Will Cain Country - America’s Immigration Crisis: The Fix No One Will Say (ft. Gene Hamilton & Asra Nomani)

Episode Date: March 25, 2026

Many things have changed in America over its 250 years of history, but few of those changes have made as big of an impact as the Hart-Celler Act of 1965. President of America First Legal Gene Hamilton joins Will to examine the sweeping demographic changes that followed the Act, whether its implementation led to a rise in Islamic terror attacks from individuals we welcomed into our nation with open arms, and what can be done to fix our immigration problems.Plus, Senior Editor of Investigations at FOX News Digital, Asra Nomani continues to share her deep dive into the Chinese Communist Party’s shadowy network of propaganda, facilitated by a single American tech entrepreneur with ties to “activist” organizations across the U.S.Subscribe to ‘Will Cain Country’ on YouTube here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch Will Cain Country!⁠⁠⁠Follow ‘Will Cain Country’ on X (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), Instagram (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), TikTok (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), and Facebook (⁠⁠⁠@willcainnews⁠⁠⁠)Follow Will on X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WillCain⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Comies, a bunch of lefties, Hassan Piker, Code Pink, all travel down to Cuba and stay in five-star hotels while the entire island's in a blackout. Cute, funny little story. Until you think about the hundreds of millions of dollars behind that little trip to Cuba, behind every protest on the streets of America,

behind the man. Never Roy Singham funding subversion with the help of the Chinese Communist Party. A deep dive again with Fox News Digital. Asra Nomani. And how do we get all these immigrants out of America? I'm kidding. I'm not. With Gene Hamilton.

It is Wilcane Country. Streaming live at the Wilcane Country YouTube channel, the Wilcane Facebook page. Always here by hitting follow as Spotify. or on Apple. We are live from New York City. Let's go. That's right, two a day, sitting in the next room next to me, tinfoil Pat, in his bunker in America's Pond Shop, Jacksonville, Florida. Here we are. Heck yeah. Smooth sailing.

I'm surprised. Small TSA lines, no delays, flew into LaGuardia, saw the air Canada flight, still propped up on its tail. And I'm going to sign when you're landing. But everything was working smoothly. Statistics show that after a month of not getting a paycheck, something like 450 TSA agents have walked off the job. Across the Fox News channel, you can see videos of long lines, three-hour lines, four-hour lines. But it's pretty scattered. It's not everyone's travel experience.

On Monday, we talked about this here on Wilcane Country. And I saw many of your comments out there on Facebook and YouTube. I heard you, Willisha. You're traveling smoothly, and so did I, absolutely flawlessly. yesterday, from Dallas to LaGuardia. What's happening is many of those walk-offs are concentrated at certain airports. Some of those images you're seeing on the Fox News Channel are showing those particular airports. They are Atlanta and Houston. I don't know what's happening in those markets that's causing more TSA agents to walk off the job, but it's not something that's

happening everywhere, not all the way across America. It's just happening in some places. So Godspeed and God bless, if you're living in Atlanta. Atlanta or Houston. It's somewhat good to be back in New York. As I walk the hallways, everybody says, are you glad to be back? And it's hard for me to fake it. I don't give gratuitous compliments. I can't tell you your dog is cute at the park unless, in fact, your dog is cute. Even if you tell me, my dog is gorgeous. I can't fake it. And so I've had trouble faking it in the hallways here at Fox. Yeah, it's good. It's good to be back in New York. I heard it. Someone asked Steve Wells over here with you and like, yeah, yeah. It's fun to see everyone. It really is. And unfortunately, you have to

kind of schedule yourself with all these formal meetings to get time with everyone that you want to see other than who you just run into in the hallways. And so when I come to New York, I feel like I'm scheduled out in five-minute increments, but it is good to see everyone. You know, I drove around New York last night. There's still a small bit of nostalgia when I pass a skateboard park that I used to take my sons to, or there's some corner market that you used to go to that's a long time now of business because that's what happens in New York. Everything you think is permanent is not. It's there for about five to ten years, and then it's gone. Your New York died when you left. That's what people famously say. New York is never, if you come to New York thinking you're going

to conquer New York, if you're going to know New York, if you want to feel like you have it figured out, that you could draw the map in your head and you could follow it by instinct, it changes. Of course, the streets don't, but the landmarks change. Nothing is permanent in New York. York. And you sit there and you can have see movements in the economy. This morning I was driving now. I was like, that used to be a Lulu Lemon. Hmm. And I got me thinking, how's Lulu Lemon doing? Check that stock price and see how sales are going for leisure wear, ath leisure. But nothing's permanent, not New York. And maybe that's a reminder of how things are, not just in America, but in life. Nothing, my friends, is permanent. The only permanent thing, Dan, is change. So get use

to that permanency. However, we don't have to accept all change. We don't have to accept that every bit of change is progress. We don't have to always believe that yesterday was worse than tomorrow. There are times and there are things and there are principles that last. One of those is the project that is the United States of America. And something has drastically changed in America. It didn't happen overnight, and it's not even something that happened under President Joe Biden.

It did, but at varying degrees. Regardless of a political party over the last half century, America has changed the way we have come to understand the idea of what it means to be an American. Illegal immigration, legal immigration. The 1965 Immigration Act,

heart sellers. We have changed who we invite. We have changed the requirements. We have changed what it means to be an American. And as part of an ongoing conversation we hope to have here on Wilcane Country and at the Fox News Channel on the Wilcane show, it's time that we do what we did for most of our past. And that is to think and to talk and to deliberate about what that actually means to be an American and who we invite in to be in America. Because we once did, we no longer have that conversation, critically think. It's shouted down as racist. It's painted as xenophobic. But so too is every other civilization who hopes to preserve themselves into the future. Let's talk about that. Let's go from A to Z, if we can, with Gene Hamilton, who is president of the

America First Legal Foundation, his former deputy White House counsel to President Donald Trump. It's good to have him here on Wilkane Country. Hi, Gene. Hey, Will, thanks for having me. Today, Gene, on the Will Kane show at the Fox News Channel, I will have Congressman Andy Ogles on for a conversation that will undoubtedly be too short and only begin to scratch the surface of this conversation that I hope to have with you here today. He has proposed and will introduce legislation to repeal the 1965 Immigration Act, heart sellers. He wants to go back, I think, we'll explore with Congressman Ogles, to something that we did maybe from 1924 through 1965,

a much more deliberative, a much more thoughtful exercise in what it means to be an American. Here's where I want to begin that conversation with you today. If we think about this conversation, think about it as the alphabet, A to Z. This conversation that I want to have with Ogles, it is very important. But it's a little bit like starting the conversation at T. It's hard to get to T without going through ABC, D, E, and F, and so on. And we have a freak out, an absolute freak out, obviously from Democrats and from the left,

but we have a freak out also from the American public over the deportation of illegal immigrants. And I think we're going to have problems with Republicans on ever having a conversation about legal immigration if we can't resolve ourselves to first just stopping illegal immigration. Yeah, well, that's exactly right. Donald Trump, I think, in his policies, recognize this. They, and if you look at them by at least starting with shutting down the border, shutting down new illegal immigration into the country, and then the things that they've been doing to try to reactivate the tools that are on the books to deport the people who made it in, especially over the Biden administration, but everything.

who came in prior to that as well. Reflect this focus on let's stop the bleeding, right? Let's stop the bleeding. And then let's see what happens. Now, as you point out, getting from letter A to letter Z, if we're starting conversation at letter T, I applaud you, Will, for doing exactly what needs to be done, which is asking the fundamental question, what does it mean to be an American? What does that mean?

