December 2, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- Mike Lyons talks to A&G
- Issues with supplements
- Worst field goal attempt of all time & the foot fetish...
- Claiming tips according to the IRS
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 (00:02):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Ketty arm Strong
and Getty and he Armstrong and Hetty.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Find out what happened when and you know what orders
were given. I think all the all the particulars. You
want to know what the facts are, and then you
want to compare that with the relevant and figure out
you know, procedurally, you know what's the you know the
correct lawful way to do things, and determine whether or
(00:46):
not that everything is followed.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Of course, we're talking about the second strike on the boat,
turns out second, third, and fourth maybe strikes on the
boat off the coast of Venezuela, and whether or not
Pete Hegzeth.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
Ordit it or not, and exactly what was ordered, when,
by whom, and whether it was legal. It's worth noting
that the voice you heard was Senator John Thune, the
Republican leader of the Senate.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
The very last is from the New York Times, citing
five US officials today that Hegzeth called for the original
strike but did not specify what should happen if survivors remained.
And then Admiral Frank Bradley, who you've now heard his
name a lot, ultimately signed off on the initial strike
(01:29):
and several follow up strikes that killed eleven people.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Okay, interesting to gain a little perspective, we've invited on
the terrific Mike Lyons, military analyst who is also I
was happy to see writing for Real Clear Defense, including
a great piece about the possible Ukraine deal, which we'll
touch on in a minute. But first, Mike, welcome, How
are you hey?
Speaker 4 (01:49):
Good one, you guys, thanks for having me back.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Trust you and the family had a great Thanksgiving? Could
do talk to you? Yeah? I was good.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
I didn't have my son home or my daughter home,
but hopefully well get him a Christmas time at this point,
so we're looking forward to.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Yeah, onto that part of life. Yeah, so, Mike, let's
talk a little bit about your impressions of the you know,
what is known thus far about the alleged targeting of survivors.
What do you think?
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Yeah, you know, so I've voided this story for a
while because I just a lot of it as one
hundred percent politics. That video that was released, I guess
you know ten days ago, almost two weeks ago, by
the congressmen and senators over you know, not fine, not
not obeying legal authors. I thought that pierced this veil
between the military and the civilians like I've never seen
(02:32):
before and set this path on to where I think
we are today. And the fact that this mission is
being so scrutinized because I could give you multiple examples
of previous missions that and people have testified in front
of Congress about these kinds of double taps that we've
done in the past, but for now it's now reached
this hyperbolic boiling point over what's going on here.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Well, let's let's make sure we understand what you're saying there.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Are you saying the sort of thing that is being
alleged here happens regularly.
Speaker 4 (03:02):
Well, no, first of all, nobody in the military is
committing war crimes, which is where this has gone to.
It's gone to, you know, we're murdering people that are
hanging off of you know, ship parts in the in
the Caribbean or the Pacific or whatever the mission was.
I mean, you know, it's not like Robinson, Caruso or
Rose hanging off the side of the Titanic here. I mean,
it's insane that we're still having this conversation. This is
(03:24):
a military target that the initial target was approved legally,
and the target is to be destroyed and destroyed means destroyed.
And so if the first target hits and there are
still survivors and there's still a target in the water,
well those survivors were still part of the original target
to begin with. So they are legal targets as well.
(03:46):
So so, but this is all about context. It's all
about what, you know, what what people want to view
and they want how they want to see this, And
from from my perspective, it's it's a shame. Now we've
seen the Secretary of Defense throw us over to SOCOM
commander and this addal now will testify in front of Congress.
But these missions go on all the time. They're approved legal,
(04:09):
and once they are approved legal and they start, it's
pretty hard to bring that health fire missile back.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
So there's a pretty good history, including the Nuremberg Trials,
of prosecutions for targeting survivors of an attack on a
ship who no longer posed any threat. Are you saying
this doesn't apply here or that's wrong or what?
Speaker 4 (04:29):
Yeah, I don't know enough about it. I'd have to
see a lot more. But sure, we're not going to
target sole survivors waving their hands in the water, let's say, right,
especially with the health fire missile, and again I don't
know what visual is on them, and we're with seal
Teams six close to them. I mean, there's just so
much information that needs to come out that would figure
(04:51):
out whether or not. I mean, I saw this one
report that said maybe they thought that there was another
boat in the area and this boat could have came
and picked up some of the cargo of this ship.
I don't know. Again, I haven't seen the battle damage
assessment or anything, but all I know is that so
many different opinions are being layered into this contextually that
(05:12):
is now clouded it to the point of we don't
it's going to get this mission accomplished. Of stopping what
they're trying to do. I think it's a pure political
situation that Democrats don't want anything to do with what
Trump is doing in the Caribbean. I think he needs
to say what that strategy is. I still don't know
what that is as well, but this is not the
way to do it, to use the military, because basically,
(05:33):
if he's going to accuse hex at about war crime.
If you're going to accuse him of war crime, you're
acusing everybody to pull the trailer all the way down
to who fired that missile?
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Okay, just for the record, obviously, you know, we're not
engaging in hyperbole or trying to cloud new waters. In fact,
we're trying to do just the opposite and help people
understand what are the actual issues going on here.
Speaker 4 (05:52):
Yeah, so yeah, no, I don't think you are. This
is again I avoided this just for this reason. I
think it's more political. I think it's a shame that
we're at this place that now the military is going
to be questioned about this going forward, We're going to
drag this admiral and into this political hearing, and this
is all about getting secretary heccess, frankly from my perspective
(06:13):
and interesting. So it just just seems too close to
the video that was released ten days ago to have
this situation come up right now.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Yeah, we wondered about that yesterday. The timing seems pretty
suspicious exactly.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
And then the initial Washington Post article now has proven wrong.
When the New York Times is throwing the Washington Post
off under the bus over there, then you know something
is up, so.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
Is your take, And I just want to make sure
completely understand what you're saying is that we are entering
into getting way too loyally on this sort of thing,
or much more lawyerly than we usually are in reality,
you know, in a war situation.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
Well, my take is that I think they decided that
these are legal targets, and they are the military targets
as they've been declared narco terrorists and enemies of the state,
and each one is evaluated separately with regard to how
they're going to take it out and what they want
to do, and what the definition of destroyed means. And
(07:13):
I think that once the initial shot was fired then
and if that was determined legal, then any shot fired
after it is determined legal as well. Again, I got
to think there's not a video and audio of Haigs
that's standing up saying kill them all and all these
other things that are coming out of this. I mean,
it's just not the case that the people, you know,
(07:33):
I had a chance to talk to some of the
former Jay Sock commanders the last few days, and they
wanted me to reiterate to everybody that the people that
are on these missions are professionals, and they're doing things
exactly by the book. And if they thought for one
second so that was an illegal target or they were
there were survivors, and the fact that they thought that
that the target wasn't destroyed, they wouldn't have fired again,
(07:55):
did Why did in a couple of weeks later we
turned two people back over to this to the host county.
What did that happen? Well, they must have thought that
situation was different from this. I'm sure that will be
explained in the Senate Armed Services Committee. But the professionals
in the military are looking at every single aspect and
there's just no way they were going to fire on
a target that wasn't legal.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
All right, well said, we'll wait for more facts to
come out. Now to your piece about the still taking
shape Ukraine deal, I thought the way you framed it
was so interesting that it's not exactly a peace treaty.
It's more a Korean style armistice or freeze. Tell us
about that.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Yeah, it's a freeze, and you know, you know, it's
a classic trading land for some kind of freedom or
immediate relief from stopping the war. We all want the
war to stop, but there's no guarantees of what specifically
what that means without NATO being involved. For example, I
still don't believe Russia will accept anything, any peace agreement
(08:53):
or any agreement that they come to right now anyway.
And I'll kind of put this out preemptively because it's
going to forest United States to try to create more
leverage at some point. But if they did accept what
what's currently on the table right now, all it does
is going to set up Round two at some point.
