Laura Ingraham (27:00)

One of the principals who was on that signal chat, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. Advisor Waltz, thank you for joining us tonight. The President expressed complete confidence in you today and his entire cabinet. But how did a Trump hating editor of the Atlantic end up on your signal check chat?

Mike Waltz (27:15)

You know, Laura, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but of all the people out there, somehow this guy who has lied about the President, who has lied to Gold Star families, lied to their attorneys and gone to Russia hoax, gone to just all kinds of links to lie and smear the President of the United States, and he's the one that somehow gets on somebody's contact and then gets sucked into this group.

Dave Smith (27:44)

All right, so just pause it. Pause it right now.

Laura Ingraham (27:46)

Intel team.

Dave Smith (27:48)

Okay, so I, first of all, I thought this was really bizarre, that walls opened up by being like, hey, look, man, I'm sorry, but when you see something like this, you gotta jump to conspiracies like, okay, yeah, I don't completely disagree with you. How the hell did this guy of all guys end up on that chat? The problem here is that the answer is you. It's you. Like, what, what conspiracy are you alleging? And then you can go off on like all this, you know, this is the guy who was pushing this Russiagate stuff. Yeah, the entire establishment was pushing the Russiagate stuff. Literally the entire establishment who's like Devin Nunes and Stephen Miller, like a couple guys within the establishment resisted it. The rest of it was like, you know, Donald Trump himself, his family and a bunch of podcasters and real journalists out there on the Internet. But you know who else was pushing it was like your former bosses, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. So, like, yeah, you're their guy. And now you're here and you're just evoking that like, yeah, I mean, this seems like a conspiracy. Okay, let's, let's put these pieces of the puzzle together here. National Security adviser, you tell me about this. Because now, of course, Laura Ingram, when he goes, oh, it's a conspiracy, she starts going like, okay, so is someone on your team compromised? Is. How did this end up happening? Let's hear his answer.

Laura Ingraham (29:26)

Trying to cause trouble here, because that's the scuttlebutt out there.

Mike Waltz (29:30)

We have people. We have people. No, look, this was. This is a great group. The President has a great team. This is not personal.

Laura Ingraham (29:37)

I'm not talking about the other principals.

Mike Waltz (29:38)

No, no, no. These were principals and a couple of staff that were coordinating, as you saw, having a policy discussion as. As we went forward. And then just in the days before what was an incredible strike, not only did we take out people that the Biden team never could, that we took out headquarters, missile caches, and actually one of the leaders of the Houthi organization, we've since taken out several since. And, you know, that's what they don't want to talk about. They don't want to talk about the success here. They don't want to talk about the hostages getting released. They don't want to talk about the Black Sea ceasefire that we just put in place today as the President ends the largest land war in Europe or the border, or the fact that Panama just kicked China out of the canal. And success after success after success.

Dave Smith (30:25)

All right, let's. Let's pause it again.

Mike Waltz (30:27)

It's embarrassing.

Dave Smith (30:28)