What is the American identity? And why can't we decide what the American identity is? Why can't we reaffirm what everybody once understood what it meant to be an American? If you are a person who, say you go and take a trip and you go to Japan, there is a distinct Japanese identity. Now if I as an American go over to Japan and I violate their immigration laws and I insist that I get the right to reside in Japan and that everyone else has to accommodate. me, they have to change their identity to accommodate me.

I think we all know what would happen. Now imagine if I did that in a very hostile country like China. The same type of issue would apply, but of course I would end up in prison and then deported. I would not be allowed to stay. And so we, when we're talking about what it means to be an American and the enforcement of our immigration laws and adjustments to our legal immigration system, all of it needs to be wrapped up in this fundamental understanding of what it is that we think constitutes the American identity, what are the values and attributes that we want to highlight and emphasize, and then what are the

things and what are the steps and changes in legislation that need to get us to that place where people once again understand what it means to uniquely be American and work and further themselves to accomplish that end. Okay, let's pause. Let's consider that question for a moment, what it means to be an American. So I had this conversation some months back with former presidential candidate, candidate for Ohio governor Vivekramuswamy. And he made this point, which I think is pretty fascinating. He said, I could move to France. I could live in France for 20 years. I would never be considered a Frenchman. But in America, you can move here. You can live here for five years. You could live here for one year and be considered an American. And I think that is fundamentally true,

Gene, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does highlight something happens, a transformation happens, something is accepted, something is bought into. Now, there's this debate, Gene, about, like, is America a propositional nation? You've seen that before. Do you simply have to buy into the proposition of America to be an American? So let's, again, I'm sorry, this is a conversation, and I don't want a filibuster, but the idea that America is a people and not just a proposition. That's grounded in historical fact. That's grounded in historical fact. The American project was founded by Anglo-Saxon, Western European Protestants, and they established a culture and an identity that carried us. Well, for most of our history, and one could argue still to the

day, defines largely what it means to be an American. But it wasn't exclusive. So this is to Ramoswamy's point. It isn't exclusive to a Western European Protestant. It is a anyone that can buy in, not just to a proposition, but assimilate to a culture that pre-existed their presence, is part of that of what it means to be an American. And I think that we assume that if you come here, you assimilate, you accept the predominant culture, as opposed to me doing the same in France, you can actually become an American. Do you buy that? Do you buy that we can take someone into Ramoswami's point, from India, from a very different culture, right, who can come in and do certain proactive things, lifestyle acceptance, culture acceptance,

value acceptance that makes them American. I accept that proposition from the standpoint of, again, coming at this from the standpoint of actually assimilating into the culture. You can, in fact, take people from all over the world, and I think you and I both probably know people who are close to us, friends, family, whatever, who have come from different places all around the world, and they have adopted that American identity, they have assimilated properly, and they are productive members of society that we are proud to have. But, but, but, but, being an American requires that actual assimilation, that attachment to the Constitution, that attachment

to our Western ideals, that attachment to the American identity in ethos. And it's not just being an economic asset. It's not just being a person who has a job and increases the GDP. That is not enough. And failing your way up through the immigration system, which is a concept I describe as just basically skirting by it, just like a kid in school, much of our immigration program, especially during the Obama years and the Biden years, they just enabled people to kind of fail their way up into the next grade. So starting as a non-immigrant converting to an immigrant visa, getting a green card, and then going eventually through the naturalization process. all too often people were allowed to skirt by, and they weren't really truly assessed for their ability to assimilate, their ability, their attachment to the Constitution and the things that made us great.

So, yes, I completely agree with the proposition that you stated, but it comes from a place of people have to actually assimilate. You can't just come here and just magically become an American with the waving of a want. It just doesn't work that way. And that is a very hard metric to measure. It's a very hard metric to measure how someone has assimilated and what their level of buy-in is on the values and ideology of America. So, we'll get there together in just a moment, Gene. You then cross a different bridge,

and that is the bridge that sort of Ogles is talking about and the bridge that America crossed in 1965. Prior to 1965, we made macro judgments on this. We looked at the culture from which you came, We looked at, obviously, any individual information we could have about your likelihood of success or your propensity for criminality and that type of thing. But we said, okay, if you're coming from this culture, whatever it may be. And pre-1965, we actually had some pretty strict rules. Like, okay, if you came from, I think, Eastern and Southern Europe, it was more difficult than coming from Western Europe.

Coming from Asia was almost impossible. Coming from Africa, very difficult. those were macro cultural judgments on your propensity for success. And those are long gone, right? So first of all, those things, we can just acknowledge this, Gene, are today dismissed as racist or cultural superiority. But they did measure something that we in some ways are seeing the price being paid today, right? When I see four jihadi attacks by naturalized citizens. in America in a one and a half week period, I think I'm talking about Austin, Old Dominion,

New York City, and it was Michigan. The three of the four were naturalized American citizens. One, New York City was the children of naturalized American citizens. What you see is a potential price that you're paying for bringing people in who might be coming from a macrocultural background with less of a propensity to buy into the identity of being an American. Yes, you hit the nail on the head. Our immigration laws, even post-1965, is as weird as the structure is, and I think inherently flawed as the structure is post-1965 to our immigration system, where we're not actually assessing people based on merit and potential to assimilate.

Regardless, there are still some laws that are on the books that have been on the books since then that are supposed to screen against many of these things that would at least give you an indication if you used common sense about someone's propensity to become a productive member of the American society. And so things like membership in a totalitarian party prior to coming to the United States, affiliation with different terrorist organizations, all kinds of different ideologies that we screen against, and of course even things as simple as immigrant intent versus non-immigrant intent, whether or not, you know, depending on the visa that you come in,

how long you intend to stay here, or whether you get to go home, etc. are all things that were just kind of chucked out the door. And what the, especially the Obama administration did and the Biden administration, and really, quite frankly, for decades prior, was that it really turned into kind of an arbitrary rubber stamp process for people trying to go through the lawful immigration system. There are all these projects, there are all these things on paper, right, that are supposed to be requirements that people are supposed to meet, they're supposed to check off a box here, check off a box there. And most of the time it would just be, hey, approved, you're good to go. Sometimes the answer seemed a little bit arbitrary, the right people would get shut down for the wrong

reasons. And so what I'm getting at here is that at least with Donald Trump, and this goes back to his first administration, and it continues through now. One of the most important things that he has done and that his team has done is to ensure that we use, vetting and screening metrics in a way that is tied to common sense and what does common sense involve common sense involves actually being able to vet somebody against an existent database and so if you have someone coming from a third world country where there are no police records that are electronically accessible or from somewhere where you just don't even you can't trust the

records that you get why would you take a chance on letting someone come in from a a country like that where we have no records. Right. And you know that that culture has a propensity to commit certain types of offenses and then just allow them into the community to live with the American people, to live with your kids, your wife, your family on the streets, just walk around loose on the streets and hope that nothing bad happens. So at least this administration, this president of the United States, has led and he has led

with common sense and strength on this issue. We're diving deep. So let's not stop. Let's keep this conversation going with Gene Hamilton, president of the America First Legal Foundation. When we come back on Wilcane Country. In communities across Canada, hourly Amazon employees earn an average of over $24.50 an hour.

