
to reversing these cuts so that seniors get the money
that the law says they are entitled to.
Speaker 7 (26:31):
What I will commit to is that I will run
the agency, and I will be in charge of the agency,
and I will look at every item you want me
to look at.
Speaker 8 (26:41):
That's not what I'm asking you. I'm asking you just
answered the previous questions by saying you.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Would follow the law.
Speaker 8 (26:49):
The law is to deliver the benefits that people are
legally entitled to. If you don't have the staff, if
you don't answer the phones, if you don't fix the mistakes,
people don't get what they're legally entitled to. So I
want to know, are you willing to commit right now
that you will put enough people back to work so
(27:12):
they can do the job of delivering the benefits that
Americans earned.
Speaker 7 (27:16):
I'll guess or no, I'll commit to have the right
stuff and to get the job done.
Speaker 8 (27:21):
To get the job done, meaning delivering the benefits people
are entitled to.
Speaker 1 (27:25):
Yes, I'm going to hold you to that.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
I promise that they'll get all the wampum and blankets
to us they're entitled.
Speaker 1 (27:34):
Michael just said, in my ear, she's bringing the firewater.
I don't know if that's an expression. I tell you what.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
The only thing I hate Elizabeth Warren. She is such
a lying phony. But the Doge guys have cut like
the customer service end of Social Security right now, and
it's become a bit of a nightmare to deal with.
I have a friend who's been telling me about it. Guys,
be smart in near cuts, be strategic, add those people
back in.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
It still gets down to there have to be cuts.
You either have to raise taxes or cut the program,
or we have to make major changes. It doesn't work.
And the fact that we can't talk about that is
so nuts. I mean, you're inside conversation. He's having his head.
I'll continue to answer your questions. You know you're lying,
(28:19):
you're playing to your stupidest voters, and you know what
you're doing. I know what you're doing. Everybody in this
room knows what we're doing. We're going to continue to
do this kabuki theater because this is how it works.
And luckily I'm old and I'll die before I have
to see how it bleeds out. I mean, that's actually
what they're thinking. Yeah, yeah, boy, well I'm not sure
(28:40):
I can go on, Michael. I mean, that's just ivan.
You would think that in a room full of people
you could get one Republican and one Democrat because it
flips back and forth. True, because you saw when Republicans
were screaming at Biden because he was going to cut
social Security in theory and he wasn't at the State
of the Union address. I mean, so it works on
(29:02):
both sides. But anyway, you think you could get in
these hearings one Republican one Democrat? At some point, say
how about a GM you and me or Linda or
whatever could be a woman. Let's you and I just
have a conversation separate from all these politics, that it's
going broke. It doesn't work, the math doesn't work. We've
got to make radical changes one way or got any ideas? Yeah,
what do you think we ought to do? And let's
have this conversation separate from all these people who are
(29:24):
playing to their voters and acting like this isn't true.
But you can't even get two people to say that, Yeah,
I appreciate your you're even trying. It's cute.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
Democracy has failed. Monarchy now, so springtime is here. Baseball
season officially underway. Word from our friends in Prize Picks,
do not miss your chance to add to your favorite
players from the diamond in your Prize Picks lineup, whether
it's strikeouts, RBI's first inning runs, even take your pick
of more or less for your shot to win up
a thousand up to a thousand times your cash today
on Prize pick yep, so.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Download the app. It's super easy to use. Turn your
sports opinion. You probably have strong opinions heading into a
new baseball season or whatever, and turn those into cash.
You can do it fast.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
Yeah, and on Prize Picks you can mix and match
player projections from different sports. So combine your favorite baseball
players with players from basketball, hockey, e sports, even and
much more. Second half of the basketball seasons here, they're
starting to play like they mean it. The playoffs will
be heating up on Prize Picks, the best place to
cash in none of your favorite sports. So download that
app today, Prize Pick. She's the code Armstrong. They'll give
(30:27):
you a fifty bucks instantly after you play just a
five dollars lineup again. You don't have to win. They
give you that money to play around with. After you
play five dollars Prize Picks, run your game. Remember that
code Armstrong. Prize Picks, Run your game.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
I would say calling it the biggest Ponzi scheme of
all time is one hundred percent accurate. The amount of money,
the biggest ponzee scheme of all time, and it's going
to crash in my kids generation. Certainly we got more
on the way Armstrong, Honey, Lucy say.
Speaker 9 (30:58):
Forty six year old Gerhard Cone was hiking a poly
trail in o' Wahoo with his wife, thirty six year
old Ariel Koenig, when he struck her in the head
with a rock and tried to push her off the ledge.