I mean, I don't know why. This is just. It's so pathetic. And he's not even good at delivering this. I mean, he seems visibly nervous, like, the whole time that he's saying this. But this just, like, pathetic attempt to pivot back to the successes of the administration, which, you know, some of those being legit, some of them not so much. But, you know, you're sit. He's sitting there and he starts with, like, oh, like, this is a. There's some type of conspiracy here. I mean, of all the people out there, this guy gets added to this group chat. And then Laura Ingram, reasonably, is like, yeah, so like, someone on your team, right? That's the only way this would be a conspiracy. Someone here is working against the President. And then he goes, no, no, my team's perfect. My team's perfect. I mean, look at all the success. And what they don't want to talk about is how successful this strike, which, again, just save me the bullshit on how successful the strike was. Like, what do they even mean by that? There's. Are the Houthis not a problem anymore? Are no more ships going to be fired upon now? Or. What do you mean? You mean when we dropped the bombs, it blew shit up? Like, yeah, okay, that was. But everyone's distracting from what a success this was. Well, first of all, this story was out in. This was out for weeks before this signal scandal dropped. And, yeah, like, no, One's really talking about what an amazing success it was because there's just, it's just not apparent that anything was achieved other than, you know, killing some kids that seems to have been achieved. But you know, like, okay, what else was it? But so now you're sitting here saying, well, what exactly is the conspiracy that you're alleging here like? And somehow this journalist hacked his way into your signal chat. Clearly he was added to the chat. I don't think any like. Right. He's not claiming anything else. All right guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Stash. Brand new sponsor. We're thrilled to have them on board. Saving and investing can feel impossible, but with Stash, it's not just a reality, it's easy. Stash isn't just an investing app. It's a registered investment advisor that combines automated investing with dependable financial strategies to help you reach your goals faster. They'll provide you with personalized advice on what to invest in based on your goals. And if you want to just sit back and watch your money go to work, you can opt into their award winning expert managed portfolio that picks stocks for you. Stash has helped millions of Americans reach their financial goals and starts at just $3 a month. Don't let your savings sit around. Make it work harder for you. Go to get.stash.com problem to see how you can receive $25 toward your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures. That's get.stash.com problem paid non client endorsement, not representative of all clients and not a guarantee. Investment advisory services offered by Stash Investment LLC and SEC Registered investment advisor. Investing involves risk offer is subject to terms and conditions. All right guys, let's get back into the show. So, okay, anyway, let's keep playing.

Laura Ingraham (33:48)

Harrison.

Mike Waltz (33:48)

Yes, we're going to get to the bottom of it. We've have. I just talked to Elon on the way here. We've got the best technical minds looking at how this happened. But I can tell you, I can tell you for 100% I don't know this guy. I know him by his horrible reputation and he really is the bottom scum of journalists. And I know him in the sense that he hates the president, but I don't text him. He wasn't on my phone. And we're going to figure out how this.

Laura Ingraham (34:15)

So you don't know what staffer is responsible for this right now?

Mike Waltz (34:18)

Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible and look, I take full responsibility I built the. I built the group to. My job is to make sure everything's coordinated. But how does that.

Laura Ingraham (34:28)

I mean, I don't mean to be pedantic here, but.

Dave Smith (34:29)

All right, let's pause it here.

Mike Waltz (34:30)

Have you ever had somebody's contact.

Dave Smith (34:32)

Pause it here. And then just bring it back a little bit because the next part is pretty wild. But I just. Look, you can't say I'm taking full responsibility for this. I created the chat. But also, there's some type of conspiracy afoot here. Which one is it? If you're taking responsibility for it, like, how did he get added. Now, by the way, it is worth pointing out here that Goldberg, in his piece, says that they had. They. They had communicated in the past. He said he wasn't entirely surprised to be. To have Mike waltz reaching out to him. So, like, somebody's lying here. Now we know Goldberg's a liar. Okay? So I'm not, you know, denying that that's a possibility, but it does seem like in this case, his story seems to be much more likely than it's a conspiracy. Like, he doesn't want to throw a staffer under the bus and say, maybe somebody else set this up. He's saying he created the group chat. How did this guy get added to the group chat? It seems like you had to at least have his number, have his contacts of something, I don't know, explain it to me in a way that makes sense. But that's not you taking full responsibility. And, you know, like, you could sit here and say, like, oh, everybody wants. You know, everybody wants to be distracted with this. Instead of talking about how great the strike was, it's like you announced the strike before you did it. To a journalist who hates your boss's guts, that seems like a pretty big scandal, man. Like, I don't know how. How would that not be the topic of conversation? Don't get me, wr. I think the topic of conversation should be about why the hell we're going to war with Yemen. But forget that. All right? Let's keep playing.

Mike Waltz (36:37)

And I know him in the sense that he hates the president, but I don't text him. He wasn't on my phone. And we're going to figure out how this happens.

Laura Ingraham (36:45)

So you don't know what staffer is responsible for this right now?

Mike Waltz (36:48)

Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible. And look, I take full responsibility. I built the. I built the group to. My job is to make sure everything's coordinated. But how does that.

Laura Ingraham (36:58)

I mean, I don't mean to Be pedantic here, but how did the number.

Mike Waltz (37:00)

Have you ever had a. Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name? And then you have an. And then you have somebody else make those mistakes, right? You got somebody else's number on someone else's contact. So of course I didn't see this loser in the group. It looked like someone else. Now, whether he did it deliberately or it happened some other.

