Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong, Joe Getty, arm Strong and
Speaker 1: Jetty and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2: Authorities in Michigan told parents to be on the lookout
Speaker 2: after discovering candy and snacks containing THC and hallucinogenic mushroom products.
Speaker 2: Said parents, Oh, we've been on the lookout for those.
Speaker 2: So is this a serious problem?
Speaker 3: I would assume if you're a stoner drug fiend, you
Speaker 3: don't want to be given away your stuff, and.
Speaker 4: Especially given the fact that it's a felony and give
Speaker 4: you a child. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And if something that happened, you'd go to prison.
Speaker 4: I suspect Jack, that there will be and have been
Speaker 4: a small handful of cases around a gigantic country where
Speaker 4: somebody who's either just monumentally stupid or has monumentally terrible
Speaker 4: judgment will do this, and everyone in America will hear
Speaker 4: about it over and over again. So it'll be the
Speaker 4: classic exceptionality bias news story. It gets attention because it's
Speaker 4: so rare. Yeah, it will be incredibly fencing people that
Speaker 4: is common. It will be incredibly rare. And I'm not
Speaker 4: worried about it for my own kids.
Speaker 3: But I could see I've known numb nuts that would
Speaker 3: think it was funny to get kids high.
Speaker 1: Get kids high. I could see that, Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4: That's your really top tier of stupid.
Speaker 1: Yep, it really is.
Speaker 3: So I came across this in substack yesterday from this
Speaker 3: guy named Timothy Lee, who I do not know. But
Speaker 3: his article was he writes about AI for a living,
Speaker 3: and his headline was AI skeptics and AI boosters are
Speaker 3: both wrong.
Speaker 1: And I gave that a look.
Speaker 3: Everybody's guessing to a certain extent here, but I just
Speaker 3: thought this was an interesting tank a take I hadn't
Speaker 3: heard before. Earlier this month, he writes, I attended an
Speaker 3: AI conference called the Curve in Berkeley, California, in just
Speaker 3: a few miles from where we are. A lot of
Speaker 3: people there were AGI pilled, he calls it. For example,
Speaker 3: I participated in a role playing exercise organized by this
Speaker 3: dude who argues that AI systems will soon achieve human
Speaker 3: level intelligence. Then they will rapidly improve themselves, leading to
Speaker 3: superhuman AI capabilities and an extreme acceleration of scientific discovery
Speaker 3: and economic growth. Then he went across the hall to
Speaker 3: another conference where a different AGI pilled writer. That's someone
Speaker 3: who believes so much of this, who believes the super
Speaker 3: intelligent AI will kill everyone on the planet.
Speaker 1: He said, to go back to the first one.
Speaker 3: He said, at the opposite end of the spectrum or
Speaker 3: skeptic to believe AI is not just overhyped, but practically useless.
Speaker 3: This perspective wasn't well represented at the conference, but it
Speaker 3: came up a lot. We mentioned this a couple of
Speaker 3: weeks ago. There was a piece in The New York
Speaker 3: Times quoting this study. One of your big godfathers of AI.
Speaker 3: You know, there's a handful of people that are really
Speaker 3: well respected whenever they talk about AI. One of those
Speaker 3: people wrote a column in The New York Times citing
Speaker 3: this MIT study, which we have talked about before. A
Speaker 3: recent study run by MIT's program that looks into this
Speaker 3: sort of stuff found that ninety five percent of companies
Speaker 3: that did AI pilot studies found little or no return
Speaker 3: on their investment, and a financial analysis projects an estimated
Speaker 3: shortfall of eight hundred billion dollars in revenue for AI
Speaker 3: companies by the end of twenty thirty. That it's not
Speaker 3: going to pan out near the way they thought so.
Speaker 3: That article got a lot of attention at the time,
Speaker 3: and apparently came up a lot in this conference.
Speaker 4: I can contradict that right now, but go ahead to
Speaker 4: that later. No, go ahead, Oh just happened to yesterday afternoon.
Speaker 4: I have a conversation with a good friend who is
Speaker 4: an attorney of great experience and success and worked for
Speaker 4: a fairly important law firm. And he's actually my friend
Speaker 4: who I've mentioned to his license to practice both in
Speaker 4: the US and Britain.
Speaker 1: He is no dummy.
Speaker 4: He and his company are working with a certain university
Speaker 4: on AI programs for law, and he was describing to
Speaker 4: me how they were designing AI personas I think was
Speaker 4: the term he used that would approach a problem as
Speaker 4: he would not just as a generic attorney or as
Speaker 4: a computer, but as he has and would throughout his career.
Speaker 4: And that's based on extensive interviews and study of how
Speaker 4: he doesn't And he said the results.
Speaker 1: Were scary good. Wow.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't buy the it's not going to be
Speaker 3: profitable or be a thing. I lean more toward ruining
Speaker 3: the world than toward making it better personally, even though
Speaker 3: I think it will make it better and it'll be
Speaker 3: able to cure diseases and help you figure out medication
Speaker 3: and all kinds of different things. But it at the
Speaker 3: same time is going to.
Speaker 1: Ruin the world. And you know, if it ruins the world,
Speaker 1: what good does it do?