Employees also have the opportunity to grow their skills and their paycheck by enrolling in free skills training programs for in-demand fields, like software development and information technology. Learn more at about Amazon. This is Ainsley Earhart. Thank you for joining me for the 52 episode podcast series, The Life of Jesus. A listening experience that will provide hope, comfort, and understanding of the greatest story ever told. Listen and follow now at foxnewspodcasts.com or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Join Fox in supporting our troops from daily needs to global emergencies. Help us be there for those who serve. Visit go. dot fox slash red cross to donate to service to the armed forces today welcome back to will cane country we're still hanging out with jean hamilton the president of america first legal talking about not just illegal but legal immigration okay let's take a moment just to address what you said it'll take a break from the larger conversation to to acknowledge what you're saying there has been improvement under president donald trump and and everyone listening should know that if you believe the things that jean and i are

talking about. There are statistics that show, you know, legal immigration has been curtailed from a lot of the places where we've had it over the past, honestly, half century, but also denaturalizations have gone up. Where in the past, I think, Gene, you probably have the stats at your hand, at your fingertips more quickly than I do, but in the past, you might have seen something like 10, a dozen denaturalizations a year. You're now seeing something like 100 or 140,000. 50 denaturalizations here. Now, denaturalization, don't want to take for granted. Anybody knows what that is. But that is an American citizen, a naturalized American citizen who has done something to have their citizenship taken away. Now, like you said, we have those laws on the books. And people

assume, by the way, Gene, that's really, really hard. And it is hard because it's like, did you commit fraud in your naturalization process? But there are other things as well, right? Like, you, there are other things you, I mean, I believe in the law. It says if you're a member of the communist party, you could be denaturalized, you know, which brings up a whole host of questions about guys like, I'm about I'm about Neville Roy Singham, who's an American citizen living in Shanghai, openly pushing Chinese Communist Party propaganda from Shanghai. Why does he still have American citizenship? Like the laws on the book say you could denaturalize that man. So there is a process for denaturalization, and it has gotten better. And I just want to, in concert with you

acknowledge, I would argue not enough. I still would say, Gene, not enough. But, better under President Donald Trump? Yes, yeah, absolutely. Not enough. It has gotten better. And some of the things that the American people at home might be surprised to know or to learn that prior to the Trump administration,

there was a lot of people who just kind of shrugged their shoulders and didn't care about the inability to vet and screen or to compare databases or to compare actual physical pieces of paper that people submitted during their immigration process with what the government actually in fact knew. Remember, like all these things that we're using today, so whether you're a person who uses GROC or Claude or chat GPT or any of these other AI things, or even Google,

and you can type in a search, that those technologies, of course, are new. And the government's ability to vet and screen and to compare information and to make sure that what somebody said on one form, when they say, oh no, actually, in fact, I was not a member of a totalitarian party before coming to the United States remained true, again, because the government might not have had the information at the time the person turned that piece of paper in, but they certainly came into knowledge about it later.

I hear that. In the age of technology, it's easier to vet people. But I want to make this even harder, Gene. I really do. Okay. So it's gotten better under President Donald Trump. We acknowledge that there was at one time in America, and there could be once again this macro macro immigration judgment based upon the culture from which you come, which will not always be fair, it's not going to always be fair. Just because you come from a place with a backwards culture does not in itself mean you are backwards. However, it's very difficult to see if you're an outlier. And there are outliers. You know, Congressman Andy Ogles often talks about the likelihood of success of people coming from Muslim countries and assimilating to America. But there

will always be an eye on her see Ali. Of course. An eye and her see Ali belongs as an American. So it's not all Muslims can't be Americans, but how do we find the propensity to assimilate and adopt the values of America? And I would say, I think your bar is too low, Gene, at least our bar in this conversation. It's not just who has been a member of a totalitarian party. It's not just who's been affiliated with a terrorist organization. Yes, those things should be easy to find. But I'm concerned at a deeper level about people who come into the country who fundamentally

don't like the values of the country, right? They may not be criminals. They may not be fascists or totalitarians. They may not be Islamists. I don't know. But I want a vet. I think if you come here, there should be an ability, and I think it's very hard, and I don't know how to put a test to it, to test your love of America. Like, what's the point in you coming here if you don't love America?

But how do I vet someone? Hell, I don't care. How do I vet an Englishman coming here? who's not, you know, a far-left socialist who doesn't like America. I don't want him either. So it's not just an Islamist. I don't want anyone coming here with an antipathy towards the thing they want to come towards. Yeah, that is spot on, again, Will, 100% right.

That should be the ultimate test. And I think one of the only ways that you can actually get at that is to do better interviews on the front end at our embassies and consulates abroad to give the necessary time. Now, again, this is something that the American people at home might not understand, but that especially during the Obama and Biden administrations, there were time limits placed on individual foreign service officers who were adjudicating cases of people trying to come here. You have to adjudicate this number of cases, which means you have to interview this number of people in this compressed amount of time. And that's the completely wrong approach. Instead, you have to treat it as though it was someone that you were inviting into your house,

or somebody that showed up at your door in the middle of the night. And they say, let me into your house. Well, if you don't know who that person is and you have sleeping children and a wife in your house, if you let that person in and you have no idea who they are, that's stupid. That's just contrary to common sense. And so instead, what you would do is you would do all kinds of things to verify, maybe let the person stay on the ports, let them stay in the grass, help them get a hotel, whatever the case may be.

But when it comes to immigration, which is conceptually basically the same type of thing that we're talking about, which is letting people into our national house. All common sense goes out the door for so many people, especially on the left, and especially amongst the bureaucracy that has perpetuated D.C. and the immigration agencies for so long, which you just have to apply common sense. If you don't know that this person is going to love you and your family and that they're going to be peaceful and productive members of your household, then why the hell would you ever let the person in the door in the first place?

Okay, I want to cover just a few more things in the time we have left together, what people don't know, and I honestly, as I get more educated on this process myself, Gene, I have learned on my own as well. When I think of legal immigration, my brain goes to the economic metrics that you brought up earlier. It's people that can work and they're going to add something, and surely that's why we're bringing. That is not. That is like 15 to 20 percent of the people that we're bringing over legally. 70 something percent of legal immigration is through family reunification. It is family sponsorship. Now this, on your heartstrings, may pull. You become a citizen.

Oh, I also want to bring over my brother or my mother. I want to bring over my family. And on our hearts, it's like, oh, yeah, that makes sense. But the problem with this is that is literally what we talk about when we bring up the idea of chain migration, because then that person becomes naturalized and they sponsor two more, three more people, whatever it may be. And you have this balloon expanding through family reunification. And it is 70% of our legal immigration system.