Polly Say, the attack hambage around ten am on Monday,
when the couple was visiting the tourist site located just
outside Honolulu. She was taken to a local hospital with
multiple injuries to the head and face, where police say
(31:18):
she remains in critical condition. After a day long manhunt,
Hawaiian police confirmed they arrested Koenig after chasing him on foot.
He's being held behind bars and criminal charges are pending.
Speaker 1 (31:29):
So where'd you get the detail you threw in about that, Katie?
About what they the argument that ensued. Where'd you come
up with? Then? That was attached to a couple of articles.
So the story, what's the story you have? They're out hiking,
husband and wife, and what happens they're out hiking. He
wants to take a picture with her and she said no,
(31:51):
and he lost it so hit her with a rock
and heaved her over the cliff. Sure he did the
next logical thing, tried to push her off a cliff.
Why didn't she just get her picture taken? I don't know.
I'll ask her.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
Wow, wow, wow, good looking couple too, But who knows
what evil lurks in the hearts of mess.
Speaker 1 (32:12):
Should hit her in the head with a rock? But hey,
why are you being so obstinate. We're on vacation, we
want memorials.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
And he's an anesthesiologist, so he knows that hitting someone
in the head with a rock is not anesthesia. I
mean it has a similar effect ultimately.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
But wow.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
So this is a moneyed couple, highly educated. His wife's
a nuclear engineer.
Speaker 1 (32:37):
Wow. And it's not being portrayed as like it was
a plan. You know, he's he's got a mistress or
insurance money or because we've heard this sort of thing before.
It was an all of a sudden, lose your temper
thing that I don't remember hearing, especially among older successful people.
Not like it's a couple of meth heads.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
Well right, yeah, exactly. They've been married six and a half,
seven year or something like that.
Speaker 1 (33:03):
Not another picture, she says, I want a nice picture
with the sunset and you in front. I'm not doing it.
Where's a rock? Wow, that's just nutty. No, he was
planning to killer, it's gotta be. That's why I think
that detail is a red herring. Canard.
Speaker 3 (33:20):
Yeah, it's a well, it is a red herring. He's
he's trying to come up with oh my god, I'm
busted crime of passion is my only defense. Yeah, and
just to reduce the sentence because premeditated you're done.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
Yeah, yeah, exactly exactly. I know you like this story, Katie.
I know a woman, so she would have been at
the time mid twenties, very serious boyfriend and they were
out hiking it. He said to her, they're on standby cliff.
He said, Man, if I pushed you off this cliff,
(33:54):
nobody would ever know. Yeah, and she broke up with
him over that. Good very serious too. What a weird
thought and thing to say. You should say that. Not
(34:14):
everybody's got weird thoughts, but to go ay by the
way and not standing next to the cliff and make
me a little. I think I'll ease away from this cliff, and.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
How about you walk in front of me for the
rest of the hike. And I taught my daughter daughters, Katie.
I heard a self defense expert talking about this. Women,
if you have the urge to cross the street or
you're concerned in a parking lot, don't turn that voice
off because of either political correctness or no I need
(34:43):
to be brave. No, listen to that voice. Likewise, with dudes,
if you're getting the this is wrong. This is not right.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Don't touch yourself out of it. Don't even worry about why, yeah,
or if the guy you're with, I just.
Speaker 3 (34:57):
Show you right off this cliff and I never get caught. Boy,
I don't know if he used that menacing tone.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Okay, by the way, this did you know I could
make you disappear? Yeah? No, not a good good thing. Yeah.
And they were like, uh, they were a long way
away on vacation. I want to say where because I
want to give away who is. But uh, they were
like way far away into vacation, so they had to
fly back and everything like that. I don't remember she
broke up with him there and they came back or
(35:27):
after we got back or what. But oh geez, I'm
glad this guy got I'm glad this guy wasn't successful
because it would have been pretty hard to prove, you know,
if she stumbled and fell off the cliff, come back
and weep and gnash your.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Teeth that, oh my god, my wife, and then keep
your story consistent.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
That's how they always get you. But especially in the
with the in the modern area, there's so many stories
you know of people doing selfies or taking pictures and
falling off cliffs and whatnot. It happens for real. I
told her step back. I didn't know she was Oh yeah.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
Selfie deaths are rampant these days. Charles Darwin his hand
in the events for sure coming up. Get rid of Google,
It's time for the artificial intelligence on your phone. Plus
people mad at her take about the signal scandal, We'll
let their voices be heard as well.
Speaker 9 (36:17):
Stay with us, Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.