Speaker 3: If I mean, if nobody has jobs and nobody gets
Speaker 3: together in relationships anymore, who cares if it's curing these
Speaker 3: obscure answers.
Speaker 4: Right in the few remaining human beings, right produced Yeah.
Speaker 3: But anyway, I wanted to get to this part and
Speaker 3: then I will shut up about it because I won't
Speaker 3: worry out. But I thought it was this interesting, this
Speaker 3: guy writes. My view is between these two extremes. I
Speaker 3: think that AI has genuinely impressive capabilities that are likely
Speaker 3: to improve further in the coming months and years. I
Speaker 3: think the AI industry is likely to be profitable in
Speaker 3: the wrong run, and that open AI's basic business model
Speaker 3: is perfectly reasonable. But I don't think we're very close
Speaker 3: to human level intelligence at all. I don't think AI
Speaker 3: is about to drive the kind of massive social and
Speaker 3: economic changes that AGI pilled folks expect. And then it
Speaker 3: gets into some of his reasoning after that that gets
Speaker 3: complicated and uses rais in terms that you have to
Speaker 3: look up. But there is a crowd out there that believes, well,
Speaker 3: kind of what I just kind of what I just said,
Speaker 3: but not completely. He believes, Yeah, it's a thing and
Speaker 3: gonna it's gonna come along, and it's it's going to
Speaker 3: be impactful, but it's not going to upend society and
Speaker 3: our economic models in ways that we need to be
Speaker 3: worried about.
Speaker 1: And I hope the more right. Yeah, Yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: think he is.
Speaker 4: I think there is a wide swath of so called
Speaker 4: white collar jobs that will vanish.
Speaker 1: I'm completely convinced to that there's that.
Speaker 3: And then I think a lot of these people, because
Speaker 3: they're computer geeks, which in most cases by definition means
Speaker 3: you're kind of like not a normal person in society,
Speaker 3: I think they vastly underestimate what it's going to do
Speaker 3: to relationships and society and coupling and all that sort
Speaker 3: of stuff, because there's such outliers as human beings to
Speaker 3: start with, and I'm not sure that a lot of
Speaker 3: these people even can conceive of thinking about that issue
Speaker 3: because they just don't live in that world of like going.
Speaker 1: Out in dating and blah blah blah.
Speaker 4: Well, and a lot of opinion leaders are also self
Speaker 4: motivated go getters, and so they can't conceive of because
Speaker 4: you no longer have to work to take care of yourself,
Speaker 4: you become a blob of dinner on weik because they
Speaker 4: would find something right. But a hell of a lot
Speaker 4: of human beings aren't made like that. Most, Yeah, the
Speaker 4: vast majority. And I feel like we've already seen enough of.
Speaker 3: The people having relationships with chatbots when it's at its
Speaker 3: current level of engagement, that it's inevitable that it becomes
Speaker 3: a huge problem. I can't I can't imagine the argument
Speaker 3: that says, no, it's not going to be a big deal.
Speaker 3: You aren't going to have millions of in cell dudes
Speaker 3: who are so obsessed with their AI, chat bot and
Speaker 3: porn that they never get with a real woman.
Speaker 1: That won't happen. I don't understand that argument at all.
Speaker 4: Right, Oh my gosh, I've got a great think piece
Speaker 4: around here somewhere about the rise of that very sort
Speaker 4: of young man and how they quickly become embittered and
Speaker 4: hateful and for instance, kill Charlie Kirk or try to
Speaker 4: put a bullet in Donald J. Trump's head for the
Speaker 4: very scenario you were describing, and.
Speaker 3: Then then for women, because women tend to be more
Speaker 3: about the emotions than most dudes in general. Man, the
Speaker 3: getting some sort of comfort from a chat dude that
Speaker 3: talks to you about your problems and agrees that you've
Speaker 3: been wrong by your mom and your sister, I just think.
Speaker 4: That's gonna be a huge thing, right, just as an
Speaker 4: aside as you were a speaking jack, I quickly did
Speaker 4: a search on how old is the saying I have
Speaker 4: had or the devil's playthings? Or are similar phrasings of
Speaker 4: the same thought? And it definitely goes back to the
Speaker 4: Old Testament. Sure it's in proverbs. Idle hands are the
Speaker 4: d well? It depends which just you know the translation
Speaker 4: you have. It endured throughout the early days of Christianity.
Speaker 4: Here are a bunch of citations from the medieval period.
Speaker 4: Here are early English usages in the fifteen hundreds through
Speaker 4: the seventeen hundreds. The wording probably solidified in the eighteenth
Speaker 4: or nineteenth century, but the idea itself is at least
Speaker 4: fourteen hundred years old, with deep roots in early Christian
Speaker 4: moral teaching. It is an idea that has never receded
Speaker 4: from human consciousness, that idle hands are the devil's playthings.
Speaker 4: And yet we are moving as quickly as possible toward
Speaker 4: a mechanism to idle as many hands as possible.
Speaker 1: That only works, That's true.
