Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio of the
Speaker 1: George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong, Joe, Katty Armstrong, and
Speaker 1: Jettie and He arm Yet live from studio see see Senior,
Speaker 1: a dimly lit room where deep within the bowels of
Speaker 1: the Armstrong and Getty Communications Compound. And hey y'all today,
Speaker 1: what is it Tuesday? We're under the tutelage of our
Speaker 1: general manager, Washington. The District of Columbia, Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Is our rare geographic general manager. Oh, a piece of
Speaker 1: land is our general manager today. Indeed, an odd little
Speaker 1: thing in the midst of America. It's a pretty It's
Speaker 1: like guom. I think that's why I go to if
Speaker 1: I want a day off, I go to the chunk
Speaker 1: of land and say, could I have next Thursday off?
Speaker 1: Since that's my boss? Oh yeah, no kidding, my general manager?
Speaker 1: And why is that? Just because of the big controversy
Speaker 1: over Trump taking over the police force with federal oversight
Speaker 1: or something or other. Who knows what it's going to
Speaker 1: look like on the ground. Nobody seems to explain to
Speaker 1: me why I should care about this. I feel like
Speaker 1: all the media people who live in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Care about it a lot or so reporting the heck
Speaker 1: out of it. I just don't haven't cared yet. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a huge part of it. No, in your day
Speaker 1: to day life. I don't think it'll vetch you at all.
Speaker 1: I just I think it's interesting a because it's never
Speaker 1: been done before, and I would love to see it work.
Speaker 1: I would love to see a stark and fairly short
Speaker 1: term illustration of the difference between conservative policing and governing
Speaker 1: principles and progressive ones. Well, actually I got the order wrong,
Speaker 1: but you know what I'm saying. I think it could
Speaker 1: be incredibly useful. As I said yesterday, I think the
Speaker 1: most interesting thing for all of us, that applies to
Speaker 1: all of us is trying to nail down how you collect,
Speaker 1: in interpret read crime statistics. Because you know, if you've
Speaker 1: been following this story, it's constant in politics. Crime is
Speaker 1: the Republicans generally claim crime is up, Democrats generally claim
Speaker 1: crime is down. And everybody's got their own set of
Speaker 1: statistic statistics. And I never know what to think other
Speaker 1: than like my own personal experience and feeling wherever I am,
Speaker 1: and you know, and that matters a lot. But you
Speaker 1: can be misled by that. You know, you get your
Speaker 1: car broken into and crime seems like it's up, and
Speaker 1: you know that sort of thing. So, but there's been
Speaker 1: tons of your mainstream media, which leans left, claiming that
Speaker 1: crime is not that bad in Washington, d C. Over
Speaker 1: the last several days. Right, well, in a handful and
Speaker 1: you'll hear the audio later, but a handful of lefty
Speaker 1: news figures have come out and said, you know, actually
Speaker 1: it is. It's it's really bad. It's scary. Yeah, it's funny.
Speaker 1: Joe Scarborough even on MSNBC this morning, was saying, look,
Speaker 1: everybody who lives here knows crime is horrible. So I
Speaker 1: was surprised to hear him say that. Well in the
Speaker 1: argument that crime is actually down from the calamitous heights
Speaker 1: of two or three years ago, is not as well.
Speaker 1: It's not a negative, but it's not as positive a
Speaker 1: positive as you think. It is my own anecdotal evidence.
Speaker 1: And this is not about DC where people live, but
Speaker 1: just you know, the mall where all the tourist stuff is,
Speaker 1: or where the government runs and all the museums and
Speaker 1: stuff like that. When I landed in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Last summer right about now with my kids. We got
Speaker 1: we landed it at night. It was pretty late. It
Speaker 1: was like eleven eleven o'clock at night, midnight. I mean
Speaker 1: it was late and dark. And I asked the because
Speaker 1: we weren't tired, because we're on West Coast time, and
Speaker 1: and I asked the hotel clerk. I said, is it
Speaker 1: safe to go walk around? Because our hotel was right
Speaker 1: next to the mall, so we could just walk over
Speaker 1: and look at the Washington. He said, oh, it's perfectly safe.
Speaker 1: And we walked around. There were families everywhere at midnight,
Speaker 1: walking around looking at all the monuments. I didn't see
Speaker 1: any security and I felt safe. So that's my own
Speaker 1: anecdotal evidence of Washington, d C in recent years. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that is no offense, not very useful, because they policed
Speaker 1: the ba Jesus out of that couple of square miles.
Speaker 1: So the part outside of that where people live is
Speaker 1: where everybody's getting beaten up and robbed in et cetera,
Speaker 1: et cetera. Yeah, exactly, And some hoods are worse than others,
Speaker 1: like any city. But yeah, if tourism were to dry
Speaker 1: up in DC, that would be absolutely calamitous, be like Texas.