Dave Smith (37:19)

Okay, this part was just wild to me. So first of all, where he go, Laura Ingram, like, trying to be cute or funny there, and she almost like stepped over. Like the part where she should be, like, she correctly asks the follow up question and then she's like almost giving him cover in a way here. It's like, shut up, Laura, and let him say this. You're. He's going, have you ever had a contact name with somebody else's number in it? Okay, well, first of all, the answer was, is no. No, I have never had that. And I'm an idiot. I've texted the wrong person the wrong thing, but I never had the wrong number under a contact name. I mean, perhaps I entered a number wrong. But again, like, what are you suggesting here? Are you suggesting that there was somebody else in that you were trying to add to this message and you got their number wrong and that number just happened to be the number of the senior editor of the Atlantic? Are you arguing that, like, he got someone's old number? Like, I'm sorry, this is just so weird to me. No, I don't. That doesn't make any sense. And then he, at the end, like, by the way, and I, I'll tell you, this is the truth. I know in my, in my younger days, I knew. And this was never me, by the way. I swear to God. I'm not just saying that, but I knew guys who, like, had like a, like a girl they were cheating on their girlfriend with and they had it like saved as somebody else's name. I knew a couple guys who did that move. Not saying they should have done that wasn't great. We were young at the time, though. But that's like the only thing I could think of in my mind. And then he seems to implicate, like, I don't know that he did that. Like, how would he do that? Did he hack into your phone? Did a journalist for the Atlantic was able to hack into the National Security Advisor's phone and put his number in somebody else's contact in his signal on the hopes that they would organize a signal group text about a bombing plan in Yemen that they would add that guy to, would not realize it was really him. I mean this is like, this makes no sense then by the way, if you were alleging that that is a serious crime. I mean could you imagine you're hacking into the national Security Advisor's signal account and adding yourself as somebody else in there. This is just like, like doesn't pass the smell test is not enough of a statement for this. This is just, there's just no way. This is like, like the worst excuse somebody could come up with when they're on the spot. I can't believe. Look, I don't know what are we talking about? Okay, so 48 hours ago this story broke. This is last night. I believe Laura Ingram is on at 9pm I could be wrong about that. Maybe she's 10pm over at Fox News. So at the very least he probably had a few hours notice that he was going on Laura Ingram show. I mean my, my guess is probably right now, knowing a little bit that I know about the news business and cable news and stuff like that, someone like in Michael Waltz's position, first of all, just in general, you're the national Security advisor. Pretty much anyone will have you on their show. You could pick whatever show you want to do. But you're the National Security Advisor embroiled in this scandal. That is the, the juicy thing that people are talking about the news of the day. You could pick any show you want to go. You can decide who. I'm going to have interview me over this topic today. And he decided Laura Ingram. Now I don't know exactly when they made this decision. My guess would be the day before yesterday. Probably had 24 hours before he was going into the show. It is possible they made it later. It's possible he only had five hours or so. But you still had hours to prepare. This is what you ended up coming up with. Like, this is like if you got, if you got caught red handed on the spot and had no time to prepare, you'd think you could come up with something better than this. But the idea of being like, oh, you know, have you ever had a contact name that didn't match the number? Like, no, that's not a common problem really. And that seems like something you would just make sure wasn't the case before you started a group chat a about a military campaign between the highest levels of the US federal government. I'm sorry man, I can't be the only one who's looking at this and saying this just makes no sense. This makes absolutely no sense. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show. If you are looking for a great mother's or Father's day gift idea, my thoughts on father's day aside, people still give gifts. I know from experience that the best gift you're going to find is at paint your life where you can get a hand painted portrait to fit almost any budget. It's a great gift idea for your mother, your father, or both. I will tell you, I gave my wife this gift. She absolutely loved it. I highly recommend it. Now you can get a professional hand painted portrait. Portrait created from any photo at a truly affordable price. An unforgettable mother's day gift or Father's day gift if you're so inclined. All you do is you upload photos to create anything you can imagine. You can put yourself in a location you've always wanted to visit. You can add a lost loved one to a special occasion to create the portrait of your dreams. There's lots of options. You choose between oil, acrylic, watercolor, charcoal, plus more. And select a variety of quality frames. You can communicate directly with the artist who's painting your picture to ensure the portrait is painted just the way you wanted it. You get a handheld portrait in as little as two weeks. It's meaningful, personal, and always heartwarming. Now you can give the most meaningful gift you have ever given at paint your life. And there's no risk. If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded, guaranteed. And right now we have a limited time offer. You can get 20% off your painting. That's right. 20 off plus free shipping. To get this special offer, just text the word problem to the number 87204. You just text the word problem to 87204. One more time, text the word problem to 87204 dot Paint your life. Celebrate the moments that matter most. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details. All right, let's get back into the show. All right, let's keep playing.