Speaker 3: It only works because you believe that a lot of
Speaker 3: people are not self motivated to do something. The remember
Speaker 3: Nancy Pelosi famously saying, this will be a chance everybody
Speaker 3: can be an artist or a poet or whatever. Yeah,
Speaker 3: a lot of people are going to kind of talk
Speaker 3: about that, but they aren't going to like engage in
Speaker 3: eight hours of effort every single day to be whatever
Speaker 3: they're going to be and be occupied. No, they're going
Speaker 3: to sit around and get you know, naval gazingly selfish
Speaker 3: and insular in their lives, and it's going to go
Speaker 3: off the rails and high and hi.
Speaker 4: All right, here's a little poetry for you, Nancy, Roses
Speaker 4: are red, violets are blue. AGI is here, Humanity's through
Speaker 4: there you go.
Speaker 1: There's a little.
Speaker 4: Uh artificial generalized intelligence.
Speaker 1: That's the AGI. Right.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Yeah, it's not a good poem, but you know,
Speaker 4: I'm a beginner. Hey, work from our friends that simply
Speaker 4: save home security, the goose, ghosts and goblins and ghouls
Speaker 4: and little skeletons running around are just charming and sweet.
Speaker 4: What's scary is the bums and junkies who want to
Speaker 4: break into your house and steal your stuff and god forbid,
Speaker 4: hurt your family. Trust simply Safe Home Security and it's
Speaker 4: incredible combination of AI and professional monitoring agents.
Speaker 1: It stops a crime before it starts.
Speaker 3: You know that giant ghost clearly an adult walking around
Speaker 3: in neighborhood. They're case in your house, That's what they're
Speaker 3: doing this getting ready for the opportunity, checking out, looking
Speaker 3: through your windows, seeing what you got. You got the
Speaker 3: whole simply Safe set up. You're okay, see, the only
Speaker 3: home security that we trust to keep our homes safe.
Speaker 3: I love the fact that I've got simply Safe set
Speaker 3: up with the cameras and the censors and all the
Speaker 3: different sorts of stuff, and you can tune with the
Speaker 3: sixty day money back guarantee and no long term contract.
Speaker 1: Why wouldn't you at least try it.
Speaker 4: You're in your business every single day because they know
Speaker 4: you're gonna love it and you're gonna use it. Go
Speaker 4: to simplysafe dot com slash armstrong to save fifty percent
Speaker 4: off on your simply safe home security system. That's simplysafe
Speaker 4: dot com slash armstrong. There's no safe flights, simply save.
Speaker 4: Trump dropped a bit of a political bomb earlier. We
Speaker 4: can talk about suggesting the Republican Senate do away with
Speaker 4: the filibuster. I don't know how much you understand that,
Speaker 4: but that is trulliot, don't doli. It's highly troubling. Among
Speaker 4: other things we can talk about stay here a strong.
Speaker 5: President Trump says enough is enough. It is time to
Speaker 5: nuke the filibuster and reopen the government. Here's what he
Speaker 5: posted last night on truth Social It's now time for
Speaker 5: Republicans to play their Trump card and go for what
Speaker 5: is called the nuclear option. Get rid of the filibuster
Speaker 5: and get rid of it now. That would allow Senate
Speaker 5: Republicans to reopen the government on their own, even though
Speaker 5: Senate leaders generally don't like the idea of ending the filibuster.
Speaker 5: But pressure is mounting. Troops are getting paid today after
Speaker 5: the Pentagon shifted some funds around, but federal snap benefits
Speaker 5: run out this weekend, and we're already seeing major flight
Speaker 5: disruptions in places like Orlando and here in Washington.
Speaker 3: That would be a horrible thing to do. To end
Speaker 3: the filibuster, Currently, you need sixty votes in the Senate
Speaker 3: see and usually need the party with the majority and
Speaker 3: a decent handful of the other party. In other words,
Speaker 3: the bulk of America needs to agree on something for it.
Speaker 1: To pass, is the theory.
Speaker 4: And if it's probably the last vestige of Yeah, we
Speaker 4: disagree with each other, but we care about the country,
Speaker 4: so let's talk about it.
Speaker 1: Probably is as supposed to just naked partisan. Probably is
Speaker 1: the last vestige of that.
Speaker 3: And if you do away with the filibuster and then
Speaker 3: it just becomes majority rule like it is in the House,
Speaker 3: then whichever party holds power in the Senate has fifty votes,
Speaker 3: and then if you have the vice presidency, you only
Speaker 3: need fifty. We'll just pass everything they want. So the
Speaker 3: House will pass it, the Center will pass it, and
Speaker 3: there you go. It's a law without any say whatsoever
Speaker 3: from the other party, which would.
Speaker 1: Be horrible, horrible, horrible.
Speaker 3: Now, Trump's argument is that the Democrats tried to do
Speaker 3: it for three years but couldn't because Senators Joe Manchin
Speaker 3: of West Virginia and Kirsten Cinema of Arizona wouldn't vote
Speaker 3: for it because they're decent Americans. I also don't think
Speaker 3: all those Democrats that voted for it actually meant it,
Speaker 3: because I think there are enough institutionalists, grown up Democrats
Speaker 3: also in the Senate that Okay, you two are going
Speaker 3: to vote against it, Okay, then I can vote for
Speaker 3: it to look like I'm for it for my crowd.