Speaker 1: Run out of oil back in the day. So yeah,
Speaker 1: they they're extremely careful about that part. We have breaking
Speaker 1: news we need to get to because it's so damn important.
Speaker 1: And the reporting on e cannomic news economics is not
Speaker 1: my wheelhouse. I don't claim that it is, but I
Speaker 1: try to take it in through the media, like the
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal, Inflation held steady at two point seven
Speaker 1: percent in July. Okay, But here's my favorite part of
Speaker 1: the reporting, always on inflation. So you get one paragraph
Speaker 1: in and they say, year over year, inflation held steady,
Speaker 1: a key measure. But the number that economists look at
Speaker 1: that really matter actually rose and is at three point
Speaker 1: one percent. Why are you telling me in the lead
Speaker 1: paragraph a number that you tell me in the second
Speaker 1: paragraph isn't actually important. But the one economists, which are
Speaker 1: really the people we're looking to for this information. If
Speaker 1: economists are looking at that number in the second paragraph
Speaker 1: to make their decisions, why isn't that the lead story?
Speaker 1: Somebody explained that to me. You're right, that's that's absolutely hilarious.
Speaker 1: It just goes to show you how powerful convention is,
Speaker 1: especially among the media. Heard but they just they do
Speaker 1: what's been done because they might as well, because you
Speaker 1: don't get in trouble for doing what's been done. But
Speaker 1: it's like my jihad number, it's actually fallen to one
Speaker 1: hundred and seventy third. You have one hundred and seventy
Speaker 1: three jihads. Oh no, I got like two hundred and eighty,
Speaker 1: but this one has fallen to one hundred and seventy three. Okay?
Speaker 1: Is that bitching people constantly citing the Dow Industrial Average.
Speaker 1: It is useful as a measure of the general health
Speaker 1: of the economy because the way it's weighted, and it's
Speaker 1: a long and dull explanation. It is antiquated, it is silly,
Speaker 1: it doesn't make any sense. But that is always the
Speaker 1: lead number on every business report on network and cable TV.
Speaker 1: But I would think the Wall Street Journal writing this
Speaker 1: themselves would say, hmm, we just said that the second
Speaker 1: number is the important one. Maybe that should be the
Speaker 1: lead paragraph. Nice. I don't quite get it. But oh,
Speaker 1: it's like every football game account to leading with the
Speaker 1: number of yards gained rushing as opposed to the freaking
Speaker 1: score player, what are you doing? And the league care
Speaker 1: mostly about the score at the end of the game
Speaker 1: as close to the more important measure, the number of
Speaker 1: points posted actually had the Patriots winning anyway. And then
Speaker 1: also this the whole expectations game. So the overall number
Speaker 1: came in at two point seven percent, they were expecting
Speaker 1: two point eight, so yay, it's a tenth lower. But
Speaker 1: on the other number, the number that economists care about,
Speaker 1: they're expecting, they were expecting three, and it came in
Speaker 1: at three point one, a tenth high.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: Then, having was expecting Civil War style inflation in the
Speaker 1: South in the Confederacy, wheelbarrows full of cash, so it
Speaker 1: really beat my expectations. I'm very pleased. So then having
Speaker 1: told me that that second number, the important number, actually
Speaker 1: went up, it then says in the Wall Street Journal,
Speaker 1: stocks have jumped on the news. So stocks have risen
Speaker 1: on the news of this inflation. So take that for
Speaker 1: what you will. But that's the news out today. I'm
Speaker 1: going to watch TikTok video. It's still it's still higher
Speaker 1: than the goal of two percent, which is where we
Speaker 1: try to keep it, and it has been most of
Speaker 1: my adult life. So interest raight cuts or not, I
Speaker 1: don't know. You know, your guess as good as mine.
Speaker 1: Will get a couple of more monthly reports before they
Speaker 1: make that decision. But it's not horrible and it's not
Speaker 1: where a lot of the doomsayers were predicting things would
Speaker 1: be with the tariff stuf, although, as you point out,
Speaker 1: a lot of the tariff stuff didn't kick in when
Speaker 1: it was supposed to kick in. And Trump announced last
Speaker 1: night we're kicking the can down the road on the
Speaker 1: big China tariffs, which is like the biggest one maybe
Speaker 1: for the whole planet, and they're putting that off for
Speaker 1: what ninety days? I've lost track. Yeah, so he announced
Speaker 1: last night. He announced last night in a truth social
Speaker 1: post that the whole China tariff thing is on hold
Speaker 1: for ninety days till November tenth. I think it is
Speaker 1: before that kicks in, because negotiations are going on right
Speaker 1: now now. I was watching News Nation this morning and
Speaker 1: their analyst didn't go with taco Trump always chickens out.