Mike Waltz (43:59)

Other technical mean is something we're trying to figure out.

Laura Ingraham (44:02)

So your, your staffer did not put his contact information.

Mike Waltz (44:07)

No.

Laura Ingraham (44:07)

But how did it end up?

Mike Waltz (44:09)

Well, that's what we're trying to. That's what we're trying to figure out.

Laura Ingraham (44:11)

Okay. But that's a pretty big problem.

Dave Smith (44:13)

That is.

Laura Ingraham (44:13)

What if there are numbers?

Mike Waltz (44:14)

You've got the best technical minds. Right? And that's where, I mean, I'm sure everybody out there has had a Contact where you. It was said one person and then a different phone number, but you've never.

Laura Ingraham (44:25)

Talked to him before. So how's the number expert in any of this?

Dave Smith (44:29)

But it's. Just pause it for a second here. But what, Like, I'm sorry, am I crazy here? Like, Natalie, some. Anyone in the chat here, anyone. Is that. I'm sure everyone out there has had, like a contact in a phone. It's not. First of all, I. No, I've never thought of this as like a problem. Yeah. Natalie says no, that's insane. Yeah, this. This is like bananas. Like, and. And even if you had that, you'd be thinking like, oh, I messed up putting his number in. I put the wrong number in. Right. And I'm just saying. Just running through this. And again, I was never like, that strong of a math student or anything like that. But like, if you, like, had a contact and incorrectly put the number in, the odds that that would hit the senior editor of the Atlantic. Like, like, it was like your contact was one number away from this gu. Something like that. The odds are like, insane. It's like one in millions. That. That would be the example. So what we're talking about here is that you. What you're saying is that somebody put his information under this contact. Now, you could be alleging a conspiracy here, but is Laura Ingram kind of. Laura Ingram is like a Trump sycophant. So she's kind of going soft on him here. But even she starts going like, so a staffer. No, we're not saying a step. Like, it almost seems like she's trying to assist him in this cover up, but, like, can't figure out how that would even work unless you're implicating a staffer. How else would this happen? Just makes no sense whatsoever. All right, let's keep playing.

Laura Ingraham (46:10)

How's the number on your phone?

Mike Waltz (46:12)

Well, if you have somebody else's contact and then it. And then somehow.

Laura Ingraham (46:16)

Oh, someone.

Dave Smith (46:17)

You.

Mike Waltz (46:17)

That it gets sucked in.

Laura Ingraham (46:18)

Was there someone else supposed to be on the chat that wasn't on the chat that you thought?

Mike Waltz (46:22)

So the person that I thought was on there was never on there. It was.

Laura Ingraham (46:26)

Who was that person?

Mike Waltz (46:27)

Well, I'm not. Look, Laura, I take. I take responsibility. I built the. I built the group.

Laura Ingraham (46:32)

Okay, so that's that.

Mike Waltz (46:34)

But look, that's the part that we have to figure out, and that's the part that we. Embarrassing. Yes, but Pete and I are veterans. We know these operations. He has been an excellent secretary of defense, and this was an operation that. I mean, it Amazes me. I guess the Democrats were fine to leave all the sea lanes shut down, were fine to have destroyers fired on dozens of times by this terrorist group, and fine to have Iran keep supplying them missiles. That was okay. The President takes decisive action, and now we're seeing some real success in taking down their air defenses, opening the sea lanes, taking out their leadership. We don't want to talk about that. We don't want to talk about this now.