Speaker 3: I think, you know, a couple would have stepped up
Speaker 3: to make sure it didn't pass. We may we're going
Speaker 3: to cross the line at some point. I think at
Speaker 3: least that's direction all our politics are going, where one
Speaker 3: party is going to do with this, away with this,
Speaker 3: and Trump's making the argument they're going to do away
Speaker 3: with it when they take over the Senate. Then they'll
Speaker 3: be able to pack the Supreme Court with whoever the
Speaker 3: hell they want.
Speaker 1: Because all you will need is fifty of votes.
Speaker 3: And we might as well do it now to get
Speaker 3: the jump on them, which is which is the classic
Speaker 3: definition what I've been the phrase I've been using for
Speaker 3: a long time.
Speaker 1: Race to the b I mean, that's just the perfect
Speaker 1: race to the bottom. Yeah. I wish I could declare
Speaker 1: that those folks are.
Speaker 4: Just wrong, categorically wrong, but they might not be it
Speaker 4: could be that we're heading toward a future where it
Speaker 4: is simple majority for everything, and elections have enormous consequences
Speaker 4: and policy swings wildly back and forth. Of course, with
Speaker 4: the you know, Congress forgetting its job, forgetting the Constitution
Speaker 4: and all of us worshiping the chief executive as something
Speaker 4: like a king, we're having wild swings and policy back
Speaker 4: and forth.
Speaker 1: Anyway, Well, imagine the kind of just make it worse.
Speaker 3: Imagine the kind of judges we might get if you
Speaker 3: just need the majority and you've got a strong president
Speaker 3: with a big following like Barack Obama. Biden didn't have it,
Speaker 3: but like Barack Obama or Donald Trump, where you could
Speaker 3: get somebody through fairly extreme, and there'd be a tremendous
Speaker 3: amount of pressure to put on your fifty senators to say,
Speaker 3: put this person on the Supreme Court. Then we've completely
Speaker 3: own up that institution. Also, we get a whack jobs on.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you might have a handful of senators on the
Speaker 4: president's party on his side thinking this person's a monster,
Speaker 4: they shouldn't be on the bench.
Speaker 1: Right. I hate still get through.
Speaker 3: I hate the idea of doing away at the filibuster,
Speaker 3: but I do think it's inevitably going to happen. It
Speaker 3: just it's the direction everything is going. Wow, and then
Speaker 3: we're just going to be majority rule. You might as
Speaker 3: well just combine the House and the Senate into one thing.
Speaker 3: Five hundred and thirty five members of that.
Speaker 4: God dang, that's what the Democratic Socialists of America party wants.
Speaker 4: They want to elimination of Senate and just a pure
Speaker 4: you know, majority rules, single House. Speaking of which I've
Speaker 4: got a zoron Mumdani update coming up later on the show.
Speaker 1: Monadanie. Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 3: I don't know where I am on the weather because
Speaker 3: I think Trump might be right that it's going to happen.
Speaker 3: It'd be better if we do it, then they do it,
Speaker 3: and you get no credit through history for.
Speaker 1: We weren't the party that did it. It was the
Speaker 1: other part.
Speaker 3: That ain't gonna matter when the other party does await
Speaker 3: the fillbuster and then just starts passing whenever the hell
Speaker 3: way want to pass.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm of two minds. I'm against.
Speaker 3: I would if I were a Senator, I would I
Speaker 3: would try to stop this from happening.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I agree, complains well, especially reminded of conversations go ahead.
Speaker 1: Especially around this.
Speaker 3: Trump's argument is to end this shutdown, the freaking shutdown.
Speaker 3: You're gonna blow up the damn Senate over the shutdown
Speaker 3: of all things, which is the Democrat's fault. Come on now, no, no, no,
Speaker 3: don't bail them out. The WAPO editorial Board today says
Speaker 3: the quickest way to end the shutdown is to have
Speaker 3: the Democrats enough Democrats to vote for passing this. The
Speaker 3: WAPO Editorial Board, right, yeah, don't do anything much less
Speaker 3: blow up the Senate. By the way, on Tuesday, we
Speaker 3: will officially be in the longest to shut down this
Speaker 3: country has ever had. And I think we're gonna get there.
Speaker 3: Over what nothing. We have a way to run a republic.
Speaker 1: We got a lot more on the way.
Speaker 3: If you missed a secment, get the podcast Armstrong and
Speaker 3: Getty on demand.
Speaker 4: Armstrong and Geeddy.
Speaker 6: There's a new star of the spooky season. That is
Speaker 6: kid saying trick or tato potato Yeah. Videos of homeowners
Speaker 6: handing out potatoes on Halloween have been sprowling up on
Speaker 6: social media in recent years, leaving some puzzled, but surprisingly
Speaker 6: most ecstatic.
Speaker 1: You have potatoes.
Speaker 6: More trick or treaters are poised to strike Yukon gold.