Speaker 1: They're analysts wet with Well, the Chinese are negotiating and
Speaker 1: they're actually giving some so it makes sense to pause
Speaker 1: this while they're showing good faith efforts to make a deal.
Speaker 1: So don't trust China. Well, part of that's because Nelson
Speaker 1: Huang of in Vidio fame cut the government in on
Speaker 1: fifteen percent of the chip sales to China, which plays
Speaker 1: China very much in spite of I know what you're saying.
Speaker 1: If you're just perhaps starting on the radio Slash podcast
Speaker 1: for the first time in a while, you're like, wait
Speaker 1: a minute, A private company cut the government in on
Speaker 1: their profits. Why? Yeah, nobody's quite sure. But anyway, so
Speaker 1: that's shaken loose than negotiations with China, which are, as
Speaker 1: you might imagine, enormously complex and enormously important. Yeah, the
Speaker 1: underlying story. And again, I'm a layman, but oftentimes in
Speaker 1: my experience in life, the average person's view of things
Speaker 1: turns out to be more important than the expert's view
Speaker 1: of things. They just have it. But I think at
Speaker 1: some point everybody's gonna catch on to the fact, or
Speaker 1: history is gonna catch on to the fact that this
Speaker 1: giant stock market rise that we've had for quite a
Speaker 1: few years, and all these records don't say it, don't
Speaker 1: say it is like four companies, four tech companies, and
Speaker 1: if you take that out of a mix, everything's kind
Speaker 1: of flat. So how long can we ride the Apple VideA,
Speaker 1: Tesla Google thing. I think Tesla's falling off the list too,
Speaker 1: so so I guess as long as AI chips are important, anyway,
Speaker 1: we should start the show officially. I'm Jack Armstrong, He's
Speaker 1: Joe Getty on this it is Tuesday, August twelfth, year,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five or Armstrong and getting we approve of
Speaker 1: this program. Let's begin the show officially. Then, according to
Speaker 1: f CC rules and regulations at mark DC is our home.
Speaker 1: You can't have it Trump and what's our home? Sergigan. Now,
Speaker 1: it's like happy Birthday when you don't know the person's name,
Speaker 1: kind of degenerated into the mill mumbling right, they call
Speaker 1: it into the lobby and you're all singing happy birthday
Speaker 1: for that blonde, middle aged woman that you've been working
Speaker 1: with for five years, but you don't know her name.
Speaker 1: So when you get to happy birthday, do dear happy
Speaker 1: birth exactly. That's sounds that. That was the end play of that. Again, Michael,
Speaker 1: what did you That was charming sing along If you
Speaker 1: know the words and you don't, they don't dear off now.
Speaker 1: So once again, it's the legacy of the sixties. People
Speaker 1: have seen videos of people singing in on the Capitol
Speaker 1: steps in the sixties and bringing about major change, and
Speaker 1: so they think that's the way you do that. And
Speaker 1: so okay, it's a fascinating to me answerpological question. Why
Speaker 1: do people on the left love a singing together, be chanting,
Speaker 1: especially rhyming chance and do they actually think they are
Speaker 1: accomplishing something or is it just we're rallying the folks
Speaker 1: and getting their enthusiasm up. Then we'll all go out
Speaker 1: into our community. Is that I get Michael? Do you
Speaker 1: have a comment? Yeah, I just we have our favorite
Speaker 1: chant of all time. What that hole in the sky
Speaker 1: where the tree once was? Somebody's making money.
Speaker 3: There's a hole in the sky where the tree once was.
Speaker 3: Somebody's making money. There's a hole in the sky in
Speaker 3: the sky instead of a spreading canopy.
Speaker 1: There's a hole in the sky in.
Speaker 3: The sky instead of a ninety year old tree.
Speaker 1: Yes. Uh. And then see progressives like to show you
Speaker 1: their feet. That's the other thing the progressive like to do.
Speaker 1: They like to show you their bare feet with their sandals.
Speaker 1: We've got Katie's headlines coming up next. They hear the
Speaker 1: Trump Putin meeting on Friday in Alaska. I heard the
Speaker 1: most interesting perspective on that whole thing yesterday I would
Speaker 1: love to share and discuss at some point, among other things. Excellent,
Speaker 1: let's figure out who's reporting what it's the lead story
Speaker 1: with Katie Green. Katie hit it all righty ABC News.
Speaker 4: Zelensky says Putin not preparing to end war as Russian
Speaker 4: forces make breakthrough in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Oh, I didn't see that the Russian forces made a breakthrough.