Laura Ingraham (47:14)

The Atlantic told us in.

Dave Smith (47:15)

All right. I mean, Jesus Christ. Okay, sorry. It's just like, this is just. And. And look, I mean, if you were trying, like, I. I must be your target demo if you're sitting here going like, yeah, but the Democrats are so bad, you know, and the corporate media is so bad. It's like, yeah, I know, dude. And, you know, part of the reason why people aren't talking about what an amazing success this strike on Yemen was, because it's all like, there was no success. You can't point to any success. Oh, they're. I guess they're just fine with the shipping la closed and this terrorist organization, you know, Terrorist organization, whatever the hell that even means anymore. How. How exactly? We get to call the Houthis terrorists, but what we're doing to Yemen isn't terrorism, or what Israel's doing to Gaza isn't terrorism, or what the Saudis did to Yemen isn't terrorism. Like, but you. You find me a consistent definition for terrorism that says the Houthis are terrorists, but the US Military, the Israeli military, and the Saudi military aren't. And essentially, as we always say on the show, right? It's the old Noam Chomsky line. But I love that it's one of Noam Chomsky's best ever. But when someone asked him, she goes, well, what differentiates terrorism from these military actions? And he goes, oh, it's very simple. If they do it, it's terrorism. If we do it, it's counter terrorism. That's is pretty much the case. But look, it's just not true. Just. None of this is true. This is such bullshit. You're as. You're as big a liar as the Democrats and the corporate media right now. First of all, Joe Biden bombed the Houthis, and for the exact same reason he did this. You could go watch there's tape of Donald Trump when he was on Tim Pool's show last summer, specifically talking about this and how stupid he thought it was that Joe Biden's bombing Yemen. And he goes, man, these guys just always want to drop bombs. It's like their answer to everything. What about diplomacy? Why can't we talk to people? You could pick up a phone and do more good than you can just dropping bombs on all your problems. That's what Donald Trump was saying last summer when Joe Biden was bombing the Houthis, and for the same reason, because they were shooting at ships going by in protest over what Israel's doing to Gaza. Okay, so this whole thing is just bullshit. It's all bullshit. And to say, like, why, like, it's so ridiculous to sit here and go, well, why is it that people are talking about this Signal thing instead of talking about what an overwhelming success this bombing campaign was? Well, there's two major reasons. Number one, the bombing campaign wasn't a success. Number two, because the National Security Advisor added the fucking senior editor at the Atlantic to the goddamn group chat planning a future military attack. That's why we're talking about it. Sorry, that's a scandal. There's no universe in which that's not a scandal. I mean, it's crazy that there's a universe in which bombing a poor third world country isn't a scandal. Like, there's. It's crazy. What's really crazy is that we actually live in a universe where the scandal isn't the fact that there seems to be consensus within the group that this wasn't time sensitive, that it didn't need to happen when it happened. Meaning, in other words, there was plenty of time to go to Congress and get authorization for this strike. If you remember, in that dusty old book called the Constitution, Congress is the one who's supposed to have the war powers, not. Not a group of people on Signal. That wasn't exactly the founder's intention for the country. That's a scandal. But I'm sorry, even in our crazy universe where those things somehow are not considered scandals, it's a goddamn scandal. When the National Security Advisor, who used to be Dick Cheney's counterterrorism adviser, is adding the most Trump hating, lying corporate journalists to their Signal account. And that his explanation for this just makes zero sense at all. He's sitting there saying, I take full responsibility, except none of the responsibilities on me, right? I mean, isn't that essentially what he's saying? He's sitting here and saying, I take full responsibility. I'm the one who created the group chat. How did this guy get added to the group chat? Well, it's certainly not my fault. What's your plausible alternative explanation? Don't have one. Ah, you know Contact names and numbers. You know how it goes. Everyone's had that, except everyone hasn't had that. None of this makes any sense. You're totally skirting responsibility by while claiming that you're taking responsibility for the whole thing. And really, all you've got to say is our best. We got great people on it, top guys on the job. We'll get to the bottom of this. This is horrible, dude. Like, this is just awful. All right, let's, let's keep playing.