I mean, it's appeasement to try to stop a world
We're you know that nineteen thirty eight. Let's say that
was kind of appeasement to try to keep a war
(09:14):
from happening. This is the flips it on it's head.
It's Korea nineteen fifty three in the same regard. That
will create a DMZ, and we'll create this line, but
it can always be restarted. And I just don't believe
this is good for the long term of Eastern Europe,
and I don't think it's in the long term interest
in the United States.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
We were wondering yesterday, why would Putin quit?
Speaker 3 (09:34):
If you're a Russia with Russia's goals, would you keep
prosecuting the war exactly.
Speaker 4 (09:39):
Not for one second would I quit. So that's the thing.
And there's the battlefield math has not changed. There's nothing
differently on the battlefield. In fact, the Russians have caught
up with the Ukrainians when it comes to their drone technology.
It's incredible the fiber optic drones that are being used
right now, and they're tethered, and they're ubquous to the weather,
and and they're not impervious to electronic warfare. You know,
(10:04):
we need to be paying close attention. I know we
are at the military academy this because we've got a
leaf fraud this technology. We can't be satisfied with what's
good enough on the battlefield right now. We've got to
be looking over the horizon and figuring out what it's
going to take, what the drone technology looks like on
the next battlefield, because because right now it's very very
advanced right now, and the Russians have caught right up
with the Ukrainians on it.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
Right and final point on the comparison with Korea, the
thing that bothers me is somebody who's been standing up
for Ukraine is that unlike the Korean deal where you
got your demilitarized zone, but then everybody's armed to the
teeth on both sides of it. Yeah, this is calling
for Ukraine to more or less disarmed, to weaken their
own military and become a just It wouldn't take ten
(10:45):
minutes for Putin to violate the agreement and beat the
hell out of the Ukraine, take even more land a
year or two hence, so.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Exactly they would have interior lines. They would take land
that they haven't conquered yet. You know, in Korea we
poured in forty five thousand troops. There's ten thousand artillery rounds,
you know, targeting each other right now, that's a tinderbox
on some level. And we've talked about that and before.
But this, this in particular, would be it would clearly
lead to a round two at some point unless NATO,
(11:13):
for example, provided an air defense umbrella over Ukraine that
guaranteed all missiles coming from Russia would be shot down,
perhaps a no fly zone, although a no fly zone
is technically an active war. But and what are the
troop where do the troops come from? So NATO has
to be in the game or the or NATO countries
have got to be in the game from a security
perspective or to execute your point, they would roll right
(11:35):
through Ukraine once this they were disarmed.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
Military analyst Mike Lyons will post his piece forrom Real
Clear Defense at Armstrong and getty dot com. Mike, really
interesting perspective. Thanks so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
Yeah, great guys, Thanks for having and thanks for having
this kind of conversation. I'm not sure where other people
are having it. And I think it's important to recognize
that our military is professional and not murdering people in
the water. I just think I just want to make
that that point clear.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Yeah, we probably we'd be better off pandering, but we're
too stubborn to do it. So anyway, Thanks Mike.
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Great to talk to you, great guys, great out here.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
So do these two things go together, though, that our
military is professional and we're not in the business of
murdering people in the water, and things aren't quite as
delineated as you think they are in TV shows or
whatever around these issues.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
Well, and to what extent is a drug cartel an
enemy force? And to what extent where are we at war?
Because that's there's an underlying set of questions before we
even get to the specifics. But a quick word from
our friends at Omaha Steaks. That's fabulous. That the sale
that got going on right now, it's fabulous. There's sizzle
all the way. Sail. You can get fifty percent off
sitewide at Omaha Steaks dot com. Plus you good people
(12:48):
get an extra thirty five dollars off with the promo
code Armstrong at checkout.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Yeah, we're just doing that for you because we like
you and we want you to et Omah Steaks.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Because they're really really good.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Lots of different kinds of steaks, you know, there are
different cuts and that's stars sort of stuff, and they
have that Nomaha Steaks, but they're all fantastic. And then
the burgers are the best burgers I've ever had, absolutely fantastic,
the apple tart.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
Let's just all kinds of stuff from Ama Steaks that
are great. You want an endorsement, I've ordered it for
my papa, who just turned eighty five. Year after year
after year love Omaha Steaks, Never for a second wonder
about their quality. It is so good. A lot of
different packages too. Save big on gourmet gifts and more
holiday favorites with Omaha Steaks visit Omaha Steaks dot com
for fifty percent off sitewide during their Sizzle All the
(13:30):
Way sale. That's a really good name, and for an
extra thirty five bucks off, use the promo code Armstrong
at checkout. Use it at checkout Omaha Steaks dot com.
The code is Armstrong.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
I want to talk about what's your pea doom a
little bit later if you don't know that term around AI.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
But I don't want to rap name p doom Yo
yo yo.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
I don't want to be the scariest radio show in America.
So we have some other stuff where you're coming up
next farm Strong.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Hard to believe, but Ireland will finally introduce warning labels
on alcohol, you know to one of its harmful side
effects such as katy disease, cancer or worse going home
with rosy O'Donnell, never forget or something Hey, get it
(14:16):
by Christmas. Shipping deadline is upon us. Order your new
Ang T shirt or hoodie now at the Ang Superstore
Armstrong Giddy dot com. Perhaps you're looking for something else,
how about the truly amusing kftc apron perfect for your
favorite griller. Please. I can't wait to get mine. Where's
mine Handsome or our new drink wear and the ruin
(14:38):
the entire country Newsome twenty twenty eight T shirts are
flying off the shelves. Wear them proudly. Halt progressive stupidity
in its tracks. Anyway, moving along, because we all want
a quick route to health other than eating a reasonably
balanced diet and regularly exercising. And I'm not claiming for
a minute I do those things. But anyway, everybody wants
(15:01):
to take supplements. Kitty, are you big on supplements? Have
you been into the turmeric or whatever? Pre pregnancy?
Speaker 5 (15:08):
I was, but then I kept reading all this stuff
about how it's just they're not regulated and not good
for you, so I steer clear.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Came across this piece from our friends Jason Rantz and Seattle,
who's a terrific radio guy and a good guy. New
independent lab analysis may make every Amazon shopper I think
twice before buying another supplement from the world's largest online marketplace.
A consumer health testing platform purchased forty four of Amazon's
(15:37):
most popular supplements and put them through ISO accredited labs.
The results were alarming. Boy fifty two out of the
forty four failed to meet their label claims for what
were in them, and even more stunning, of those twenty
two that failed to meet the claims, twenty of them
virtually all of them had zero to three percent of
(15:59):
the main ingredient an amount claimed. That means half the
supplements tested were effectively fakes, and many of them contained
none or almost none of what the label promised was
in them. So Amazon's marketplace has become a huge magnet
for low quality, foreign manufactured deceptive supplements selling. But did
(16:19):
they work? They cured the PLACEBA almost right away.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
I had quite a conversation with my niece who's in
medical school right now for Thanksgiving about PLACEBIA.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
Now I'm all for it.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
If I think it works and it made me feel better,
one hundred percent, I'll pay for it.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
So the folks who sponsored this, who I believe are
a domestic supplement maker, they discovered that every single overseas
registered supplement they tested failed testing, including six from mainland China,
delivered none of the claimed potency. Plus you get your
opaque seller identities on Amazon. I've fallen pray to that
(16:56):
once or twice, two third party sellers. Anyway, fuyerviewer go
with known domestic brands.
Speaker 5 (17:04):
Yeah, and one thing that I've seen I can't remember
where I saw this report, but these especially the Chinese manufacturers,
will pay people to review the product, so then it'll
show the product is having a higher rating because you
know they've they've obviously planted all these these reviews and
then people purchase.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
How about these giant, giant vitamin stores that they have
in strip malls or whatever, those are probably legit, right
if you go into one of.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Those, uh will I would again, I would check the label.