Speaker 1: Yeah they did. They've kind of broken through a preliminary
Speaker 1: defense line. But they're very, very vulnerable where they are
Speaker 1: and prone to a counter attack. So who knows they're
Speaker 1: breaking the lot? Clear what he's trying to do, gain
Speaker 1: as much ground as he possibly can. Yeah, they're breaking
Speaker 1: through the lines like on on quads and motorcycles and
Speaker 1: electric dirt bikes the way they do it now.
Speaker 4: And just because this is the top everywhere CNN. US
Speaker 4: inflation didn't rise as much as expected in July despite.
Speaker 1: The tariff rollout. That's a good headline for the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: CNN headline is didn't rise as much as expected. This
Speaker 1: sent me through the roof the New York Times.
Speaker 4: Man sentenced to life for killing Maryland woman on hiking trail.
Speaker 4: That man is the illegal immigrant that raped and killed
Speaker 4: Rachel Morin. Oh wow, but the way they wrote man
Speaker 4: sentenced to life for killing Maryland woman on hiking trail.
Speaker 1: They didn't.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: That is sanitized it as much as they could.
Speaker 3: M H.
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 4: Trump administration is considering reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug.
Speaker 1: That would be about time, wouldn't it. I mean, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: if only from more easy medical experimentation. Yeah, to figure
Speaker 1: out what it's actually doing a people's brains.
Speaker 4: From Newsweek, white House cage fight is quote.
Speaker 1: Going to happen, says UFC boss, right there on the
Speaker 1: White House lawn, on the South lawn. Yes, I was
Speaker 1: picturing the pro wrestling, but no, this is the mixed
Speaker 1: martial arts. Yeah, you know, the actual guys bashing each
Speaker 1: other in the face. You know who would think that
Speaker 1: was awesome? He's on Mount Rushmore, Teddy Roosevelt. Ah yeah,
Speaker 1: Lincoln wouldn't have minded either. Tr was always the first
Speaker 1: trip into the race in wrestling. But it is so now,
Speaker 1: let's get it on boys. Tr was always worried we
Speaker 1: were becoming less and less manly, and it was a problem.
Speaker 1: We are and it is.
Speaker 4: From The New York Post, Excited woman gets engaged to
Speaker 4: AI fiance after five months and insists she's fully aware of.
Speaker 1: What she's doing. This is a good story. I have
Speaker 1: more of the details later. Oh boy.
Speaker 4: From USA today, Open AI unveils chat GPT five model
Speaker 4: with quote PhD level intelligence.
Speaker 1: PhD isn't an indication of intelligence. It's an indication of
Speaker 1: how much time you've wasted in academia, no offense, how
Speaker 1: long you've avoided the workplace. Right.
Speaker 4: Another cry Another AI headline from Breitbart, Elon Musk's AI
Speaker 4: chat bought Grock briefly suspended from X after going quote unhinged.
Speaker 1: Wow, I got to read about that.
Speaker 4: It was they're saying it's quote echoing the July anti
Speaker 4: Semitic posts incident. And finally from the Babylon b DC
Speaker 4: mayor warns Trump's crime fighting measures will unfairly impact the criminals.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm sure we'll get some of that it it
Speaker 1: appears to be disproportionately targeting blank blank right, Okay. A
Speaker 1: different perspective on the whole Ukraine Russia, how the war
Speaker 1: will end? Trump putin thing kind of well, I was
Speaker 1: gonna say Europe's perspective, but not exactly accurate anyway. I
Speaker 1: found it very very interesting yesterday. Among other things. We
Speaker 1: can get to lots of news today. If you missed
Speaker 1: the second, we get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on
Speaker 1: demand Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 5: This is really a feel out beating a little bit,
Speaker 5: and President Putin invited me to get involved.
Speaker 1: He wants to get involved. I think I believe he
Speaker 1: wants to get it over with now. I've said that
Speaker 1: a few times that.
Speaker 5: I've been disappointed because I have like a great call
Speaker 5: with him, and then missiles would be lobbed in Takiyev
Speaker 5: for some other place, and you'd have sixty people laying on.
Speaker 1: A road dying. I said, that's cold. That's cold. He
Speaker 1: said a lot of interesting things yesterday about this. I
Speaker 1: think he said at one point something along the lines
Speaker 1: of I think I think Putin respects me, or something
Speaker 1: like that. I don't think Putin respects anybody. First of all,
Speaker 1: before we get further into this, how big a deal
Speaker 1: do you think this story is? Because I'm I think
Speaker 1: it's a really big deal. But I could be the
Speaker 1: Russia piece summit, the whole Russia thing, not the summit,
Speaker 1: but just the whole thing. Oh my gosh, what level
Speaker 1: do you mean? Like, how much people are interested in it,
Speaker 1: it's geopolitical significance in twenty five years, or I don't
Speaker 1: think people are very interested in it. It's geopolitical significance
Speaker 1: I think is incredibly high. Yeah, I would agree it's
Speaker 1: it's quite high. I find myself wondering all the time,
Speaker 1: how long does Putin live in what's next? Because he
Speaker 1: is a pretty old guy. But yeah, it's a huge story.