Laura Ingraham (52:22)

And discredit us and our reporting. Follow an obvious playbook by elected officials and others power who are hostile to journalists and First Amendment rights of all Americans. They're saying, don't blame the messenger. He responds to them.

Mike Waltz (52:35)

Lied about Russia, lied about Gold star families, lied about even as last what year in terms of the President paying for the family of a gold star family that he absolutely did. I mean, lie after lie after lie.

Laura Ingraham (52:51)

Have they ever apologized for any of that?

Mike Waltz (52:54)

No.

Dave Smith (52:54)

I mean, yeah, but you're lying right now.

Mike Waltz (52:57)

We care about the main.

Dave Smith (52:58)

You can't just sit here and call everybody else a liar while you're clearly lying about this. Like, what do you want me to say here? I mean, look, dude, it's gonna, it takes a lot to get me to trust one of these lying hacks from the Atlantic. But as of right now, when he, his story makes way more sense than Mike Waltz's story, I, I, I think that, I think Waltz does have a relationship with this guy. I think he had his contact info on signal. Now, it is whether or not he accidentally added him to this list or this was some type of intentional thing that kind of remains to be seen. I, I don't know about that, but I think he's lying right now about this. I think he is in contact with that journalist. And this pivoting to he lies about everything just doesn't work when you're so clearly lying through your teeth about the current scandal at hand right now. All right, let's, let's play a little bit more.

Mike Waltz (54:00)

What I care about is staying focused on mission accomplishing the President's agenda, getting these things done, cleaning up the Biden messes from Afghanistan to Ukraine to the Houthis to the border to China, all over South America to the Arctic, where we're completely exposed to NATO that's not paying up. And the President has had success after success, and he's got a fantastic national security team.

Laura Ingraham (54:26)

I mean, I think it's just stunning how many people on the team have his 100% trust and there have been enormous successes early on in this administration, but you all are rattling the old cages of the establishment, defense and national security embedded people who are still working government, a lot of great people. But the concern is, is that somebody got involved here who didn't want the President to be successful. And a lot of us are very concerned about that. That someone is in this orbit who doesn't want this President of the United States to be a raging success and turn our foreign policy into an America first approach.

Mike Waltz (55:06)

Look there, we made a mistake. We're moving forward and we're going to continue to knock it out of the park for this President. Look at what he's gotten done in under two months. And I didn't even get going on, on the economy, on trade or all of those other April 2nd's coming day.

Laura Ingraham (55:26)

The DNI was very adamant today and very clear that there was no classified information in this, in this text chat. And the Democrats of course are predictably, they're going to jump on this. But would Goldberg, should Goldberg just release the other information that he has because he's standing on this? Well, I'm not going to release this information because I have my standards and journalistic standards. Okay, but it's not classified information. So does it matter? Would you, would you care if the rest of this information came out?

Mike Waltz (55:54)

Look, I mean I would prefer certainly as the President was saying today, if we could all sit in a steel line, let you know, steel line lead room and have all of these conversations. I certainly want our deliberations to stay confidential. This was an encrypted app that the CIA had on sitting there as John Radcliffe was confirmed and walked into the building from the prior administration. It's on other agency apps. And so no, of course I don't want it all out there because these were conversations back and forth that you should be able to have.

Dave Smith (56:27)