Speaker 3: Now I have been ladling out hot cream corn for
Speaker 3: years at Halloween, you know, hold out your little basket
Speaker 3: and I just give you a full scoop of cream
Speaker 3: corn in there.
Speaker 1: On top of all your candy. And yet potatoes might
Speaker 1: as well. The last kid.
Speaker 3: The thing any kid needs is more candy. It's ubiquitous candy.
Speaker 3: It's everywhere, it's practically free, right right, yeah, yeah, that
Speaker 3: is kind of funny. Oh I might do that myself tonight. Honestly,
Speaker 3: Henry would love that. We'll get a We'll get a
Speaker 3: bag of potatoes, potatoes, just full raw potatoes. Is that
Speaker 3: the way you do with Katie? Just like a big
Speaker 3: brown raw.
Speaker 1: Potato?
Speaker 4: And am I missing the joke here? Is it just ironic?
Speaker 3: Just it's well, I don't know if it's ironic, it's
Speaker 3: just odd, all right, whatever?
Speaker 4: Why not a turnip, That's what I say? Or a
Speaker 4: California prunes. Check out californiaprudnes dot org. Let's see where
Speaker 4: was I?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 4: Yeah, uh, just a handful of stories that worth are
Speaker 4: worth at least tipping our cap to I'm always torn
Speaker 4: with like looking back at Joe Biden's presidency the Free
Speaker 4: Press with a scathing, scathing report on the House Oversight
Speaker 4: Committee report that just came out about how incredibly out
Speaker 4: touched Joe Biden was.
Speaker 1: I got some great details from that writer.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, grab them or we can do it now whatever,
Speaker 4: particularly the use of the auto pen and all of
Speaker 4: the pardons. It's become completely clear that his activist staff
Speaker 4: just had some very broad perimeters, didn't look at individual parameters, rather,
Speaker 4: didn't look at individual cases at all, and gave pardons
Speaker 4: to some really monstrous people and people who didn't deserve
Speaker 4: it at all.
Speaker 1: But and Biden had no idea of any of it.
Speaker 3: So, not surprisingly, the mainstream media, which was involved in
Speaker 3: covering for an obviously addled president, is not reporting on
Speaker 3: the report that just came out.
Speaker 1: But this is a legit report.
Speaker 3: This is not like Comer, you know, the Republican committee
Speaker 3: member who makes all these claims and then they never
Speaker 3: come true. This was the testimony of actual people who
Speaker 3: worked in the Biden administration. And I became aware of
Speaker 3: this only through Mark Alpern's podcast yesterday. He was losing
Speaker 3: his mind over the fact that this was not in
Speaker 3: The New York Times of the Washington Post, because this
Speaker 3: came out two days ago, and he's like, how is
Speaker 3: nobody talking about this?
Speaker 1: Here's what Axios had. This is from Thompson.
Speaker 3: He's the other guy with Jake Tapper that wrote the book,
Speaker 3: one of the very few journalists in America who was
Speaker 3: being honest about Biden's mental decline. Alex Thompson Thompson, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: so he wrote this in Acxios. This is from the
Speaker 3: report that came out two days ago that's getting no coverage.
Speaker 3: Former Biden chief of staff, his chief of staff, Jeff Zeins,
Speaker 3: told the panel that he, Jake Sullivan, the NSA advisor,
Speaker 3: Anthony Blincoln, the Secretary of State, the Commerce Secretary of
Speaker 3: the VIA secretary all expressed concern about Biden continuing his
Speaker 3: re election campaign after the debate. Zeins told all lawmakers
Speaker 3: that within a few days after the debate, Biden was
Speaker 3: aware of my view that I thought it was prudent
Speaker 3: to get out of the race. They didn't think he
Speaker 3: was mentally competent to be president. The Secretary of State,
Speaker 3: his own chief of staff right didn't think he should
Speaker 3: be president at that time, let alone for another four years.
Speaker 1: And they all kept their mouths shut, and they kept
Speaker 1: their mouths shut.
Speaker 3: And that's not a big enough story for the New
Speaker 3: York Times of the Washington Poast. As I heard someone describe, well,
Speaker 3: they were complicit in the cover up. So how do
Speaker 3: they report at this point that it's shocking that somebody
Speaker 3: was not saying out loud what was clearly true. So,
Speaker 3: like I said, Mark Awpern was losing his mind over
Speaker 3: how this is not a big national story that the
Speaker 3: secretary of State and the guy's own chief of staff
Speaker 3: knew the guy shouldn't be president, that he was incompetent
Speaker 3: and kept their mouths shut. The Democrats should have this
Speaker 3: hung around their head for many cycles.
Speaker 4: Right right, So, as I started to say at the
Speaker 4: beginning of the segment, I mean, there's a part of
Speaker 4: me that thinks, you know, we got plenty of problems
Speaker 4: now dissecting the past. You know, what good would it
Speaker 4: do Biden's hat office and soon to be out of life.
Speaker 4: But at the same time, I mean, we've not to
Speaker 4: hold people to account it, or even a political party
Speaker 4: on some less.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yet it's not about Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: But there are a whole bunch of people involved that
Speaker 3: plan to continue to be major movers and shakers of
Speaker 3: the Democratic Party right that we now know because they testified.