Here's the problem here, Gene, with this. To me, that is not asking the fundamental question. Do you want to be an American? That is asking a different question. Do you want to be with your family? And just because you want to be with your family doesn't make you a good prospect for being a good American. Yes. Yes.

That's, again, spot on. What we need to do, I think, personally, as a policy matter, is move to a place where we are judging people based on their individual merits, their individual potential to contribute, to become productive members of American society, to assimilate into the American identity, and to make decisions about people based on their individual merits that they bring. So maybe, maybe as a bonus factor, as some other consideration, maybe if we go to a points-based system that's focused on skills and things that folks bring to our American communities, you could give someone bonus points, for example, if they have established family ties in the United States

and you know that they're going to be participants and good members, upstanding members of the community. Maybe, but that's a very different question, fundamentally, from the current status quo, as you point out, which is so much of the system right now is just based on the existence of a family connection. And that is not answering the question for the American people, which is,

why should we let you in the front door? Why are you going to be allowed to be in our communities. Again, you can go back to that same analogy of the person who's, they're on your doorstep. Maybe you let them in, maybe you don't, probably not, but what if that person then wants to bring in additional people? And they're trying to bring in additional people

and you don't know anything about them, and you don't have the ability to assess whether or not, or maybe you do know. Maybe you do know that in fact this person's brother or this person's father or this person's mother is a real dirtbag. You'd like the ability to exclude them, but our current immigration system is very, very, very,

difficult to stop some of these family migration patterns, chain migration patterns, to come into the United States. And instead of focusing on assimilation, and instead of focusing on turning people into upstanding, productive members of the community, what our system has been producing time and time again is more balkanization of our communities, of our cities, of our states, where we, look, it's fine. Everyone knows, everyone's been to San Francisco, everyone's been in New York City. We all know there's Chinatown, there's historic neighborhoods that came up. And that's fine. That's great. There's no problem with that in the historical perspective of the development.

But why are we bringing in groups of people, large groups of people now, in encouraging this balkanization of small towns and cities across the United States and of states and transforming their entire nature, their entire character, through this chain migration and through the faults in our immigration system? It doesn't make any sense. Okay. Okay, so we have managed to basically move through, you know, we'll call it A through T. We're not going to get all the way to Z.

I would argue Z is remigration, which is a conversation we've had from time to time here. But just because of time, we're not going to get T through Z. But even getting to T in torturing this analogy of the alphabet, you know, Congressman Ogles is talking a lot about this stuff. and he is going to introduce legislation. And he wants to revisit the 1965 Act when a lot of the stuff you and I are talking about started. This is when all of this started. But I love the ideas. And I'm, as you can tell, I'm all in on this gene.

There is a real world realist to me as well. And I look at this and I go, oh my gosh, we are freaking out as a country over deporting criminal illegal aliens, not even illegal aliens. And the American public polling-wise will say, yeah, I think you should deport all illegal aliens, not just criminals. But I also think the American public has a problem seeing it happen.

They don't like it. They don't want their gardener. They don't want their house cleaner. They don't want to see Home Depot raids or whatever it may be. And so they like it in theory, but they don't want to see it in practice. And that's not even taking into account

how many Republicans. And Democrats are freaking out over where we are today. And where we are today is at B, A and B of this conversation. I just don't know how we get to T. We're obviously not going to get Democrat buy-in. I don't think we'll get, you know, sufficient Republican buy-in. And I'm not sure the American public, I think they would agree with you and me in theory,

but I don't know that they'll buy in and practice. Yeah, it's a good point, Will. I mean, look, I think that one of the things that is fundamental that must happen are conversations like this. a willingness just to talk and to ask the question, what does it mean to be an American? And how have things gone so off the rails? If you are just actually willing to educate and to help engage in open, honest discussions without accusations of racism or anything else being tossed your way,

the American people just pursue this from an intellectually honest perspective, a true seeking endeavor, where they just start to ask questions and they start to hear about some of these concepts. What's been beaten in their head for years and years and years from all kinds of different sources, including on the right, including on the left, is that all immigration is great. It's all good. It all helps boost GDP. It's all good.

We all came from somewhere. We're a nation of immigrants. And while there's aspects of those statements, you know, there can be good immigration, and increasing GDP can be good, but it has to be done the right way. And it has to be done the right way. And you have to understand the costs and the benefits that are associated. with anything in life. And so I think one of the most critical things that we can do to encourage this conversation or to encourage a better future for our country, one that is

based upon love of America, the ability to assimilate, the ability to be productive members of society is we have to engage in these honest discussions where we just talk about the ideas and help people understand. Well, I'll tell you, I spent a number of years in my life working for ICE as a lawyer in handling cases in immigration court. One of the things that's really interesting is that amongst the people who go to work for ice, you can be a staunch conservative or you can be a bleeding heart liberal, but they all end up at the same place after a couple of weeks, after a few months. They all recognize the need to enforce the laws and what happens to a country, to a nation, to a society, when you let

individual decisions based on, you know, toxic empathy, animate your decisions and you expound that and let the interest, compound interest, so to speak, occur over society when you don't do what's just required to be done by the law. And you do it without bias, you do it without prejudice, you do it just because it's the right thing to do. And you're able to divorce recognizing the human value, the unique human value and dignity that each human being deserves on this earth. but divorcing that from a discussion of should you be a member of the American community. Those are two very different questions. Yes.

Well, I hope we can continue this conversation. This has been a fascinating one. Gene Hamilton is the president of America first legal. He used to work for President Trump as Deputy White House counsel. So let's continue the conversation, Gene. Thanks for hanging out with us today. Thanks very much. Well, all right, there he goes.

Gene Hamilton. Coming up, Fox News, Digital Investigative reporter Azra Nomani on her deep dive into the man behind the left. Neville Roy Singham on Wilkane Country. All right, you heard me bring up Neville Roy Singham. You've heard us talk about Neville Roy Singham on this program. Over a matter of weeks, yesterday we were joined by Azernamani, who's a Fox News Digital investigative reporter, who's been looking into this man. She's got a five-part investigative series that's being published in stages, the third part posted today at Fox News.com, talking about the money. So a few weeks ago, we started this conversation

talking about the protests on the streets. The cause is fungible. It doesn't matter. It could be anti-ice in Minneapolis. It could be pro-Palestine in New York City. It could be contra the Iran war in Washington, D.C. The same groups show up over and over and over again,

the People's Forum. I'm not even capable of remembering them all code pink. But there is a common tie that binds, and that is the money. And where is the money coming from? And the answer, in this investigative series increasingly comes back to one man. Neville Roycingham. Azra, senior editor of Investigations at Fox News Digital joins us now.

Azra, let's start with Cuba. Let's start with what we saw just in the last two days. I think it has been the last couple of days. This trip to Cuba that included guys like streamer Hassan Piker, very popular on the left, Code Pink, and others. I did it on the show yesterday, Osra. We all kind of laughed. Oh, look at him.