Speaker 1: So a different perspective on it than I heard anywhere
Speaker 1: else yesterday coming up in a moment, But first let's
Speaker 1: get some of our American reporting on it first. This
Speaker 1: is from CNN's The Leads.
Speaker 2: The landscape from the start has been very clear that
Speaker 2: nothing's going occur about Ukraine without Ukraine, and kind of
Speaker 2: went on the information offensive, sen that the information they're
Speaker 2: getting their intelligence suggest in fact Russia's not preparing for peace.
Speaker 2: Instead it's actually preparing more offensive operations. Indeed, there have
Speaker 2: been some alarming reports by open source analysts suggesting that
Speaker 2: in some way parts in the East, Russia's made significant
Speaker 2: progress in just the last week.
Speaker 1: I suppose you could be fair and say, well, they
Speaker 1: don't know what's going to come out of these peace talks,
Speaker 1: So of course they're continuing to prepare for offensives. On
Speaker 1: the other hand, it might be he's preparing for offensives
Speaker 1: because he has no plan whatsoever for even thinking about
Speaker 1: any kind of peace and is not expecting that well,
Speaker 1: And or he's going to spend whatever resources it takes
Speaker 1: in the interim to get as much done as he can,
Speaker 1: to consolidate gains and say, look already hold this land.
Speaker 1: Oh just asking for a little more. So got a great,
Speaker 1: great quote about that. But here's ABC News Martha raddits
Speaker 1: their version of the story.
Speaker 6: With the historic summit in Alaska just days away, President
Speaker 6: Trump seemingly downplaying what could come of it.
Speaker 5: This is really a feel out beating a little bit well.
Speaker 6: Ukraine's president Zelensky has insisted he will not trade territory
Speaker 6: for peace. President Trump said again there will be landswaps,
Speaker 6: Trump vowing to call Zelenski first after his face to
Speaker 6: face with Putin.
Speaker 1: So I am really big into the daily telegraphs reporting
Speaker 1: on the war between Russian and Ukraine. That's the Telegraph
Speaker 1: of London, their big newspaper there, one of their big
Speaker 1: newspapers there, and they their reporting is one fantastic, and
Speaker 1: of course they're a lot closer to the action, and
Speaker 1: they're part of the whole Europe deal. And their conversation
Speaker 1: in perspective, at least those two reporters from the newspaper
Speaker 1: on their podcast yesterday was and has been for quite
Speaker 1: some time. When is Europe going to stand up and
Speaker 1: take the lead role in this? Why are we seating this?
Speaker 1: Why is the world acting like it's up to the
Speaker 1: United States. Why is Europe allowing it to seem like
Speaker 1: it's up to the United States to figure this out?
Speaker 1: The United States doesn't really need to have any role
Speaker 1: in it whatsoever, other than maybe providing weapons, because we
Speaker 1: are the you know, we're the big dog in the
Speaker 1: world on that whole thing. But their argument was Europe.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of conversation about Europe's being sidelined,
Speaker 1: Ukraine's being sidelined, Europe is sidelining itself. Europe could get
Speaker 1: around that very quickly. And this is from the reporting
Speaker 1: from the London Telegraph. They're saying, we need to Europe
Speaker 1: needs to make the announcement we're putting one hundred thousand
Speaker 1: troops in there unless these things happen right, and do
Speaker 1: their own negotiating with Putin. Not leave it up to
Speaker 1: Trump and wait and see what happens. That's crazy. We're
Speaker 1: the closest ones to them. And they went with the
Speaker 1: quote I love this quote that I've been saying ever
Speaker 1: since the first time I heard it. I don't think
Speaker 1: it gets enough attention. This is from the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: of Poland, Donald Tusky. They're right next door. The paradox
Speaker 1: is that five hundred million Europeans are asking three hundred
Speaker 1: million Americans to defend them against one hundred and forty
Speaker 1: million Russians. We must rely on ourselves, fully aware that
Speaker 1: our potential and with confidence that we are a global power.
Speaker 1: When is Europe going to stand up? Europe's economy is
Speaker 1: as big as ours altogether. When are they going to
Speaker 1: stand up and take charge of their own damn backyard? Right?
Speaker 1: I have two I have many thoughts, but here are
Speaker 1: the two main ones, and I'll keep it brief. Number one,
Speaker 1: the idea that Europe is taking a passive role is
Speaker 1: just that shows you how deeply ingrained the passive role is.