Speaker 3: They had to testify, and I'm thinking the only reason
Speaker 3: they testified this is because they knew either other people
Speaker 3: were gonna say it, or it's documented somewhere or whatever.
Speaker 1: The freaking secretary of State.
Speaker 3: What kind of patriot are you if of the secretary
Speaker 3: of State, everything that's going on in the world, a
Speaker 3: couple of wars, all the different awful things that could happen.
Speaker 3: You know, the guy's not competent to be president of
Speaker 3: the United States and can keep your mouth shut.
Speaker 5: Don't smesh them in awak unless you want to get
Speaker 5: the back.
Speaker 3: And part of it, I guess is Trump during syndrome,
Speaker 3: they probably that will be better than having Hitler as president.
Speaker 4: Part of it was that, and the other part of
Speaker 4: it was that people who are closest to Biden, who
Speaker 4: are politically very very dangerous, would cut you off at
Speaker 4: the knees if you dared break ranks, for instance. And
Speaker 4: the fact that this is not like covered a lot
Speaker 4: in the mainstream media just shows how incredibly biased they
Speaker 4: are because it's a super interesting political story. Mike Donalan
Speaker 4: is a campaign consultant he's been with Biden for nearly
Speaker 4: forty five years. People close to Biden. This is in
Speaker 4: twenty twenty one in the Washington Post see donal and
Speaker 4: is Biden's conscience, his alter ego, a shared brain. One
Speaker 4: long time Biden advisor estimated no fewer than ten thousand
Speaker 4: times in their working relationship. As the President turned to
Speaker 4: Donalin and asked, Mike, what do you think. Closest guy
Speaker 4: to Biden had a four million dollar bonus coming if
Speaker 4: Biden got reelected. As his campaign consultant, he got paid
Speaker 4: four million bucks for getting Biden in the White House
Speaker 4: the first time, and if he could keep Biden in
Speaker 4: the race, he would earn four million more. Mike Donalin
Speaker 4: was the hatchet man behind the nobody says anything scheme
Speaker 4: about Biden, and.
Speaker 1: He's under oath.
Speaker 4: Here the transcript of the committee's interview with the Donald.
Speaker 1: He spells it all out.
Speaker 3: Man, if you're cheapest staff to a president and you've
Speaker 3: gone to the guy and said I don't think you
Speaker 3: should run for reelection, you can't keep your mouth shut
Speaker 3: and let that play out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know, I know. It's terrible.
Speaker 3: What if he'd had a crisis that he maybe we did.
Speaker 3: Maybe that's the next shoe that's going to drop. Maybe
Speaker 3: not for twenty five years when a variety of things
Speaker 3: are finally released. But who knows was making variety of
Speaker 3: decisions around, you know, our Israel policy or Ukraine policy
Speaker 3: or whatever policy it might have just been, you know,
Speaker 3: the chiefest staff in the Secretary of State and signing it.
Speaker 4: Is there a big historic shoe foot that's going to drop?
Speaker 4: Shoot the trubet shoe. Shoe that's gonna drop when Biden Croakes.
Speaker 4: Is Anthony Blinkin gonna unleash his book?
Speaker 3: Yeah? I don't think you could. I don't think you
Speaker 3: could because you're implicating yourself as a really bad person.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I guess so.
Speaker 4: Speaking of media and politics and that sort of thing,
Speaker 4: here's a headline for you.
Speaker 1: Bloodbath.
Speaker 4: CBS parent company announces mass layoffs, slashes race and culture
Speaker 4: unit at CBS. They announced Wednesday around two thousand layoffs,
Speaker 4: including one hundred in the newsroom. Well, I eliminated the
Speaker 4: outlets race and culture unit in an effort to crack
Speaker 4: down on ideological bias.
Speaker 3: I haven't paid attention to the ratings for the evening
Speaker 3: newscast for many, many years. Because it has become much
Speaker 3: much less relevant. Used to be so important the three
Speaker 3: evening newscasts, and they are barely important now. But I
Speaker 3: didn't realize CBS was so far behind the other two.
Speaker 3: I mean absolutely getting trounced by ABC and NBC, and
Speaker 3: so yeah, I mean it's not some sort of of
Speaker 3: right wing berry wise fascist. It's I mean, if you're
Speaker 3: just running a business, you would come in and lay
Speaker 3: waste because you're getting your ass kicked.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's funny. In spite of that clear, unmistakable reality,
Speaker 4: the folks at CBS are tweeting, mostly anonymously or on
Speaker 4: slack messages, that it's just it's a blood bath. It's
Speaker 4: nerve wracking. It's so unfair. It's a blah blah blah. No, No,
Speaker 4: you're losing. Your team loses all of its games. Don't
Speaker 4: like weep bitter tears when you fire the offensive coordinator.
Speaker 4: That's what you're supposed to do. But that sense of
Speaker 4: entitlement is nothing new in the media. Let's see, I
Speaker 4: want to squeeze in one more. Oh that's really good. Oh,
Speaker 4: here's a good one for you. Here's a headline for you.
Speaker 4: Hesbola is rearming putting cease fire with Israel at risk HESBLA.