They're staying in five-star resorts. the country's in a blackout, but once again, it's not this cute little thing that just popped up, highly coordinated, highly funded. Right. And what's really important is that the network that Neville Roy Shingham funded was in Cuba days and weeks before this event unfolded, meeting with the Cuba Communist Party leaders, the president, having their own strategy sessions. preceding this. And so it's just like every other protest that has happened, it's all orchestrated. And it also has a very important strategic design. You know, Will, I've not been a China expert all through my career, but boy, have I dive deep into understanding China's priorities in the world? And China is enmeshed in Cuba. China is building ports there. They are, you know, just like the Russia, Soviet Union,

considered it, you know, a great way station to be near the United States. That's what China also sees it as. China is sending rice, you know, to Cuba right now to act like it's the humanitarian actor and all of this. And it's the same story in every other flashpoint, Venezuela. They were building ports in Venezuela. Brazil, they have access there. Sri Lanka, Greenland, they're going after resources. So every flashpoint is one that is of geopolitical importance to China, including Cuba.

And this network is this, you know, these like they kind of, one person calls it information laundering. They end up being able to translate China's priorities into these cute images of women in fuchsia pink, you know, with hearts. standing love Cuba and, you know, they make it so that it's translated into a language that will not shout China. Right. But at the end of the day, that's exactly what this network is trying to protect. Okay. Information laundering, fascinating concept.

We're going to come back to it. I've sympathized with you. Like, you didn't expect for most of your career, you didn't for most of your career, but now you're having to become this, like, Chinese expert because it's hard. Like, I'm read all three parts of your series so far. And it's like the names that you have to keep in your head and keep connecting. And you describe it in your piece as concentric circles because it's shell organization. It's this organization.

It's that organization. Tell me if I'm going to describe this accurately and you help us understand. Neville Roy Singham, the man who made something like $7 or $800 million on ThoughtWorks, you're looking into who funded this. meaning who gave the seed capital, the venture capital, whatever, to start this business thought works that helped him build this company, and then actually how did he exit as well, like who paid for the exit? But he took a lot of those proceeds, and you got the number at $278 million that he's funneled

through these organizations of concentric circles. And I think you've described it as he put it into 11 main organizations, some of which I think we've talked about, right? Like I think the People's Forum is one of those main 11. And then from there, it fractures into 52 or so other organizations. And some of those, at one of those levels at least, includes breakthrough news, who was the streamer, the social media disseminator of everything that this group did in Cuba. Exactly. A-plus, you've definitely processed what I've put out there really well.

And it really boils down to a operation of, you know, trusted people who keep repeating the playbook that they've established of taking advantage of a headline, creating a narrative around that headline that is anti-American, and then presenting this mythology. of the grassroots operation that it is not. It fools so many in the media. That's what's so unfortunate about this is that the bias of the media in failing to report on the far left like they do on the right is really why this has been allowed to happen

for this past almost a decade that Neville Roy Shingham has been funding these organizations. They, you know, I watched the, Yesterday, the lead anecdote in today's story is about this boat that is literally named for the boat that Fidel Castro rode when he launched his communist revolution in Cuba. They're not even subtle about it. And they are just, you know, reported upon by Reuters, AP, all the mainstream media press as if they're just a group of, you know, do-gooders who want to bring rice and bicycles to Cuba. But what they are is part of this larger ideological battle for Cuba.

And it's really, I'm so happy to be at Fox News and doing this work, having you, you know, make Neville Roycingham a household name because, well, you're the person who can do it and you are doing it. And this is, I think, going to be a game changer, this kind of reporting for our country and its future. Well, let's go back to the concept of information laundering. So we talked about essentially the washing machine of how the information goes through, the money.

The money goes through these organizations and then the information is really laid out on the mind of the American people. But behind it, so you trail the money up, you see what the information is that's being laundered. And I can't remember if it's in today's post or yesterday's post. I think it was today's post.

You started talking about something you told us about yesterday. And that is Singham, who lives in Shanghai, his open connection to the CCP. And it's money going back and forth. Like from what I understand you're reporting, like, Singham is paying CCP propaganda arms to create information for them or create different things for them that then goes back through the laundering mechanism. And his partners, some of his partners as well, their direct connection.

And by the way, when I say direct, this is where I feel for you. Because even once you get over to China, it's still shell company, this company, that company. It's all freaking shadows that you have to connect. But here's where it gets overt. Like you said yesterday, you've got Vita. I mean, this is them, what are they doing? Was it singing songs or taking oaths to China's Communist Party and doing all these different things? I mean, once you get back there, even though there's the shell games, there's not hiding the ball on who they are working for.

the CCP. Yeah. Yeah, and you know, you're probably not listening to the international, which is the anthem of the communists worldwide. It was the anthem, national anthem for the Soviet Union. So even when I heard it for the first time in this video, I sent it then to Shee Van Fleet, this brave woman who survived the cultural revolution.

And I said, she, what is this song? Because then I tried Google music, you know, the whole thing, like try to get it to read the, like hear what's being played. So she knew it immediately because she lived through Mao's communist revolution. And she said that's the communist anthem. And that's the song that Neville Roy Singham was standing to and people were pumping their fists in the air just like they were as they arrived on this boat. into the port of Havana yesterday. Right. And so to your point about the money flow,

we have that $270 plus million coming in, starting in 2017. And what we document today in today's article is that three of the nonprofits that Neville Roy Singham helped to fund sent $9 million back to China to this organization called Maku, Shanghai. And it is doing propaganda work for the Chinese Communist Party.

He has a business relationship. It's a person from ThoughtWorks who's actually running Maku. So it's all a spider's web. But the great part about reporting is that at some point, and Google spreadsheets and, and the data analytics that we can do nowadays is that at some point you can make sense of it. And that's how I was able to make sense of that flow.

Let's take a quick break, but continue this conversation with Fox News Digital's, Azar Namani on this deep investigation on Will Cain Country. Welcome back to Will Cain Country. We're still hanging out with Fox News Digital investigative reporter, Azar Namani, who's been diving very, very deep on the money behind the left, and the man connected to the CCP, Neville Roy Singham.

That's my challenge. You're going to be with us today on the Fox News channel and I've talked to my team. You have to make this visual. We have to be able to show the connections. In fact, in order to do that, let's do this right now. We have video of this of this communist anthem. It may or may not show Neville Roy Shingham and his partner and what you're describing. But let's take a look at exactly what's being described by Osirnomi. There is the flash of a person with the bald head. There he is. There's 10 seconds. Yeah, there you go. Okay, so this is the communist anthem. Dan, re-wrack that and see if you can pause it on Neville Roy Shingham. Do you know what he looks like, Dan? He's kind of tan, he's bald-headed, he's of Sri Lankan descent.

You'll see him. He's about midway into that video. About 10 seconds, yeah. You'll be able to, so the audience can see what he looks like. So what we're watching there, Ozzy, that is the communist anthem. Yeah. And that's in Shanghai at the, the Tulip Hotel, the Golden Tulip Hotel.

Right there. Yeah. The man on the right is Neville Roy Singham, right, Azra? Well, I can't see the video. Okay, you can't see it. But it is him. I've seen pictures of him in your articles. That is him on the right.