Maybe go with the better known supplement brands. Yeah, I mean,
maybe taking turmeric or whatever the hell is today's hot
hot mineral magnesium a good idea or bad idea, but
you might as well get what you're paying for. Yeah,
(17:51):
and then whiz it out because your body gets plenty
of it just from regular diets like most things. That's correct. Yes, yes,
wiz it out, sweeze it out.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
How much time do we got, Michael? We got to
talk about that field goal from last night. Yeah, if
you haven't watched the video, why did they send me
out to kick a field goal?
Speaker 1 (18:10):
That was a mistake. We got a lot of stuff
on the way. I hope you can stay here Armstrong
and Geeddy.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Forty seven yard trying now by young Way Conny stumbled
Killen gets swallowed up Patriots ball.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
I don't think I've ever seen that. Yeah, look like
he just stubbed his foot right into the turf. Here
it is.
Speaker 5 (18:41):
There was.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
They're laughing. So here's what happened.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
The field goal kicker who is like me, he runs
up to kick a field goal.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
It's like two feet from the ball. He gets jams
and foot into the ground. Yeah. Yeah, he never contacted
the ball, come within a foot of contacting. They speaking
as a guy who kicked a thirty five yarder on
the air. I would like to point out that was
a I've never seen anything like that. No, it's just
(19:11):
going through a whole any level of football, not high
school football. No, no, no.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
If you do that in junior high everyone would laugh
at you and they would wonder why did you ever
think you could kick a football?
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Understand again, he planted his plant foot, he swung his foot,
he hit a foot foot and a half behind the ball,
never even scared the ball, I mean, and the holders like,
what the hell do I do?
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Now?
Speaker 1 (19:35):
He picks the ball up and gets the hell beat
out of him.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
I was just going through a whole bunch of social
media stuff from various NFL players through the years who say,
I have watched eight million of games, I've never seen
anybody do that before. Yeah, it's hard to imagine the
equivalent of it. I mean, like, if you're shooting a
free throw and you turned around and faced the other
(20:02):
direction and tried to put it in the other basket,
or are you hitting yourself in the face with it, right,
It's amazing how there was a play like this in
the World Series where somebody dropped a pop fly.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Basically, how professionals who.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
Are the best in the world at it can make
the you know, I am a sucky athlete, thirteen year
old mistake sometimes.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Well yeah, but to drop a fly ball is one thing.
To stand there and have it like go four feet
away from your mitan that would be the equivalent to this.
I'm sure he'll be out trying to explain that guy
was just cut by another team and he caught on
with the sucky Sucky Giants. Oh boy boy, I'm like,
(20:45):
oh the barrel now, I'm just picturing what his teammates
must have said to him as he was walking back
to the bench.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
Would there be nothing to say? You don't need to
say anything. There's nothing you could say. The guy knows
what he did. His foot hit not even closing the ball.
He probably about broke his ankle.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Yeah, I'll tell you. There's one thing you could say,
hope you catch on with another team, buddy. Sorry, maybe
Carr's Gonza. That's what I'd have said to him. Car insurance.
You ever thought about that? People need car insurance? Be
that way to make a living.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Be that guy at Costco that says to people when
they walk by, hey do you have vinyl sighting?
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Be that guy you know if he's got a smart agent.
He's trotting him out right now with some sort of
sometimes just swinging miss badly. And that's when you call
service master or something. I don't know, something escape anything.
Speaker 5 (21:30):
Apparently the quarterback was on the sideline, Jackson Darty.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
You could see him lipping in the camera. Oh my god,
I saw that. I saw that. It was just oh
my god. He turns and then he turns and says
what and then the mercifully his said has turned. Yes, Yes,
you got to lean into it. That's exactly it.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
You gotta be on Kimmel tonight, and and you know,
do something ridiculous and become a household name for that,
and you'll make your living pitching various products the rest
of your life. You'll make more then you were ever
gonna make as a second tier kicker. Right, you need
to become a household name for the worst kick in
NFL history.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Going turn and ads for one of those divorce lawyers.
I'm I'm young, ho ku did you did you swing
and miss on your first marriage?
Speaker 3 (22:16):
They get a fair settlement, Jason lawyers bet in a
car wreck?
Speaker 1 (22:21):
Right? Why this was a car wreck, wasn't it? And
they show the tape. Yes, if you've been in a
car wreck, call Joe good if they fight for you.
Speaker 3 (22:31):
We posted that at armstrong in getdy dot com because
you got it. If you haven't seen the video of
the Giants kicker missing that field goal, you think we're exaggerating,
We're not.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
We're we're not doing it justice of how bad that is.
Missing the field goal hardly is that's really inadequate to
describe what happened. The ball didn't get off the ground.
If I you know, the ball wasn't even juststled. No,
the ball didn't get off the ground. The ball was
not assaulted, the ball was not contacted. The ball has
nothing to do with this. It was not part of
(23:01):
the play. All right, thank god for that. Coming up.
Two things. Number one, it may be the greatest scam
ever perpetrated in terms of the dollar value, and it
was perpetrated against the people of Europe. I will explain.
(23:25):
And also this, this is so good. The question and
who is asking it? The question is if I am
really turned on by a woman's bare feet? Is showing
me pictures of a woman's bare feet pornography? And who's
(23:50):
asking it? The irs? I'll try to get past.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
The because I think feet are disgusting and I just
do not under stand people who are turned.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
On by feet. I'm foot neutraled or handy for walking certainly,
But so I'll just try to ignore that that you're
a freaking weirdo if you're turned on by feet, and
just accept that some people are. You know, I'm not
going to go too deep in the Getty playbook, but
a nice foot rob is, you know, it's a nice
it's a good thing, right al or anti that you
(24:23):
refuse to indulge their or what I mean, you don't
have to getting or giving giving. I'd rather not. I
think feet are gross. Wow wow wow, Katie high Seval.
You can sigh heavily enroll your eyes, or you could
step up to the mic, your idiot, jack. Feet are
(24:44):
just disgusting. They should always be covered. Do you look
at yours every day and go ew keep them away
from people? But the coming up the irs wants to
know if feet turn you on? Is that porn?
Speaker 3 (24:57):
I know somebody I know a woman who became aware
of the fact that one of her male co workers,
if she were if she was barefoot in like you know, uh,
attractive footwear at work, that that male coworker stared at
her feet all the time, oh boy. And it kind
(25:19):
of became people and the people. Other people became aware
that man, oh boy, he's really going to be checking
you out today, Like you know, if she showed up
in open toed sandals of some.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
Sort, man, everybody with some sort of quasi lesbian look
from then on and go hiking boots and sick woolen
sucks every day.
Speaker 3 (25:37):
Because apparently he was obvious about it, that other people
in the workplace were aware that, oh boy, Jim's going
to be staring at your feet today, you know that sort.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Of Oh that's uncomfortable. Yeah, that's that's terrible. But it's
well for us.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
For somebody who's like in defeat, it's the equivalent of
wearing you know, a tube top or something, I guess
for somebody who's in the battle.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yeah, so yeah, yes, please, it's not your fault, all right.
So I will explain that that confusing story coming up
after a brief break. But our friends at Prize Picks
want to remind you that Prize Picks is the easiest,
most fun way to get into fantasy sports. You see,
all you do is pick two players and you can
combine sports if you want. Your lineup can have a
(26:19):
basketball player and a football player, for instance, and you
just pick more or less on the stat projections for
at least two players.
Speaker 3 (26:26):
For instance, did you go more or less field goal
kickers who would kick into the ground three feet from
the ball. I actually don't think they had as an option,
but if they had, you might have done.
Speaker 1 (26:37):
Well. Yeah, the more or less could have been the
ball and move one inch. It didn't anyway. Prize Picks
is super cool. You can make your picks on fantasy
score free throws, made field goal attempted at even turnovers.
A couple of players really stack up their free throws.