Speaker 1: They've had the American security umbrella over them so long,
Speaker 1: and they've built their big, fat, bloated collapsing social democracies
Speaker 1: for so long. They I don't think they can get
Speaker 1: out of that habit without just incredibly disruptive policy changes
Speaker 1: domestically and foreign anyway, So that's the point number one. Well,
Speaker 1: just to jump into that first point. Then the reporters
Speaker 1: for the Daily Telegraph in London said, we don't expect
Speaker 1: Europe to do that, by the way, because Europe is
Speaker 1: just so used to not taking the lead role. And okay,
Speaker 1: so it's remarkable how refreshing that perspective is. You just
Speaker 1: never hear it. No, your second second thing is and
Speaker 1: I hate to spoil the fund, but that's what I do.
Speaker 1: I'm a drag. The idea of Europe is a bit
Speaker 1: of a fantasy. The famous Henry Kissinger quote. If I
Speaker 1: need to talk to Europe, who do I call? Right? Exactly?
Speaker 1: They have banded together loosely more or less in having
Speaker 1: the euro in a little less so on immigration policy
Speaker 1: and defense we call each other regularly, and foreign policy.
Speaker 1: They totally disagree with us over the where just the
Speaker 1: idea of them being a unified thing is just not okay.
Speaker 1: But even if it's so, if you were to form
Speaker 1: a coalition of like the big the four big heavyweights friends.
Speaker 1: That's what I was gonna say. Even if it's just France, Germany,
Speaker 1: Poland and Great Britain, you would think they could step
Speaker 1: in there and say, okay, putin here's the deal. This
Speaker 1: is what we're saying has to happen. Yeah, they've got leverage,
Speaker 1: they've got weapons, they've got an economy. They're right there.
Speaker 1: They have more to lose and we do. What I
Speaker 1: think is interesting about this perspective from these reporters from
Speaker 1: the Daily Telegraph is it's very maga. It's what a
Speaker 1: lot of you people are saying. It's not our deal,
Speaker 1: it's Europe's deal or Ukraine's deal. Let them take care
Speaker 1: of it, that's what they're saying. We should be taking
Speaker 1: care of this. Yeah, and not complaining. Trump's boxing us out.
Speaker 1: You boxed yourself out. Yeah, our posse is a bunch
Speaker 1: of weak sisters. That just is. It's you know, we
Speaker 1: knew it, but yeah, this proves it over once again.
Speaker 1: Here's the other most interesting thing I came across yesterday.
Speaker 1: This was a quote for see, if I can take
Speaker 1: it back up again, the US NATO ambassador so talking
Speaker 1: about the land swaps and all that sort of stuff,
Speaker 1: like really tossing that out there in a very comfortable manner.
Speaker 1: You know, the idea of you land swap, You'll give
Speaker 1: up a bunch of land and get nothing in return,
Speaker 1: is what the land swap seems like it's going to be,
Speaker 1: at least the way it's presented right now. Anyway, the
Speaker 1: US NATO ambassador actually said out loud, no big chunks
Speaker 1: of land are going to be given or swapped for
Speaker 1: it that haven't been earned or fought for on the battlefield.
Speaker 1: And as the reporters that the London Telegraph said, that
Speaker 1: is like a rejection of the global order as it
Speaker 1: has been for quite some time, and just a ceeding
Speaker 1: to imperialism. If you have what was the quote, earned
Speaker 1: or fought for land on the battlefield and taking it,
Speaker 1: you can have it. That's what the U the US
Speaker 1: NATO ambassador said, So if you fought for it and
Speaker 1: control it, you can have it. Okay, Well, so is
Speaker 1: that game back on again? Is that the case going forward?
Speaker 1: Just curious asking for a friend, no kid? Yeah, absolutely, well,
Speaker 1: I understand de facto what they're saying is, look, don't
Speaker 1: say we get all of this region or all of
Speaker 1: that one Russia, because we're not giving it to you
Speaker 1: if you don't control it now, it's not going to
Speaker 1: be part of the negotiations. That's what they're saying. But
Speaker 1: to say it in the way he said it, I mean,
Speaker 1: we've got to at least grab Toronto in Montreal, don't we.
Speaker 1: If the game is back on or chunks of Mexico
Speaker 1: with lots of oil or whatever we want to, Let's
Speaker 1: get Cobo. There's some great golf there. If that's what
Speaker 1: we're just going to announce. You can't have land unless
Speaker 1: you've earned it or fought for it on the battlefield,
Speaker 1: then you can have it. Wow. I thought those days
Speaker 1: were over, like one hundred and fifty years ago. Well
Speaker 1: they were momentarily. Holy crap. That's why hooks to World
Speaker 1: War two. Momentarily in Europe Africa is like we've been
Speaker 1: scrapping for territory the whole time, and Asia has been
Speaker 1: in constant you know, bloody wars over disputed territories and
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. So it's back in Europe. That's why
Speaker 1: I think this is such a big deal. The age
Speaker 1: of conquest reappearing, certainly with China and Taiwan who knows
Speaker 1: where else? And then is Europe going to step up
Speaker 1: or not? Are they? Are they going to? I mean
Speaker 1: that quote from the Polish Prime Minister I think is devastating.