Speaker 1: They're the ones that got their junk going off by pagers,
Speaker 1: not enough of them.
Speaker 4: Apparently Israel is losing patience as the levities militant group
Speaker 4: restocks rockets, anti anti tank missiles and artillery or on
Speaker 4: that afterward from our friends at PRIs.
Speaker 3: Here BBDBP and you say, hold on a second, somebody's
Speaker 3: trying to get a hold of let me see what
Speaker 3: this is then, Bluey no gonads mmmm, disappointing.
Speaker 4: Prize Picks is the best way to cash in on
Speaker 4: your baseball theories for tonight, which players are going to
Speaker 4: go off? Which ones are over hyped? To make your
Speaker 4: picks in less than sixty seconds, turn your takes into
Speaker 4: cash all season long on Prize Picks.
Speaker 3: Plenty of NFL action this weekend, of course in basketball
Speaker 3: all the time. We're into that. So you got plenty
Speaker 3: of sports you can cover and take your opinion turn
Speaker 3: it into money with Prize Picks. Download the Price Picks
Speaker 3: app today and use the code Armstrong and you get
Speaker 3: fifty dollars in lineups after you play your first five
Speaker 3: dollars lineup.
Speaker 4: I love this Prize Picks off also offers injury reboots.
Speaker 4: If one of your players leaves the game in the
Speaker 4: first half and doesn't return, Prize Picks will not count
Speaker 4: that as a loss.
Speaker 1: That is fair.
Speaker 4: Download the prize picks at today again. Use that code
Speaker 4: Armstrong and you get fifty dollars in lineups after you
Speaker 4: play just a five dollars lineup.
Speaker 1: You don't have to win. It's automatic.
Speaker 4: That's the code Armstrong the prize picks at Prize Picks.
Speaker 1: It's good to be right.
Speaker 4: So you've got Hamas continuing attacks, trying to regroup as
Speaker 4: fast as it can, and Hesbela re arming. It's almost
Speaker 4: as if you can't make peace with religious zelots who
Speaker 4: vowed to wipe you off the face of the earth.
Speaker 4: If it takes a thousand years, turns out you can't
Speaker 4: just you know, knock them around a little bit and
Speaker 4: get them to come to their sentences.
Speaker 1: Census doesn't work.
Speaker 3: We haven't mentioned the foiled terrorist plot that cash Ptel
Speaker 3: announced today the FBI stopped. Maybe we'll get into some
Speaker 3: of the details of that if it's all accurate. It was.
Speaker 4: It was a big one in a major mom Dammi
Speaker 4: the Kami update next hour.
Speaker 1: Cool.
Speaker 3: And if you haven't heard our tip up the easiest
Speaker 3: costume for couples. You're going to a party tonight, you
Speaker 3: gotta throw something together real quick. It's the hot costume
Speaker 3: stick around. Okay, Joe's gonna have to come up with something.
Speaker 7: I'm a little distracted. Oh oh, we've all done this.
Speaker 7: Oh I sent a text to the wrong person.
Speaker 4: Oh oh, I was going to guess phone and toilet,
Speaker 4: judging by the look in your face.
Speaker 8: But now that phone and toilet, that's Is this going
Speaker 8: to have consequences kind of a text?
Speaker 1: Yes, can you send it? No, they already responded, deepic, deepic.
Speaker 1: It was not a deepic. I did not send it. Deepict.
Speaker 3: Somebody, Oh my god, I can't even come close to
Speaker 3: hinting what it's about.
Speaker 1: But it is not a good one, damn it.
Speaker 8: Were you you talking smack about the particular person you
Speaker 8: sent it.
Speaker 3: To, not smack in the sense of like, uh, you know,
Speaker 3: backbiting gossip for fun or something like that, Like a
Speaker 3: serious conversation about someone and their shortcomings to the to
Speaker 3: that person. Oh and that was all designed around helping them.
Speaker 1: And interesting wrinkle. Well, it's my role to help this person.
Speaker 3: You can probably figure out what I'm talking about, Okay,
Speaker 3: my biological role, and I sent. I sent the conversation
Speaker 3: to them about a problem.
Speaker 1: That they have gotten. Dang it, I've only done this.
Speaker 3: This is the third time I've done I've done it
Speaker 3: a bunch of times, we all have, but I've only
Speaker 3: done it three times with like actual ramifications.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure I have good for you.
Speaker 3: I have. It's been so long because I'm usually really careful,
Speaker 3: partly because you have, and the idea scares me so
Speaker 3: much when you tell us about it, I think, never
Speaker 3: do that. You know.
Speaker 4: It's an absent minded guy, it's an ever present threat.
Speaker 1: You know, go ahead.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 8: My issue lately has been the audio messages. I don't
Speaker 8: know how I keep hitting that button, but I'll text
Speaker 8: somebody and then it turns on the audio recording and
Speaker 8: then I learned down at my phone and it's like
Speaker 8: I was, I haven't sent one, but I've been too
Speaker 8: close many a time.
Speaker 4: Wow, can you like ask SII to do me a favorite?