That's interesting. Anyway, download the prize picks at today and
(26:58):
use the code Armstrong. You get fifty dollars in lineups
after you play your first five dollars lineup. As the
code armstrong, you get fifty dollars in lineups to play
around with for just playing a five dollar lineup. You
don't have to win. It's automatic prize picks. It's good
to be right.
Speaker 3 (27:12):
So the whole Pete Heggzeth guys in the Boat second
Strike thing. We talked about it early in the show.
Then we had Mike lions On talking about it, and
we've gotten so many texts about it. We'll maybe get
some of those an hour three. Seems to be a
hot topic for y'all.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yeah, I guess, wow, Okay, Yeah, I'm surprised. I thought
we dealt with it just plenty, a lot of plenty
and a half. But people are crazy into it.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Fair amount of partisan breakdown, and I think that's true
in the media also, like Mike Lein said that, you know,
there's a lot of Democrats that would just love to
get a scalp with Pete hegseeth having to resign. That
would I've never understood this kind of partisan ship where
if you make somebody from the other party resign, like, Wow,
we've really got them, now, don't I don't understand that?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Well, yeah, what do you think Trump's gonna point AOC
to the post Now He's gonna point another hardcore pro
defense Republican.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
Yeah, I don't. I don't understand that level of politics.
But anyway, we got that a lot of other stuff
on the ways to hear our three, We're gonna talk
to someone covering the Luigi trial. That scumbag murderer I
did just re saw the video. God, that guy needs
to if we had if we're gonna have a death penalty,
that guy should be executed.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
But he's handsome, and some people are unhappy about their
health insurance, so we should murder young dads, say people
who ought have he denied the effing vote immediately morons? Anyway,
So remember when Trump promised to exempt tips from taxes
to win Nevada. It was a clever political ploy and
then it was passed into law. This past summer creates
(28:46):
a number of challenges though, uh, the tax break does
not exempt tips from taxes entirely, but it's incentive for
people to earn more of them obviously lost pass and
people adjust their behavior to them tax laws especially, that's
one thing liberals never get anyway. To avoid some sort
(29:07):
of giant economy wide shift of earnings into tips, the
IRS and the Treasury have imposed some limits. Only people
who work jobs that have customarily and regularly received tips
can claim the deduction, like talk show hosts. Exactly, yeah,
we've started to go fund me. No we haven't anyway,
so on a list of nearly seventy eligible occupations under
(29:28):
the IRS list detailed in a proposed regulation in September
where digital content creators, entertainers and performers and dancers categories
that are to be a boon for America's sex workers.
Everybody's thinking, yes, all these tips that I get online
are now tax free.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
Oh, I didn't know what administration. Yes, I didn't know
what you meant by digital content creators. I thought that
those people get tips. You mean only fans people.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Among others. Yeah, okay, well there's a hell of a
lot of different digital content, but sure, yeah, but the
Trump administration then added the tips for prostitution or pornographic
activity quote unquote would not be entitled to the new
tax break. Okay, so obviously that was a disappointment, or
(30:19):
at least or a head scratcher too.
Speaker 3 (30:21):
People post, hey, that's some nice fornicating. Here's twenty percent.
I'm disappointed in that fornicating. I'll give you a fifteen
percent tip, but try harder. Well, that's that's how it works.
That's precisely how it works for the online performance.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
You call it. Take for the coins are well, I
try to understand stories before I launch into them. So anyway, Oh,
so where were we? Oh? Okay, So people who post
sexually explicit or even just sensual comments on platforms like
only Fans where users leave tips aren't quite sure where
(30:58):
to where this is going now. Performers in the adult
entertainment industry already face difficulties accessing basic financial services. They
know idea, but that's another difficulty. It certainly is. But
nobody's sure how restrictions on pornographic activity would actually work
because the IRS, like the rest of us, has not
(31:20):
yet elaborated on which activities it would consider pornographic. It's unclear,
for instance, whether strippers could claim the tips deductions. How
about exotic dancers who just lose their top. How about
those who take off their top in their bottom? Plenty
of activity, an accountan or tax lawyer could argue is
merely titillating and not pornographic. Where's the line? How about
(31:40):
some girl who does yoga in a bikini? How about
some gal or guy who just shows their feet to
people who get super turned on by feet. They are
getting sexual gratification from it, yet is it pornographic? And
can you deny them the right to deduct those tips
from their taxes? Ought somebody do yoga and tights and
(32:01):
giving them tips? You know?
Speaker 4 (32:09):
All right?
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Yeah? I mean I realize you'd like to write some
sort of ironclad list of what you should be turned
on by and whatnot and publish that as some sort
of bible. I find the tax what is porn? Question
to be more interesting? But whatever? All right? Moving along?
(32:33):
Perhaps the greatest scam in the history of mankind. The
people of Europe, those poor bastards. They've all got to
learn like three four languages. What we've changed subjects? I
was not dragging. We're on a different subject here, yes, yeah,
on a different topic. European politicians told their voters, we
(32:55):
go with this big green energy thing. We'll have green
jobs and cheap, abundant solar and wind energy, also a
sharp production in carbon emissions, and the poor Euros, having
learned three or four languages, got screwed. We're two decades
(33:15):
in and energy prices have skyrocketed. They've caught their they've
cut their carbon emissions. Great, yeah, China and India, like,
that's cute way to go, idiots. Yeah, they've cut their
carbon emissions by more than any other region, thirty percent
compared to seventeen percent for US. But listen to their
energy prices, which you and people who pay high energy
(33:37):
prices in the US, you think you're getting hosed. Now,
granted these are national averages, and somebody's getting hosed. That
does count as pornography if they're doing yoga. I'm not
sure certainly the US. In the US, we pay and
this is an average. So if you're in you know, Oklahoma,
it's different than California. You pay eight point one CeNSE
(34:00):
per kiloodd hour eight cents in the In the UK
they're paying thirty four cents.
Speaker 3 (34:08):
Wow a kiloodd hour I that it was crazy high
because of their zero policies.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
I didn't know it was that much, so it's quadruple.
Italy's a little behind that at twenty nine, Germany twenty seven,
Poland twenties five ish, France twenty one ish. But yeah,
unfreaking believable. Charles Seacook of National Review. He's from England.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
He regularly talks about how much cheaper everything is in
the United States, and people in the United States.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
Don't realize it.
Speaker 3 (34:40):
It's just so much cheaper just to live compared to Europe.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Yeah, Germany now has the highest domestic electricity prices in
the developed world. There's also industrial energy prices, which complicates
this a little bit. Well. The UK is the highest
industrial electricity rates. Average electricity prices for heavy industries in
the European Union remain roughly twice those in the US
(35:07):
and fifty percent higher in China. No wonder their economy
suck and energy prices have grown more volatile as the
share of renewables increased, so they skyrocket up and down,
crippling industry, hobbling Europe's ability to attract key economic drivers
like AI, which requires cheap and abundant electricity. They just
got ripped off, defrauded.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
So I got a question, Yeah, so is the Trump
administration arguing for more of those places to count as
tips or fewer of those places of activities to kind
of tips like the person doing yoga and stretching on
camera for people who want to watch them do yoga.
Are they trying to get that included or trying not
to They're trying to guess, I would guess they're trying
(35:53):
to minimize the number of people who could deduct tips,
just for revenue reasons, like any deduction. I thought they
were going to try to broaden it just to include
as many people as possible, but they already you know,
he's not running for election again, so he doesn't need
to do that again.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Right right, So now you make these political promises and
the IRS has to figure out and you know, a
more mundane example of it is, all right, what is
a work expense? Is?
Speaker 3 (36:19):
Are there going to become court cases like trying to
figure out whether or not somebody's showing their feet?
Speaker 1 (36:23):
If people are turned on, they will have to be right,
A judge will have to decide right, Uh, yeah, unless
the IRS goes super liberal on that sort of stuff.
But yeah, absolutely could end up in court. Wow, I
have shown one breast your honor, one breast less. Is
not porn. This is not porn. That is really anatomy.