I was shocked. Well, when I found this video, which I just stumbled upon, you know, one rabbit hole leads to another, I was shocked to see him standing in the middle of this conference, because he has been such a recluse in all of this. Like we know the George Soros name because George Soros is out there basically, you know, and his son is doing selfies everywhere. But Neville Royceingham seems to be pretty low-key and public facing. His wife, Jody Evans, one of the co-founders, are Code Pink,

seems to be, you know, one of the front people for this whole effort. But the other part that I'm advocating that we show on, your show tonight today is where neville roy singham speaks for five minutes and in one sentence he talks you know declares the alignment that he's got with the chinese communist party i want to see that we definitely need to play that but you know what's funny about that clip too and what was confusing to me it's the one yeah the five minute and then um but i think i sent it to you guys with um with just the one minute. Okay.

But what's funny about that, you said? What's crazy is, and this took me hours also and really days to disseminate because you always want to be fair, of course. Like you don't want to leap to conclusions. Okay, so he's standing in Shanghai, but, you know, maybe he's just hanging out in Shanghai. Well, what he does in his sentence about his, you know, belief in the path forward that the president she has of China has for the nation is he refers to the Communist Party of China, CPC.

I always have to say it aloud to myself. So Will, you probably don't know what the CPC is. It took me days to figure this out too. I went back to my cultural expert, Xi, and the CPC is how China refers to the Communist Party of China. Okay. So somehow, decades ago, State Department people started referring it to it as a Chinese Communist Party, and that's how we've inherited this acronym CCP.

But when you really look at the propaganda of the Singham Network and of Tri-Continental, one of the co-sponsors that Singham funded for this conference, they always refer to the CPC, and that's how China refers to. You talk about this one sentence. And I think we have it, you have the one-minute version, Dan? Okay. Okay, we've got to cut up into two different videos. Okay, let's play them, and then we can get Osir's response.

Go ahead. The international rules-based order was created by another lie, which was that the fascists were all protected by the Americans and put into power in their countries, in Japan, and in Italy. If we want to, therefore, have a new world's order that is based on multilateralism that President Xi, and CPC and China have proposed, we have to undo the ideological damage that has been done by the narrative of World War II. Okay, okay.

So we want a multilateral rules-based order presented by President Z and the CPC and undo what we learned or came out of from World War II. Yeah. Again, I'm not a World War II expert, but boy, do I know now what he's talking about? about. He is basically argued also in this 178-page document that he released under his own name that it was not the United States and the Western Allies that won World War II, which he renames the anti-fascist war. But it was actually China who kept Japan at bay so that the Soviets could then defeat Germany. And that in one of the most shocking lines of his report, he said, says that only one percent of the debts in World War II were, quote, Anglo, what does he call

them Anglo Americans? Yeah, Anglo Americans. So the Anglo is the British and then the Americans. Well, it's true. A bunch of Chinese died in World War II, right? A bunch of Chinese died. Yeah, they did die. Yeah. But what, what he's doing is what they do, which is, you know, he is diminishing the West, right? He's also really also calling America fascist in this argument because he's basically arguing that America and the United Kingdom actually propped up fascism. And so China then becomes the great state that has the hero mythology and the West becomes the doomsday cult that they are trying to free the people of the world from. And that multipolarity is kind of gobbledygook in geopolitical talk, but it's inherited from

the Cold War era of creating a non-aligned movement, which was never actually non-aligned. It was aligned with the Soviet Union usually. And that's what Fidel Castro stoked. And that's, it's like, even as I speak to you, Will, I can't even believe that we're like going back into the, you know, history books like this. But that's where they live. They live like that to resurrect. Well, we've always heard that China thinks in hundreds and thousands of years terms, not in a decade's term. You have one more video, Dan? Let's listen to one more. Is this Neveroy sing them? Let's listen one more time to sing them. This fascist lie that the West

says that there's a battle between fascism, democracy, and communism. They make a fake argument that there are three systems. I think Vijay has done a very good job of explaining that in fact, fascism is actually a face of capitalism and imperialism, as is colonialism. These are the three faces of a system that quite now is getting very, very dangerous for us. Well, that's really interesting. That's really interesting. He does not distinguish between, basically democracy, which is the catchword of the left, and fascism. Right. And, Will, like, you know all these signs I've shared with you, in your audience. One of them says that, you know, socialism is the answer to fascism. Like,

that is why we started hearing over the last few years, this, you know, equating of American democracy to fascism. When I heard that line, I was like, oh, my gosh, okay, now the narrative warfare makes sense. Like, how did it get on these signs that America is a fascist state? Like, how did that even enter into the equation? Well, you know, what's interesting, I don't, I don't, First of all, I think that democracy is over-closied. I mean, America is a constitutional republic. We're not a democracy. But whatever.

That distinction is a distinction without a difference to never really sing him. Because he sees it in a, what I gather from that is he sees it as a dichotomy. There's only really two faces on the earth, communism or fascism. You are one or the other. That's a really good point. It's a false binary. And that's that simplicity that we've seen on the streets of America also, right? there has been no middle ground and you know i'm sure a lot of people have seen that messaging

of these protests and just scratch their heads wondering like wow you guys are like black or white like this is crazy like cops are good or cops are bad you know like it's just um yeah everything's fascist yeah yeah and like so they go to such extremes but this is their narrative warfare and and back to that term of information laundering I talked to Xi also about China's positioning about World War II. And she said, what he is expressing is exactly the narrative that China. And that's the point, right? In the end, that's the main point.

The point is, is information laundering. You're tracing the money. You're tracing the organizations. And we see it on our 24-hour news cycle as these little protests and these people that we laugh at or whatever it may be on the streets of America or on their boat trips to Cuba, but it traces back to essentially the long propaganda war of Xi Jinping, of Mao Zedong, of China. Yeah.

Yeah. And, you know, they, of course, consider Marx a hero. Lenin is a hero. So there is a history route back to Soviet propaganda and Soviet ideologist. But you know, my dad, he's 93 years old, and he lived through World War II, right? He lived through this history. And I was talking to him about this will. And he said that Mao actually was when he, Mao, you know, the history of Mao is that he

kind of hung out. And then he claimed China after, and he took it from the actual popular leader, Chiang Kai Shack, who then escaped slaughter, basically, that Mao would have done to his troops. And my dad said that when Mao took over, he remembers that the Soviet Union was so excited that they were going to get their communism into China. But Mao very famously then was like, no, we're going to have our own brand of communism. And that's exactly what she is now selling, China socialism. You know, like, I went to Shanghai for one day. It's a whole other story.

But went to the McDonald's, you know, saw the capitalism taking root. you know, playing out on the streets as and the kind of confusion that it seemed they had on their economic model. But at the end of it all, that's what now somebody like Neville Roy Singham is putting into the world is China's version of that communism. Well, Osir Damani's also written the book Woke Army, the Red Green Alliance is destroying America's Freedom. Hey, Osra, I just wanted to, before we go, saw this. I don't know if it was a meme, Instagram, I don't know, and it said, you know, socialists think they're using Islamists to effectuate a socialist future. Islamists are using socialist to effectuate an Islamist future. So it was interesting

in that, you and I've talked about the Red Green Alliance, right? But what a short-lived alliance. It's a marriage of convenience with two very different outcomes. Very different. And there's one name that nobody, will remember, but his name was Ali Shariati, and he was a socialist in Iran. He actually built an alliance with Ayatollah Khomeini to have the 1979 revolution. He helped bring the Islamists to power in Iran and this near five decades of terror that they've had on their own people. And who was one of the first victims of Khomeini? It was this man, Ali Shariati. And all the other socialists and leftists, they slaughtered them.