Speaker 4: Don't ever turn that on until you've asked me if
Speaker 4: I'm sure I.
Speaker 1: Want it on? Good idea?
Speaker 3: This could have been so much worse. I got really
Speaker 3: lucky that I worded it the way I did.
Speaker 1: Or it could have been disastrous. Oh boy. But so
Speaker 1: here's the lesson.
Speaker 3: Before you press send every single time, check at the
Speaker 3: top to see who it's going.
Speaker 4: Yeah. I'm a big fan of note private thread. If
Speaker 4: you go from say a group, maybe you're putting together
Speaker 4: a tea time for the golf course for something very innocent,
Speaker 4: and Al Jones signs up and Al is a known cheater,
Speaker 4: and you don't want to have anything to do with it,
Speaker 4: and I'll send a text to you know, a person,
Speaker 4: say no, this is a private thread, this is not
Speaker 4: the same thread, Just to avoid that sort of thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, if you're in that situation, that's a good idea.
Speaker 3: I was not in that situation. I don't know how
Speaker 3: I did this. I think I was just a mind.
Speaker 3: I was thinking about the person and I was sending
Speaker 3: it to someone else, and just in my mind I
Speaker 3: conflated it somehow that I should be sending it to the.
Speaker 1: Person that it's about.
Speaker 3: I have done the whole thing where you got two
Speaker 3: conversations to go it at once with two different people,
Speaker 3: and so they're coming in back and forth, back and forth,
Speaker 3: and you just reply to a reply, and the other
Speaker 3: one had jumped in, and you say.
Speaker 4: And you in and fort invertently tell Michelangelo love you too.
Speaker 1: For instance, Yes I remember that. Yeah, I've got a
Speaker 1: few of those.
Speaker 4: It's time I came to terms with my feelings for you.
Speaker 3: Those are mildly embarrassing, as opposed to oh my god,
Speaker 3: this could change my life. Ish you could easily have
Speaker 3: some that changed your life. Man, there is nothing more
Speaker 3: true than the whole. You can't run ring a bell
Speaker 3: about things said. Yes, it just it's just one hundred
Speaker 3: ironclad true.
Speaker 4: It got back to me a hundred years ago that
Speaker 4: one of my good friends had expressed to somebody else.
Speaker 1: I cared about that.
Speaker 8: Uh.
Speaker 4: I don't get why he's with Judy. I don't see
Speaker 4: anything there at all. This is when we were dating. Wow,
Speaker 4: that's never been the same, still in touch, never been
Speaker 4: the same. Of course it's not, you know, And he's
Speaker 4: entitled to his opinion. I mean, it's fine, but just
Speaker 4: of course you wouldn't be the same.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Well, that's been very kind of you to say he's
Speaker 3: entitled to his opinion, which of course he is. But
Speaker 3: he did did he need to be saying that to anyone.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you gotta be really careful about that, because you
Speaker 4: don't know what's happening in a relationship if you're not
Speaker 4: in it.
Speaker 1: No, you don't anyway.
Speaker 4: Anyway, Oh, speaking of difficult conversations.
Speaker 1: Okay, I got that out of my system, all right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's good. That's good.
Speaker 4: Science has proved that shouting obscenities is good for you.
Speaker 4: Just not in the crowd at McDonald's. Speaking of difficult
Speaker 4: conversations that ought.
Speaker 3: To be had, you shouldn't at church, just sitting there
Speaker 3: and appeal. There are a number of settings. Sorry, I'm
Speaker 3: thinking of something else.
Speaker 4: You got nothing new with your actually, just to summarize
Speaker 4: several settings, or that's in uppurp. What's being of difficult conversations?
Speaker 4: The great Seth Dillon, the genius behind the Babylon b
Speaker 4: wrote a piece for the Free Press about the foolishness
Speaker 4: of no enemies to the right, the idea that don't
Speaker 4: don't attack the nutty right wing as a conservative because
Speaker 4: we got to train all of our firepower on the left.
Speaker 1: And how foolish that is.
Speaker 4: And it surprises me not a bit, how eloquent and
Speaker 4: persuasive his case is.
Speaker 1: We'll get to that later on.
Speaker 3: I think originally it was always no enemies to the left,
Speaker 3: but it is caught on both sides.
Speaker 4: Well, the humorous part, and you may know this already, Jack,
Speaker 4: is that that emerged from the French Revolution there to
Speaker 4: the left came.
Speaker 1: Right and that ended just beautifully. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, No matter how crazy the people to the
Speaker 3: left of us are, we're all together, so we're gonna
Speaker 3: And you see that on the left all the time. Right,
Speaker 3: the average Democrat is not down with a lot of
Speaker 3: this nuttiness, but they feel like they should have no
Speaker 3: enemies to the left.
Speaker 4: You got moderate Democrats afraid to say no dudes and
Speaker 4: beat up on girls in women's sports. That's ridiculous. They're
Speaker 4: afraid no enemies to the left. Well, let's call out
Speaker 4: our enemies.
Speaker 1: To the right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, okay, if you miss a segment, get the podcast.
Speaker 3: Check who you're sending your text to.
Speaker 4: Armstrong and Getty