Speaker 3 (36:45):
We get a lot more of the way if you
miss a segment or now or get a podcast Armstrong
and getting on
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Ketty arm Strong
and Getty and he Armstrong and Hetty.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Find out what happened when and you know what orders
were given. I think all the all the particulars. You
want to know what the facts are, and then you
want to compare that with the relevant and figure out
you know, procedurally, you know what's the you know the
correct lawful way to do things, and determine whether or
(00:46):
not that everything is followed.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Of course, we're talking about the second strike on the boat,
turns out second, third, and fourth maybe strikes on the
boat off the coast of Venezuela, and whether or not
Pete Hegzeth.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
Ordit it or not, and exactly what was ordered, when,
by whom, and whether it was legal. It's worth noting
that the voice you heard was Senator John Thune, the
Republican leader of the Senate.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
The very last is from the New York Times, citing
five US officials today that Hegzeth called for the original
strike but did not specify what should happen if survivors remained.
And then Admiral Frank Bradley, who you've now heard his
name a lot, ultimately signed off on the initial strike
(01:29):
and several follow up strikes that killed eleven people.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Okay, interesting to gain a little perspective, we've invited on
the terrific Mike Lyons, military analyst who is also I
was happy to see writing for Real Clear Defense, including
a great piece about the possible Ukraine deal, which we'll
touch on in a minute. But first, Mike, welcome, How
are you hey?
Speaker 4 (01:49):
Good one, you guys, thanks for having me back.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Trust you and the family had a great Thanksgiving? Could
do talk to you? Yeah? I was good.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
I didn't have my son home or my daughter home,
but hopefully well get him a Christmas time at this point,
so we're looking forward to.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Yeah, onto that part of life. Yeah, so, Mike, let's
talk a little bit about your impressions of the you know,
what is known thus far about the alleged targeting of survivors.
What do you think?
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Yeah, you know, so I've voided this story for a
while because I just a lot of it as one
hundred percent politics. That video that was released, I guess
you know ten days ago, almost two weeks ago, by
the congressmen and senators over you know, not fine, not
not obeying legal authors. I thought that pierced this veil
between the military and the civilians like I've never seen
(02:32):
before and set this path on to where I think
we are today. And the fact that this mission is
being so scrutinized because I could give you multiple examples
of previous missions that and people have testified in front
of Congress about these kinds of double taps that we've
done in the past, but for now it's now reached
this hyperbolic boiling point over what's going on here.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Well, let's let's make sure we understand what you're saying there.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Are you saying the sort of thing that is being
alleged here happens regularly.
Speaker 4 (03:02):
Well, no, first of all, nobody in the military is
committing war crimes, which is where this has gone to.
It's gone to, you know, we're murdering people that are
hanging off of you know, ship parts in the in
the Caribbean or the Pacific or whatever the mission was.
I mean, you know, it's not like Robinson, Caruso or
Rose hanging off the side of the Titanic here. I mean,
it's insane that we're still having this conversation. This is
(03:24):
a military target that the initial target was approved legally,
and the target is to be destroyed and destroyed means destroyed.
And so if the first target hits and there are
still survivors and there's still a target in the water,
well those survivors were still part of the original target
to begin with. So they are legal targets as well.
(03:46):
So so, but this is all about context. It's all
about what, you know, what what people want to view
and they want how they want to see this, And
from from my perspective, it's it's a shame. Now we've
seen the Secretary of Defense throw us over to SOCOM
commander and this addal now will testify in front of Congress.
But these missions go on all the time. They're approved legal,
(04:09):
and once they are approved legal and they start, it's
pretty hard to bring that health fire missile back.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
So there's a pretty good history, including the Nuremberg Trials,
of prosecutions for targeting survivors of an attack on a
ship who no longer posed any threat. Are you saying
this doesn't apply here or that's wrong or what?
Speaker 4 (04:29):
Yeah, I don't know enough about it. I'd have to
see a lot more. But sure, we're not going to
target sole survivors waving their hands in the water, let's say, right,
especially with the health fire missile, and again I don't
know what visual is on them, and we're with seal
Teams six close to them. I mean, there's just so
much information that needs to come out that would figure
(04:51):
out whether or not. I mean, I saw this one
report that said maybe they thought that there was another
boat in the area and this boat could have came
and picked up some of the cargo of this ship.
I don't know. Again, I haven't seen the battle damage
assessment or anything, but all I know is that so
many different opinions are being layered into this contextually that
(05:12):
is now clouded it to the point of we don't
it's going to get this mission accomplished. Of stopping what
they're trying to do. I think it's a pure political
situation that Democrats don't want anything to do with what
Trump is doing in the Caribbean. I think he needs
to say what that strategy is. I still don't know
what that is as well, but this is not the
way to do it, to use the military, because basically,
(05:33):
if he's going to accuse hex at about war crime.
If you're going to accuse him of war crime, you're
acusing everybody to pull the trailer all the way down
to who fired that missile?
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Okay, just for the record, obviously, you know, we're not
engaging in hyperbole or trying to cloud new waters. In fact,
we're trying to do just the opposite and help people
understand what are the actual issues going on here.
Speaker 4 (05:52):
Yeah, so yeah, no, I don't think you are. This
is again I avoided this just for this reason. I
think it's more political. I think it's a shame that
we're at this place that now the military is going
to be questioned about this going forward, We're going to
drag this admiral and into this political hearing, and this
is all about getting secretary heccess, frankly from my perspective
(06:13):
and interesting. So it just just seems too close to
the video that was released ten days ago to have
this situation come up right now.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Yeah, we wondered about that yesterday. The timing seems pretty
suspicious exactly.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
And then the initial Washington Post article now has proven wrong.
When the New York Times is throwing the Washington Post
off under the bus over there, then you know something
is up, so.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
Is your take, And I just want to make sure
completely understand what you're saying is that we are entering
into getting way too loyally on this sort of thing,
or much more lawyerly than we usually are in reality,
you know, in a war situation.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
Well, my take is that I think they decided that
these are legal targets, and they are the military targets
as they've been declared narco terrorists and enemies of the state,
and each one is evaluated separately with regard to how
they're going to take it out and what they want
to do, and what the definition of destroyed means. And
(07:13):
I think that once the initial shot was fired then
and if that was determined legal, then any shot fired
after it is determined legal as well. Again, I got
to think there's not a video and audio of Haigs
that's standing up saying kill them all and all these
other things that are coming out of this. I mean,
it's just not the case that the people, you know,
(07:33):
I had a chance to talk to some of the
former Jay Sock commanders the last few days, and they
wanted me to reiterate to everybody that the people that
are on these missions are professionals, and they're doing things
exactly by the book. And if they thought for one
second so that was an illegal target or they were
there were survivors, and the fact that they thought that
that the target wasn't destroyed, they wouldn't have fired again,
(07:55):
did Why did in a couple of weeks later we
turned two people back over to this to the host county.
What did that happen? Well, they must have thought that
situation was different from this. I'm sure that will be
explained in the Senate Armed Services Committee. But the professionals
in the military are looking at every single aspect and
there's just no way they were going to fire on
a target that wasn't legal.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
All right, well said, we'll wait for more facts to
come out. Now to your piece about the still taking
shape Ukraine deal, I thought the way you framed it
was so interesting that it's not exactly a peace treaty.
It's more a Korean style armistice or freeze. Tell us
about that.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Yeah, it's a freeze, and you know, you know, it's
a classic trading land for some kind of freedom or
immediate relief from stopping the war. We all want the
war to stop, but there's no guarantees of what specifically
what that means without NATO being involved. For example, I
still don't believe Russia will accept anything, any peace agreement
(08:53):
or any agreement that they come to right now anyway.
And I'll kind of put this out preemptively because it's
going to forest United States to try to create more
leverage at some point. But if they did accept what
what's currently on the table right now, all it does
is going to set up Round two at some point.
I mean, it's appeasement to try to stop a world
We're you know that nineteen thirty eight. Let's say that
was kind of appeasement to try to keep a war
(09:14):
from happening. This is the flips it on it's head.