Speaker 1: We're five hundred million asking three hundred million to protect
Speaker 1: us against one hundred and forty million. What is going
Speaker 1: on here? Yeah? Yeah, I would agree. Well, we'll see
Speaker 1: how it turns out. And to your China point, just
Speaker 1: to further pound home my not cynical but realist point China,
Speaker 1: you mentioned Taiwan. Okay, great, how about you know any
Speaker 1: Mongolian napaul in the parts of India they're disputing with
Speaker 1: and trying to grab up with, and the South China
Speaker 1: Sea and they're little militarized islands, and the way they're
Speaker 1: bullying the hell out of the Philippines. They are full
Speaker 1: on like you know, rehearsing expansionism over and over again.
Speaker 1: They're like and actually grabbing some land. They're like Japan
Speaker 1: in the thirties. Yes, one other thing on this for later.
Speaker 1: We had a good time. I heard another great perspective
Speaker 1: on the upcoming summit. Maybe I'll touch on the second,
Speaker 1: but go ahead. It's probably like logical and deep thinking
Speaker 1: mine is not. So we had a great conversation later
Speaker 1: in the late in the show yesterday about, just as
Speaker 1: a hypothetical, why don't we just arrest Putin? What would
Speaker 1: happen if we arrested Putin? Snatch him up, disappear him.
Speaker 1: He's a war criminal right in an international court? What
Speaker 1: would happen if we just arrested him? I talked to
Speaker 1: a security expert yesterday who would actually know how that
Speaker 1: would go down and what would need to happen. And
Speaker 1: it's really damned interesting and we'll get into that later.
Speaker 1: Plus we can answer the question that we opposed yesterday,
Speaker 1: how exactly does the security thing work when a foreign
Speaker 1: dignitary comes to the US. Do they have their own goons?
Speaker 1: How do their goons interact with our goons, our secret
Speaker 1: service guides, et cetera. Well, how does that unfold? That
Speaker 1: definitely fits in with the what would have to happen
Speaker 1: if we want to arrest Putin situation? Okay, so I'll
Speaker 1: give you the go ahead, which I think should be
Speaker 1: on the table. Wow, oh boy, that's controversial. So I'll
Speaker 1: give you the very brief version of this. It's written
Speaker 1: by a former Russian I believe in the Wall Street Journal,
Speaker 1: Russia has high hopes for Trump Putin's summit. Peace isn't
Speaker 1: one of them. The meeting represents a victory for Putin
Speaker 1: trying to end his international isolation. This guy, and he
Speaker 1: makes a persuasive case, is framing the Alaska summit from
Speaker 1: Putin's perspective, way to craft a multi pronged agreement about
Speaker 1: the Arctic and energy and commerce and sanctions and also
Speaker 1: the Ukraine question. And Putin sees an opportunity to tempt Trump,
Speaker 1: the great deal Maker, into a deal for which Ukraine
Speaker 1: is just a detail. All right, And we've talked to
Speaker 1: Mark Alpern's reporting has been for quite a time, quite
Speaker 1: a while that in DC there's lots of talk about
Speaker 1: splitting up the world into different parts that belong in
Speaker 1: the sphere of influence, right, Yeah, and so Trump's all
Speaker 1: into that, Yes, Michael, what if Putin asked Trump, listen,
Speaker 1: I will end this thing if you give me Alaska. Sorry, Eskimos,
Speaker 1: you're Russian. Now we feed them to the polar pairs.
Speaker 1: That's what Michael. We have got mailbag on the way,
Speaker 1: gonna be a good show today. Stare some women married
Speaker 1: or ai chatbot, so we'll talk about that later. Never
Speaker 1: that means, all right, great, got some more AI news too.