Which is, by the way, the story of not just Islamism's relationship to socialism, but the story of communism. I mean, ask Trotsky. How does this all go eventually? There's one man left standing. It's Stalin. It will not be Stalin and Trotsky. It's a fascinating investigation, Ozra. I know you got part four coming tomorrow. We're excited to talk to you about later today. Hopefully we can lay this out visually for the audience on the Will Kane show. Thank you, as always, Azra. Thank you, Will. Thanks for doing all that you do to educate everyone. There she goes. Azanamani, Senior Editor of Investigations at Fox News Digital. All right, boys. Yesterday, I got a message from a member of the Williscia.

I sent it to you guys, Pat and Dan. And she is in radio terms what you call a P1. I got to find it really quickly. And she's... From Monday. She gave us a little critique on our show. What is today? say?

Um, where is it? I sent it to you guys. I've got it somewhere here. And Will, where is it? Got to photos. She said, I'm glad to have Will Kane back on the Will Kane show. However, way too long interview. This was with longevity expert, David Asprey. Lots happened last week, and only 10 to 15 minutes of banner. It wasn't enough. Need to keep your guest 25 to 30 minutes, not 52 minutes, and she tags the deuce, which is tinfoil pat. It is Florida Petty guy. They like our banter? Elise Winters.

Elise, yeah. Yeah, she wants more tinfoil pat, more two-a-days, Dan, less experts. Wow. Who would have thought? What's everybody? You know, when you come back from vacation, that is an interesting thing. Should you catch up on everything that you missed and, like, have some thoughts on everything I missed?

And or you just, there's just so much. Do you do that? Like that night before you go back in? A little, but I don't go back like multiple days. I mean, I do pay attention. I scroll while I'm sitting on the beach. But, you know, I said 24-hour news cycle, just now to Ozra. Like, what are we actually in?

Really, like, honestly, what are we actually in? Six hours. I think at the most. Yeah. At the most, we're in a six-hour news cycle. The joke of the 24-hour news cycle is just, way dated. Like, yeah.

So when I come back... When I come back, it's like jumping on a treadmill. I mean, can I take the time? I should. I should because it's like, you're not jumping back into a news cycle, you're jumping back into a relationship.

And the relationship is like, how you been? That's the relationship I have with you, whoever's watching or listening. How you been? What have you been doing? What are you been thinking about? What did you see this?

It's not, did you see what happened in the last three hours? Right. But... Well, you missed the Bachelorette drama. so that's fine. Yeah, I did. Don't know anything about it.

Oh, she threw a metal stool at her guy. Oh, it was a whole long story. Those were a few years ago, but now it's back and the canceled Bachelorette. It's the whole thing. I hate that I know about it, but I do. I have a wife, so. It's all good for The Bachelor, right? All that drama?

They lost $150 million. Oh, maybe it's not all good. They canceled the whole season. Yeah, but maybe they'll get like $300 million next year. Maybe. Next go around. It's more attention, more relevance for it. That's true.

But I guess it doesn't need it. I mean, that is one of the cultural. touchstones that never touched me. Like, it's one of the things, if you said, okay, over the last 20 years, would have been the cultural touchstones that, like, mass consumption. Like, I did the Avengers.

I did all that because I had two boys. You know, I watched all the Avengers stuff. I miss all the girl cultural touchstone stuff. I do. Like, I literally, honestly, have very little knowledge about Taylor Swift, other than Travis Kelsey. And, I mean, I'm not doing,

a thing because I'm not saying I think this makes me cool. I hate it when guys do that. I don't know if I can name a Taylor Swift song. I know that I would recognize them. I know that. If you played them, I bet I'd recognize what I recognize half a dozen? Would I recognize a dozen? Taylor Swift songs? No. I bet you could recognize two. That's all? Maybe two or three. I bet I would recognize more. Do you listen to the radio radio ever? Like you just have it on? Shake it off. name, shake it off. All that's over a decade old. 15 years ago. Okay. Now I can tell you about, now I can tell you boys about Ella Langley. I bet you can. She's having a moment right now. That choose in Texas song, boy, I'm getting, I got this

real the day of these two black guys sitting in the car and it comes on and they're just kind of like look at each other for a moment and they're like, you like this? Yeah, I like this. And they both just start singing it. And the thing is like, when you find out your boy likes you. choose like Ella Langley. You don't have to hide it anymore. I have no idea what you're talking about. Come on, Patrick. See, he's doing it.

He's doing it right now. Are you doing the thing? He's doing the thing. He knows. You're too cool? There's no way. I literally have never heard her until you mentioned her right now. You're two counterculture.

His alga hasn't put thrown Ella Langley in his face. You're two sex pistols to know Ella Langley. Living, well. People like country in Jacksonville, Florida. Come on. Listen to choosing Texas. Choose in Texas. It's, you have to drop the G. Choose in Texas. It's an awesome song, Patrick. Regardless, like, it's a great song. And I don't gravitate to female artists. Again, I'm not doing a thing. And just, maybe that makes me sexist. I don't know. But I don't relate.

It's relation to them in the same way I relate to a male singer. That doesn't mean, there are great female singers that sometimes I, I, truly dig, not just because of the way they look, because of the way they sound. But this Ella Langley song has hit another level of like, you know, it's probably broken through more than any female song I can, female artist performs song that I can think of for me. Well, the thing is before that, it was like the carry underwoods. I'm going to key up your car type stuff, which we can't relate to. Yeah, right. What am I going to do with that? Yeah, exactly. So I like Casey Musgraves. She really, I like her as a female singer A lot.

Yeah. I know she covered neon moon, but you can't beat Brooks and Dun on neon moon. That's true. I might have heard it's on Instagram or something. What is in the news that you want to talk about today, tinfoil?

As I understand it, a pack of dogs. Well, it doesn't just any pack of dogs. So these dogs, I had this all ready for yesterday. These dogs were stolen from the same neighborhood. Do we have the video, I believe?

Playing right now. There's no audio, but these pack of dogs escaped from a moving van that had kidnapped them all from the same neighborhood and was taking them to a dog meatpacking facility in China. And they walked back 11 miles. The German Shepherd is injured, so they formed a pack around the German Shepherd, and they were led by the Corgi. This is something out of a Disney movie. This is literally homeward bound mixed with Beethoven. It is totally a Disney movie. Yeah.

So the German Shepherd's hurt and they're like guarding the German Shepherd? Yeah, they're protecting him. By surrounding him? Yeah. How amazing. Which also, speaking of deportation, whoever stole those dogs, I don't care if you're American citizen, you're gone. Well, this is China.