All right, let's just leave it there. Jesus. So isn't it funny? And what I, what I thought was so remarkable about this interview, right is you got to remember here, this guy could have gone on any show he wanted to. He picked Laura Ingraham show to go on because she's a cheerleader of this administration and she is actively trying to help him in this cover up. Like she's trying her best and there's just, but none of the outs that she's giving him he's willing to take. So she keeps going like oh yeah, probably a staffer, right. So you could kind of say someone else under me up. We're going to Figure out who that is. It's. This is how. This is how scandals in D.C. are typically swept under the rug. You find somebody who's known as the fall guy. That's the term that they use for it, right? And then you end up blaming them. So you find out, oh, it was a staffer who did this, you know, behind closed doors. You tell them, you're gonna have to take the fall for this. The scan, the. The. The staffer is fired. And then you go, we did an investigation. We got to the bottom of it. He won't take that bait because he recognizes that's admitting too much. So then she's trying her best, and then at the end, she's like, you know, hey, let me throw this journalist under the bus a little bit. You know what he's saying? He won't release the whole chat because there's, you know, there's. There's classified material in there. Well, I'd say Tulsi Gabbard was adamant in saying there's no classified material. So release the whole chat then. How come he won't? What does he have to hide, right? National Security Advisor. And then he turns around and goes, no, I don't want the whole thing released. Yeah, no, I don't. I don't want that out there. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Tax Network usa. The IRS is the largest collection agency in the world, and it just stepped up enforcement for 2025. If you owe back taxes or have unfiled returns, do not wait for the IRS to come after you. Simply avoiding your tax troubles is the worst thing you can do. Getting ahead of this is the smart move, but never, never contact the IRS alone. Turn it over to the team at Tax Network usa. Because not all tax resolution companies are the same. Tax Network USA has a preferred direct line to the. This means that they know which agents to deal with and which agents to avoid. Tax Network USA has proven strategies that are designed to settle your tax problems in your favor. Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million. Their attorneys and negotiators have resolved over 1 billion in tax debt. Talk with one of their strategists. It's free. Stop the threatening letters, stop looking over your shoulders, and put your IRS troubles behind you once and for all. Give them a call at 1-800-958-1000 or visit them at tnusa.comSmith that's T N USA.com Smith all right, let's get back into the show. Look, I don't even know. I'm speaking a little bit above my pay grade here. And I suppose there could be a gap in the two, but wouldn't. Wouldn't future bombing plans, by their very nature, have to be classified? I mean, I don't. Maybe it's not technically, but wouldn't. If you're talking about a military action that's coming up, that detailed battle plans. Battle maybe is not exactly the right word to use in these type of. But plans to bomb an apartment building, which is what they ended up bombing, by the way, in Yemen. How is that not secret? Like, by definition, isn't that secret? You're talking about plans of bombing something. You can't have that out there, or the guy you're trying to get will leave or won't be there or whatever. This just makes absolutely no sense. Absolutely no sense. And of course, not a shot. He doesn't want it out there. He doesn't want. Anyway, the full chat is out. It's on the Internet. I know they published it over@antiwar.com if anyone wants to go check it out. One of the things that's one of the ugliest things about it is that they essentially. In here, I'll read from it. And this is more that came out that wasn't in the. That wasn't in the original piece. But it's clearly the top guy who they're trying to get the signal. Chat reveals that they waited for. They call them the top missile guy, the Houthi's top missile guy. In the chat, they waited for him to walk into a residential building where his girlfriend lived before launching the airstrike that collapsed the building. J.D. vance referred to that as excellent in the group chat. It seems that Tulsi Gabbard also celebrated it afterward. And you know, it's just as. As Dave DeCamp, as the great Dave DeCamp wrote on Twitter. I'll. I'll read this real quickly. We could wrap on that. But he said, imagine a foreign country flattening an apartment building in the US because an American general entered it. Never in a million years would Americans think that was acceptable and not regarded as terrorism. A short tweet. Very well said. And just retweet that now. Yeah, it's kind of like what I was saying before about what distinguishes terrorism from what we do. And it's not much. It's essentially just the fact that we do it anyway. This scandal is. Look, it's not a scandal for the reasons that I would think of it as a scandal, or at least that's not how it's being portrayed in. In the media. But, like, the biggest thing here is just, like, how terrible it is that Donald Trump is bombing the poorest country in Yemen on behalf of Israel. I'm sorry, the poorest country in the Middle east on behalf of Israel. It's. It's appalling that all of these guys in this new administration were just cheering it on, you know, Meet the new boss. All right, we're gonna wrap on that. Oh, I should. Okay, before we leave, a couple quick announcements. Number one, since I am flying out to Boston tomorrow, I'll. I'll be flying. I think we're not in the hotel yet during our normal recording time. So instead of tomorrow, we're gonna members only episode on Friday. It'll be another extra long one because we're still making up the ones that we missed a couple weeks ago. And then this Saturday, for the people in the top tier is our. Our monthly zoom meeting. That'll also be an extra long one. So some fun stuff coming up this weekend and then see. I'm sure I'll see a bunch of you guys out in Boston. Looking forward to it. All right, catch you next time. Peace. It.