It's Korea nineteen fifty three in the same regard. That
will create a DMZ, and we'll create this line, but
it can always be restarted. And I just don't believe
this is good for the long term of Eastern Europe,
and I don't think it's in the long term interest
in the United States.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
We were wondering yesterday, why would Putin quit?
Speaker 3 (09:34):
If you're a Russia with Russia's goals, would you keep
prosecuting the war exactly.
Speaker 4 (09:39):
Not for one second would I quit. So that's the thing.
And there's the battlefield math has not changed. There's nothing
differently on the battlefield. In fact, the Russians have caught
up with the Ukrainians when it comes to their drone technology.
It's incredible the fiber optic drones that are being used
right now, and they're tethered, and they're ubquous to the weather,
and and they're not impervious to electronic warfare. You know,
(10:04):
we need to be paying close attention. I know we
are at the military academy this because we've got a
leaf fraud this technology. We can't be satisfied with what's
good enough on the battlefield right now. We've got to
be looking over the horizon and figuring out what it's
going to take, what the drone technology looks like on
the next battlefield, because because right now it's very very
advanced right now, and the Russians have caught right up
with the Ukrainians on it.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
Right and final point on the comparison with Korea, the
thing that bothers me is somebody who's been standing up
for Ukraine is that unlike the Korean deal where you
got your demilitarized zone, but then everybody's armed to the
teeth on both sides of it. Yeah, this is calling
for Ukraine to more or less disarmed, to weaken their
own military and become a just It wouldn't take ten
(10:45):
minutes for Putin to violate the agreement and beat the
hell out of the Ukraine, take even more land a
year or two hence, so.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Exactly they would have interior lines. They would take land
that they haven't conquered yet. You know, in Korea we
poured in forty five thousand troops. There's ten thousand artillery rounds,
you know, targeting each other right now, that's a tinderbox
on some level. And we've talked about that and before.
But this, this in particular, would be it would clearly
lead to a round two at some point unless NATO,
(11:13):
for example, provided an air defense umbrella over Ukraine that
guaranteed all missiles coming from Russia would be shot down,
perhaps a no fly zone, although a no fly zone
is technically an active war. But and what are the
troop where do the troops come from? So NATO has
to be in the game or the or NATO countries
have got to be in the game from a security
perspective or to execute your point, they would roll right
(11:35):
through Ukraine once this they were disarmed.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
Military analyst Mike Lyons will post his piece forrom Real
Clear Defense at Armstrong and getty dot com. Mike, really
interesting perspective. Thanks so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
Yeah, great guys, Thanks for having and thanks for having
this kind of conversation. I'm not sure where other people
are having it. And I think it's important to recognize
that our military is professional and not murdering people in
the water. I just think I just want to make
that that point clear.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Yeah, we probably we'd be better off pandering, but we're
too stubborn to do it. So anyway, Thanks Mike.
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Great to talk to you, great guys, great out here.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
So do these two things go together, though, that our
military is professional and we're not in the business of
murdering people in the water, and things aren't quite as
delineated as you think they are in TV shows or
whatever around these issues.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
Well, and to what extent is a drug cartel an
enemy force? And to what extent where are we at war?
Because that's there's an underlying set of questions before we
even get to the specifics. But a quick word from
our friends at Omaha Steaks. That's fabulous. That the sale
that got going on right now, it's fabulous. There's sizzle
all the way. Sail. You can get fifty percent off
sitewide at Omaha Steaks dot com. Plus you good people
(12:48):
get an extra thirty five dollars off with the promo
code Armstrong at checkout.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Yeah, we're just doing that for you because we like
you and we want you to et Omah Steaks.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Because they're really really good.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Lots of different kinds of steaks, you know, there are
different cuts and that's stars sort of stuff, and they
have that Nomaha Steaks, but they're all fantastic. And then
the burgers are the best burgers I've ever had, absolutely fantastic,
the apple tart.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
Let's just all kinds of stuff from Ama Steaks that
are great. You want an endorsement, I've ordered it for
my papa, who just turned eighty five. Year after year
after year love Omaha Steaks, Never for a second wonder
about their quality. It is so good. A lot of
different packages too. Save big on gourmet gifts and more
holiday favorites with Omaha Steaks visit Omaha Steaks dot com
for fifty percent off sitewide during their Sizzle All the
(13:30):
Way sale. That's a really good name, and for an
extra thirty five bucks off, use the promo code Armstrong
at checkout. Use it at checkout Omaha Steaks dot com.
The code is Armstrong.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
I want to talk about what's your pea doom a
little bit later if you don't know that term around AI.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
But I don't want to rap name p doom Yo
yo yo.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
I don't want to be the scariest radio show in America.
So we have some other stuff where you're coming up
next farm Strong.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Hard to believe, but Ireland will finally introduce warning labels
on alcohol, you know to one of its harmful side
effects such as katy disease, cancer or worse going home
with rosy O'Donnell, never forget or something Hey, get it
(14:16):
by Christmas. Shipping deadline is upon us. Order your new
Ang T shirt or hoodie now at the Ang Superstore
Armstrong Giddy dot com. Perhaps you're looking for something else,
how about the truly amusing kftc apron perfect for your
favorite griller. Please. I can't wait to get mine. Where's
mine Handsome or our new drink wear and the ruin
(14:38):
the entire country Newsome twenty twenty eight T shirts are
flying off the shelves. Wear them proudly. Halt progressive stupidity
in its tracks. Anyway, moving along, because we all want
a quick route to health other than eating a reasonably
balanced diet and regularly exercising. And I'm not claiming for
a minute I do those things. But anyway, everybody wants
(15:01):
to take supplements. Kitty, are you big on supplements? Have
you been into the turmeric or whatever? Pre pregnancy?
Speaker 5 (15:08):
I was, but then I kept reading all this stuff
about how it's just they're not regulated and not good
for you, so I steer clear.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Came across this piece from our friends Jason Rantz and Seattle,
who's a terrific radio guy and a good guy. New
independent lab analysis may make every Amazon shopper I think
twice before buying another supplement from the world's largest online marketplace.
A consumer health testing platform purchased forty four of Amazon's
(15:37):
most popular supplements and put them through ISO accredited labs.
The results were alarming. Boy fifty two out of the
forty four failed to meet their label claims for what
were in them, and even more stunning, of those twenty
two that failed to meet the claims, twenty of them
virtually all of them had zero to three percent of
(15:59):
the main ingredient an amount claimed. That means half the
supplements tested were effectively fakes, and many of them contained
none or almost none of what the label promised was
in them. So Amazon's marketplace has become a huge magnet
for low quality, foreign manufactured deceptive supplements selling. But did
(16:19):
they work? They cured the PLACEBA almost right away.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
I had quite a conversation with my niece who's in
medical school right now for Thanksgiving about PLACEBIA.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
Now I'm all for it.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
If I think it works and it made me feel better,
one hundred percent, I'll pay for it.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
So the folks who sponsored this, who I believe are
a domestic supplement maker, they discovered that every single overseas
registered supplement they tested failed testing, including six from mainland China,
delivered none of the claimed potency. Plus you get your
opaque seller identities on Amazon. I've fallen pray to that
(16:56):
once or twice, two third party sellers. Anyway, fuyerviewer go
with known domestic brands.
Speaker 5 (17:04):
Yeah, and one thing that I've seen I can't remember
where I saw this report, but these especially the Chinese manufacturers,
will pay people to review the product, so then it'll
show the product is having a higher rating because you
know they've they've obviously planted all these these reviews and
then people purchase.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
How about these giant, giant vitamin stores that they have
in strip malls or whatever, those are probably legit, right
if you go into one of.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Those, uh will I would again, I would check the label.