Speaker 1: It's a big deal, friends, a big deal. But first,
Speaker 1: your freedom of the book today. I somewhat regret dividing
Speaker 1: this into three quotes from the Great Javier Mila, the
Speaker 1: Savior of Argentina. So I'm going to hit you with
Speaker 1: the whole thing is kind of the culmination of our
Speaker 1: series of quotes from Javier. The state, first and foremost,
Speaker 1: is a thief that spends on itself the political cast,
Speaker 1: and not only explicitly by taxes literally a form of theft,
Speaker 1: but also by a hidden tax that destroys the economy,
Speaker 1: the inflation tax. Second, the state has been used by
Speaker 1: organized groups a private sector cast to get privileges that
Speaker 1: are not only unfair but also damage growth, protected businesses
Speaker 1: and trade union scumbags. My electoral and here's the new part,
Speaker 1: my electoral platform was therefore, to end inflation by applying
Speaker 1: my chainsaw to public spending, and to liquidate the cast
Speaker 1: by eliminating their state provided privileges. Do we have to
Speaker 1: get as bad as his country to actually be willing
Speaker 1: to do any of that stuff? Yeah, I would argue
Speaker 1: the last chunk of time, Trump has moved more toward
Speaker 1: state sponsored, state provided privileges and intertwining of industry and
Speaker 1: government and picking winners and losers. And I don't like it,
Speaker 1: mail Bag, it will end poorly, Travis Notte mail bag
Speaker 1: at Armstrong Yetdy dot com. I enjoyed this note from
Speaker 1: Todd and San Diego. Guys. You segment about how Americans
Speaker 1: are getting more divided along political lines with an increase
Speaker 1: in one party states, Maybe me think of a corollary.
Speaker 1: For whatever reason, liberals are so much worse at living
Speaker 1: in conservative places than the other way around. He mentioned
Speaker 1: he's lived in New York, Illinois for the last fifteen
Speaker 1: years Southern California. Found that conservatives and blue states usually
Speaker 1: just learned to adapt and deal with the badness around
Speaker 1: them with good humor. To view a contrast, visit a
Speaker 1: Reddit thread about relocating to a right leaning state. Ordinary professional,
Speaker 1: non wacked ut to liberals are disgusted and terrified at
Speaker 1: the thought of living among maga ads. They not ironically
Speaker 1: need to be reassured that they won't be shot by
Speaker 1: assault rifles in their living room, constantly harassed for being
Speaker 1: gay or a person of color, or forced to goofstep
Speaker 1: to church every Sunday. Well, this is pretty easily explained,
Speaker 1: as we've talked about many times. You have to get
Speaker 1: used to it. When you're a conservative. You put up,
Speaker 1: you keep your mouth shut, or learn to be polite,
Speaker 1: all through a school, all through watching the Oscars, all
Speaker 1: through every concert you ever go to, all through media,
Speaker 1: every newscatch do you ever watch? You're used to academia, right, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: you're right. Good note Todd, But yeah, we jumped to
Speaker 1: the punchline. I love this from Robert on the Trump
Speaker 1: Putin Alaska summit. Guys, let nature or technology take care
Speaker 1: of it, he says. Guys, I think Joe is close
Speaker 1: to the answer for how to deal with Putin being
Speaker 1: in Alaska. You know, Alaska with its beautiful bears and
Speaker 1: beautiful bald eagles. So when Putin is walking in front
Speaker 1: of an open window of I don't know, a twenty
Speaker 1: story building, bam, a trained bald eagle or a drone
Speaker 1: made to look like a bald eagle dives into his
Speaker 1: face and forces the Russian president out of the window.
Speaker 1: He would likely land next to a trained bear we
Speaker 1: have placed there, or a drone that looks like a bear,
Speaker 1: a trained bear that would be feeling a bit peckish.
Speaker 1: So nature would take its place. Do what nature does.
Speaker 1: President Trump can relive his Kanye response, what do he say?
Speaker 1: That's really something loyal listener, Robert, that's a nefarious plot
Speaker 1: to get Pooter. Let's see one ball. Old man TJ
Speaker 1: and the ding with a great story about a trip
Speaker 1: to Walmart. They usually do the outside pickup for groceries,
Speaker 1: but they actually went in with the family and he
Speaker 1: was going to pick up a little fishing gear. Everything
Speaker 1: was locked behind glass doors. Had to get the twenty
Speaker 1: five year old would be punk Rocker behind the counter
Speaker 1: to come over open the doors so I could get
Speaker 1: the items I wanted. Had to pay for him back.
Speaker 1: There so much friction in the buying process. There's no
Speaker 1: way I'd go in there looking for those items again.
Speaker 1: Can't believe it's still profitable. Then they go out into
Speaker 1: the parking lot and right next to them, somebody left
Speaker 1: the shopping cart right in the middle of the stall,
Speaker 1: about ten steps away from a cart. Return ranted to
Speaker 1: his wife and three kids about how it's a breakdown
Speaker 1: in society. Yep, they looked at me like I was crazy.
Speaker 1: My wife asked, can we just go home anyway? Onto
Speaker 1: those poor businesses, it's not their fault. There's so much
Speaker 1: crime and nobody knows anything about it. And you're right, TJ.
Speaker 1: You're absolutely right. Armstrong and Getty