So there are a couple tweaks I'd make. Oh, I would have it. Yeah, I would have it. And there technically it's legal to eat dog. so I would have it in America if I was making this into a movie I'd have about three dogs that are the main dogs

because, you know, like the corgi the German Shepherd is and one other dog How's the corgi the alpha? How's the corgi the alpha? That's what's funny about it. The queen loves corgi so I don't know. Have you, do you guys, are you familiar with King Charles?

The Spaniel? No. The king? The dog. That is a dog. dog. With King Charles. I believe it's King Charles.

Have you guys not seen the videos of King Charles? Oh, yes, he says. The one that walks in and everyone bows down to him. It is awesome. Yes. Yes. It is awesome. Patrick, you know what we're talking about?

It's crazy. No idea. It's a pound. It is, it's like gated, I don't know if it's a pound. It's like one of these facilities where like 20 dogs live, right? 30 dogs live in this like gated yard. Right? And these dogs, I don't think they know each other.

that much. They probably are transient. They come in and out. And certain dogs come in with a certain attitude and they start like trying to exert their alpha. And then at times they'll get in fights with each other. But the videos are always of King Charles coming in and like putting it down. And King Charles is very Disney generic looking. He's not small, but he's not big. He's a little scraggly and long haired. There's nothing about him that looks tough. He's not a German shepherd. He's not a Doberman Pincher, he's not a Rottweiler, but boy, does he submit all those breeds. He comes in, swag, saunter, and he puts these dogs down with his energy. I mean, I'm telling you, they cower. And when he walks, the crowd parts, like the big dogs

stop fighting, and they clear a path for King Charles to come through. And if any dog steps up to him in the slides, he really doesn't have to attack him much. He attacks him a little. But it's like, He just, here's a video of King Charles right now. Where is King Charles? Is he not in the picture yet? Here he comes. Here he comes. That's him right there.

Oh, oh, okay, we're done. I'm sorry. Look at that dog cower. That dog was in the face of the other dog, barking like he wanted to attack. Look at the big gigantic, what is that, a King Corso? Look at him. He bows.

He bows as King Charles is walking by. He literally bows. The king is here. Oh, yeah. Then there's the German Shepherd, like, alerting to everybody. He was sleeping and he's like, oh, here comes Charles. And then look at that.

Oh, and then he just puts that dog down on his back. It is so amazing. He doesn't snarl. The dog on the ground on his back is snarling, but not Charles. He's just standing over the dog. It's wild. That is the definition.

How are they trained that way? Like, how does that happen in the animal kingdom? What are you talking about? But it's a smaller animal. You know what I mean? Like, No, it's all about, you just have to walk in there. It's like when I was in New York and, you know, everybody grabbed me there.

You know. Yeah. You just have to walk in with the right energy. Yeah. You've heard, Dan, it's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog. True. Somewhere along the line, Charles must have been tested.

Somewhere along the line, he had to have been tested. And everybody saw what happened. It brought like a bear. And my suspicion is it happened two or three times, and it was decisive in those two. or three times. Yeah. And now it's over. Now everybody wants no part of it, including that gigantic King Corso that just totally

bows and lays down. That they could bite King Charles and kill it in two seconds. But no, it can't. It cannot. But in this situation, in China, it's the corgi that is the leader. All right. Yeah, that's a good Disney movie, tinfoil. Yep.

We also have a good one, good story. of Maryland there was a debate on the floor of I believe their house where some people want appropriate sized tampons in men's restrooms menstrual hygiene products means appropriately sized tampons what are appropriately sized tampons I've never heard of such a thing what do you consider appropriate it just means that tampons are offered there's no specific size Well, apparently there's four different sizes, so which one would you like them to use? Just a regular-sized tampon in the bathroom. God.

I don't know why we're having these discussions anymore. I have a lot of gross places I could go with this, and I can't help but think about it. When they said appropriately sized, I'm not, I am not being wizard. salacious or juvenile. I'm not being juvenile. Look, my brain's where all of your brains are. We all are. Okay? You want tampons in the dude's bathroom. For a dude that identifies as a girl, I guess. Or is it the opposite? For a girl that identifies as a boy, so she's going to use the boys restroom, but she still needs a tampon. Is that the... That one. It's that one? Yeah. Are you sure it's that one?

I don't think so. Like a biological female that identifies as a man, But still needs a tampon? I'm guessing, yeah? Having read enough 4chan in various things like that, I think it's for men who try to convert to femalehood to leave at the app periods. You know exactly where they put it, Dan. You know exactly where they put it.

And I think Patrick's right. There is a segment of this. I'm not saying it's 100% that is doing that. That in the pantomiming of femalehood, they're going as far as saying, I need to use a tampon as well. Well, where are you going to put it? You know where I'm going to put it. Well, then I need an appropriate size tampon.

And I'm telling you, I'm not being juvenile because why would the words appropriate-sized appear? That woman asking that man, that question is exactly right. What is appropriate-sized? And then he doesn't want to deal with it. He's like, I don't know, regular. She's like, well, what's regular? There's four sizes, and you've said here, it needs to be appropriately sized. And he's like, he's now on ice skates in the middle of the pond, and he can feel the cracks in the ice.

He knows it's over. And the funny thing is, it didn't even take much. Like, he skated straight to center ice, and he'd never skated before. So he's all over the place, and he doesn't know what to do. But somewhere in some room, someone drafted that language, and someone said, we need to put in. quote, appropriately sized. Okay? And when that came up in the room,

this same conversation took place. What do you mean appropriately sized? Well, you know what I mean, because sometimes these guys are putting them up there. Oh, and then some other person taking themselves seriously goes, oh, you're right. So in that case, we need... I don't even know.

What do you need now? Smaller? Could they offer a pad option, maybe? Smaller? Like, I'm not being juvenile. I'm telling you what a... America's talking about behind some closed doors at damn school board meetings. That is wild.

That's how that happened, Dan. You know that, right? There's no reason that language would have appeared appropriately sized other than the conversation we're having right now because the female is the one going, what does that mean? What are you talking about? And it's making a small amount of people comfortable and making the majority of people uncomfortable.

It's making nobody comfortable. No one. Not one single person. Not one. Even the dude that is in the bathroom who says, I'm a female now, so I need a tampon, has never said which one's the appropriately sized one. It's like zero people were made comfortable by this. That's true. Even the person who drafted this, who was trying to be whatever they're trying to be virtuously, was uncomfortable doing this. So that's the insanity. That is the insanity. Do you think I'm wrong?

Is it zero or is it possible? There was one. One dude somewhere goes. The problem here is, not that you don't have tampons, but they're not appropriately sized. Well, if you ever go on Reddit, they're probably more than zero. Right, but in schools, they take this legitimately, Patrick? Yes. They usually come in pairs, I would say.

We really are getting into some freak fetish stuff. Yes. Yeah, that's really what it is. Yes. So, wake up, America. Tim Walts would like it. Where was that? That was Maryland.

Wake up, Maryland. Wake up. Crapcakes and football and tampons. Mai Tai offer denatralization? Full circle again. Full circle again. That's what we do here on Will King Country. That's going to do it for us today, live from New York City.

We'll see you again again from New York City tomorrow. Same time, same place. Follow us on Spotify or Apple. We'll see you next time. Listen to ad-free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcast. And Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad-free on the Amazon Music app.