Maybe go with the better known supplement brands. Yeah, I mean,
maybe taking turmeric or whatever the hell is today's hot
hot mineral magnesium a good idea or bad idea, but
you might as well get what you're paying for. Yeah,
(17:51):
and then whiz it out because your body gets plenty
of it just from regular diets like most things. That's correct. Yes, yes,
wiz it out, sweeze it out.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
How much time do we got, Michael? We got to
talk about that field goal from last night. Yeah, if
you haven't watched the video, why did they send me
out to kick a field goal?
Speaker 1 (18:10):
That was a mistake. We got a lot of stuff
on the way. I hope you can stay here Armstrong
and Geeddy.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Forty seven yard trying now by young Way Conny stumbled
Killen gets swallowed up Patriots ball.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
I don't think I've ever seen that. Yeah, look like
he just stubbed his foot right into the turf. Here
it is.
Speaker 5 (18:41):
There was.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
They're laughing. So here's what happened.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
The field goal kicker who is like me, he runs
up to kick a field goal.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
It's like two feet from the ball. He gets jams
and foot into the ground. Yeah. Yeah, he never contacted
the ball, come within a foot of contacting. They speaking
as a guy who kicked a thirty five yarder on
the air. I would like to point out that was
a I've never seen anything like that. No, it's just
(19:11):
going through a whole any level of football, not high
school football. No, no, no.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
If you do that in junior high everyone would laugh
at you and they would wonder why did you ever
think you could kick a football?
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Understand again, he planted his plant foot, he swung his foot,
he hit a foot foot and a half behind the ball,
never even scared the ball, I mean, and the holders like,
what the hell do I do?
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Now?
Speaker 1 (19:35):
He picks the ball up and gets the hell beat
out of him.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
I was just going through a whole bunch of social
media stuff from various NFL players through the years who say,
I have watched eight million of games, I've never seen
anybody do that before. Yeah, it's hard to imagine the
equivalent of it. I mean, like, if you're shooting a
free throw and you turned around and faced the other
(20:02):
direction and tried to put it in the other basket,
or are you hitting yourself in the face with it, right,
It's amazing how there was a play like this in
the World Series where somebody dropped a pop fly.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Basically, how professionals who.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
Are the best in the world at it can make
the you know, I am a sucky athlete, thirteen year
old mistake sometimes.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Well yeah, but to drop a fly ball is one thing.
To stand there and have it like go four feet
away from your mitan that would be the equivalent to this.
I'm sure he'll be out trying to explain that guy
was just cut by another team and he caught on
with the sucky Sucky Giants. Oh boy boy, I'm like,
(20:45):
oh the barrel now, I'm just picturing what his teammates
must have said to him as he was walking back
to the bench.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
Would there be nothing to say? You don't need to
say anything. There's nothing you could say. The guy knows
what he did. His foot hit not even closing the ball.
He probably about broke his ankle.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Yeah, I'll tell you. There's one thing you could say,
hope you catch on with another team, buddy. Sorry, maybe
Carr's Gonza. That's what I'd have said to him. Car insurance.
You ever thought about that? People need car insurance? Be
that way to make a living.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Be that guy at Costco that says to people when
they walk by, hey do you have vinyl sighting?
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Be that guy you know if he's got a smart agent.
He's trotting him out right now with some sort of
sometimes just swinging miss badly. And that's when you call
service master or something. I don't know, something escape anything.
Speaker 5 (21:30):
Apparently the quarterback was on the sideline, Jackson Darty.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
You could see him lipping in the camera. Oh my god,
I saw that. I saw that. It was just oh
my god. He turns and then he turns and says
what and then the mercifully his said has turned. Yes, Yes,
you got to lean into it. That's exactly it.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
You gotta be on Kimmel tonight, and and you know,
do something ridiculous and become a household name for that,
and you'll make your living pitching various products the rest
of your life. You'll make more then you were ever
gonna make as a second tier kicker. Right, you need
to become a household name for the worst kick in
NFL history.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Going turn and ads for one of those divorce lawyers.
I'm I'm young, ho ku did you did you swing
and miss on your first marriage?
Speaker 3 (22:16):
They get a fair settlement, Jason lawyers bet in a
car wreck?
Speaker 1 (22:21):
Right? Why this was a car wreck, wasn't it? And
they show the tape. Yes, if you've been in a
car wreck, call Joe good if they fight for you.
Speaker 3 (22:31):
We posted that at armstrong in getdy dot com because
you got it. If you haven't seen the video of
the Giants kicker missing that field goal, you think we're exaggerating,
We're not.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
We're we're not doing it justice of how bad that is.
Missing the field goal hardly is that's really inadequate to
describe what happened. The ball didn't get off the ground.
If I you know, the ball wasn't even juststled. No,
the ball didn't get off the ground. The ball was
not assaulted, the ball was not contacted. The ball has
nothing to do with this. It was not part of
(23:01):
the play. All right, thank god for that. Coming up.
Two things. Number one, it may be the greatest scam
ever perpetrated in terms of the dollar value, and it
was perpetrated against the people of Europe. I will explain.
(23:25):
And also this, this is so good. The question and
who is asking it? The question is if I am
really turned on by a woman's bare feet? Is showing
me pictures of a woman's bare feet pornography? And who's
(23:50):
asking it? The irs? I'll try to get past.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
The because I think feet are disgusting and I just
do not under stand people who are turned.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
On by feet. I'm foot neutraled or handy for walking certainly,
But so I'll just try to ignore that that you're
a freaking weirdo if you're turned on by feet, and
just accept that some people are. You know, I'm not
going to go too deep in the Getty playbook, but
a nice foot rob is, you know, it's a nice
it's a good thing, right al or anti that you
(24:23):
refuse to indulge their or what I mean, you don't
have to getting or giving giving. I'd rather not. I
think feet are gross. Wow wow wow, Katie high Seval.
You can sigh heavily enroll your eyes, or you could
step up to the mic, your idiot, jack. Feet are
(24:44):
just disgusting. They should always be covered. Do you look
at yours every day and go ew keep them away
from people? But the coming up the irs wants to
know if feet turn you on? Is that porn?
Speaker 3 (24:57):
I know somebody I know a woman who became aware
of the fact that one of her male co workers,
if she were if she was barefoot in like you know, uh,
attractive footwear at work, that that male coworker stared at
her feet all the time, oh boy. And it kind
(25:19):
of became people and the people. Other people became aware
that man, oh boy, he's really going to be checking
you out today, Like you know, if she showed up
in open toed sandals of some.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
Sort, man, everybody with some sort of quasi lesbian look
from then on and go hiking boots and sick woolen
sucks every day.
Speaker 3 (25:37):
Because apparently he was obvious about it, that other people
in the workplace were aware that, oh boy, Jim's going
to be staring at your feet today, you know that sort.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Of Oh that's uncomfortable. Yeah, that's that's terrible. But it's
well for us.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
For somebody who's like in defeat, it's the equivalent of
wearing you know, a tube top or something, I guess
for somebody who's in the battle.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yeah, so yeah, yes, please, it's not your fault, all right.
So I will explain that that confusing story coming up
after a brief break. But our friends at Prize Picks
want to remind you that Prize Picks is the easiest,
most fun way to get into fantasy sports. You see,
all you do is pick two players and you can
combine sports if you want. Your lineup can have a
(26:19):
basketball player and a football player, for instance, and you
just pick more or less on the stat projections for
at least two players.
Speaker 3 (26:26):
For instance, did you go more or less field goal
kickers who would kick into the ground three feet from
the ball. I actually don't think they had as an option,
but if they had, you might have done.
Speaker 1 (26:37):
Well. Yeah, the more or less could have been the
ball and move one inch. It didn't anyway. Prize Picks
is super cool. You can make your picks on fantasy
score free throws, made field goal attempted at even turnovers.
A couple of players really stack up their free throws.
That's interesting. Anyway, download the prize picks at today and
(26:58):
use the code Armstrong. You get fifty dollars in lineups
after you play your first five dollars lineup. As the
code armstrong, you get fifty dollars in lineups to play
around with for just playing a five dollar lineup. You
don't have to win. It's automatic prize picks. It's good
to be right.
Speaker 3 (27:12):
So the whole Pete Heggzeth guys in the Boat second
Strike thing. We talked about it early in the show.
Then we had Mike lions On talking about it, and
we've gotten so many texts about it. We'll maybe get
some of those an hour three. Seems to be a
hot topic for y'all.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yeah, I guess, wow, Okay, Yeah, I'm surprised. I thought
we dealt with it just plenty, a lot of plenty
and a half. But people are crazy into it.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Fair amount of partisan breakdown, and I think that's true
in the media also, like Mike Lein said that, you know,
there's a lot of Democrats that would just love to
get a scalp with Pete hegseeth having to resign. That
would I've never understood this kind of partisan ship where
if you make somebody from the other party resign, like, Wow,
we've really got them, now, don't I don't understand that?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Well, yeah, what do you think Trump's gonna point AOC
to the post Now He's gonna point another hardcore pro
defense Republican.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
Yeah, I don't. I don't understand that level of politics.
But anyway, we got that a lot of other stuff
on the ways to hear our three, We're gonna talk
to someone covering the Luigi trial. That scumbag murderer I
did just re saw the video. God, that guy needs
to if we had if we're gonna have a death penalty,
that guy should be executed.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
But he's handsome, and some people are unhappy about their
health insurance, so we should murder young dads, say people
who ought have he denied the effing vote immediately morons? Anyway,
So remember when Trump promised to exempt tips from taxes
to win Nevada. It was a clever political ploy and
then it was passed into law. This past summer creates
(28:46):
a number of challenges though, uh, the tax break does
not exempt tips from taxes entirely, but it's incentive for
people to earn more of them obviously lost pass and
people adjust their behavior to them tax laws especially, that's
one thing liberals never get anyway. To avoid some sort
(29:07):
of giant economy wide shift of earnings into tips, the
IRS and the Treasury have imposed some limits. Only people
who work jobs that have customarily and regularly received tips
can claim the deduction, like talk show hosts. Exactly, yeah,
we've started to go fund me. No we haven't anyway,
so on a list of nearly seventy eligible occupations under
(29:28):
the IRS list detailed in a proposed regulation in September
where digital content creators, entertainers and performers and dancers categories
that are to be a boon for America's sex workers.
Everybody's thinking, yes, all these tips that I get online
are now tax free.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
Oh, I didn't know what administration. Yes, I didn't know
what you meant by digital content creators. I thought that
those people get tips. You mean only fans people.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Among others. Yeah, okay, well there's a hell of a
lot of different digital content, but sure, yeah, but the
Trump administration then added the tips for prostitution or pornographic
activity quote unquote would not be entitled to the new
tax break. Okay, so obviously that was a disappointment, or
(30:19):
at least or a head scratcher too.
Speaker 3 (30:21):
People post, hey, that's some nice fornicating. Here's twenty percent.
I'm disappointed in that fornicating. I'll give you a fifteen
percent tip, but try harder. Well, that's that's how it works.
That's precisely how it works for the online performance.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
You call it. Take for the coins are well, I
try to understand stories before I launch into them. So anyway, Oh,
so where were we? Oh? Okay, So people who post
sexually explicit or even just sensual comments on platforms like
only Fans where users leave tips aren't quite sure where
(30:58):
to where this is going now. Performers in the adult
entertainment industry already face difficulties accessing basic financial services. They
know idea, but that's another difficulty. It certainly is. But
nobody's sure how restrictions on pornographic activity would actually work
because the IRS, like the rest of us, has not
(31:20):
yet elaborated on which activities it would consider pornographic. It's unclear,
for instance, whether strippers could claim the tips deductions. How
about exotic dancers who just lose their top. How about
those who take off their top in their bottom? Plenty
of activity, an accountan or tax lawyer could argue is
merely titillating and not pornographic. Where's the line? How about
(31:40):
some girl who does yoga in a bikini? How about
some gal or guy who just shows their feet to
people who get super turned on by feet. They are
getting sexual gratification from it, yet is it pornographic? And
can you deny them the right to deduct those tips
from their taxes? Ought somebody do yoga and tights and
(32:01):
giving them tips? You know?
Speaker 4 (32:09):
All right?
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Yeah? I mean I realize you'd like to write some
sort of ironclad list of what you should be turned
on by and whatnot and publish that as some sort
of bible. I find the tax what is porn? Question
to be more interesting? But whatever? All right? Moving along?
(32:33):
Perhaps the greatest scam in the history of mankind. The
people of Europe, those poor bastards. They've all got to
learn like three four languages. What we've changed subjects? I
was not dragging. We're on a different subject here, yes, yeah,
on a different topic. European politicians told their voters, we
(32:55):
go with this big green energy thing. We'll have green
jobs and cheap, abundant solar and wind energy, also a
sharp production in carbon emissions, and the poor Euros, having
learned three or four languages, got screwed. We're two decades
(33:15):
in and energy prices have skyrocketed. They've caught their they've
cut their carbon emissions. Great, yeah, China and India, like,
that's cute way to go, idiots. Yeah, they've cut their
carbon emissions by more than any other region, thirty percent
compared to seventeen percent for US. But listen to their
energy prices, which you and people who pay high energy
(33:37):
prices in the US, you think you're getting hosed. Now,
granted these are national averages, and somebody's getting hosed. That
does count as pornography if they're doing yoga. I'm not
sure certainly the US. In the US, we pay and
this is an average. So if you're in you know, Oklahoma,
it's different than California. You pay eight point one CeNSE
(34:00):
per kiloodd hour eight cents in the In the UK
they're paying thirty four cents.
Speaker 3 (34:08):
Wow a kiloodd hour I that it was crazy high
because of their zero policies.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
I didn't know it was that much, so it's quadruple.
Italy's a little behind that at twenty nine, Germany twenty seven,
Poland twenties five ish, France twenty one ish. But yeah,
unfreaking believable. Charles Seacook of National Review. He's from England.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
He regularly talks about how much cheaper everything is in
the United States, and people in the United States.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
Don't realize it.
Speaker 3 (34:40):
It's just so much cheaper just to live compared to Europe.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Yeah, Germany now has the highest domestic electricity prices in
the developed world. There's also industrial energy prices, which complicates
this a little bit. Well. The UK is the highest
industrial electricity rates. Average electricity prices for heavy industries in
the European Union remain roughly twice those in the US
(35:07):
and fifty percent higher in China. No wonder their economy
suck and energy prices have grown more volatile as the
share of renewables increased, so they skyrocket up and down,
crippling industry, hobbling Europe's ability to attract key economic drivers
like AI, which requires cheap and abundant electricity. They just
got ripped off, defrauded.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
So I got a question, Yeah, so is the Trump
administration arguing for more of those places to count as
tips or fewer of those places of activities to kind
of tips like the person doing yoga and stretching on
camera for people who want to watch them do yoga.
Are they trying to get that included or trying not
to They're trying to guess, I would guess they're trying
(35:53):
to minimize the number of people who could deduct tips,
just for revenue reasons, like any deduction. I thought they
were going to try to broaden it just to include
as many people as possible, but they already you know,
he's not running for election again, so he doesn't need
to do that again.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Right right, So now you make these political promises and
the IRS has to figure out and you know, a
more mundane example of it is, all right, what is
a work expense? Is?
Speaker 3 (36:19):
Are there going to become court cases like trying to
figure out whether or not somebody's showing their feet?
Speaker 1 (36:23):
If people are turned on, they will have to be right,
A judge will have to decide right, Uh, yeah, unless
the IRS goes super liberal on that sort of stuff.
But yeah, absolutely could end up in court. Wow, I
have shown one breast your honor, one breast less. Is
not porn. This is not porn. That is really anatomy.
Speaker 3 (36:45):
We get a lot more of the way if you
miss a segment or now or get a podcast Armstrong
and getting on
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.