Will Cain Country - Are We Rushing to Judgment on the Cornell 7? (ft. Michael Malice & Cody Tucker)

Episode Date: September 30, 2026

Sunny Hostin is breaking with her co-hosts on The View over the allegations surrounding the “Cornell 7,” arguing that the story being told online doesn’t line up with the accuser’s original statement. Vince August fills in for Will and is joined by Michael Malice and Cody Tucker to debate consent, intoxication, trial by social media, and whether people have already decided the case before all the facts are known. Plus, the crew breaks down the surprising new defense strategy in the Lindsay Clancy case, how far fans should be allowed to go when heckling professional athletes, whether AI is changing the way humans actually talk and think, and why Americans don’t seem to invite people over anymore. 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

Welcome, everybody, to Will Kane Country from New York City. Vince August sitting in for Will Kane, who was suspended like another Texas Longhorn player for excessive celebration. I'm making a good point on yesterday's podcast. No, actually, I don't even know what hell Will is. Where is Will today? Does it matter? It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

Because we have two amazing guests, and I want to make sure I get your credits right. Michael Malice, host of Your Welcome, author of Unwanted, A Tall Tale of Old World. West and New Wave graphic novel, author of Not Sick of Winning, The White Pill, and the new right you can see him on X at Michael Mous. And Cody Tucker, good to see you again, brother. Comedian, author of and Now You Know, mind-blowing stories from history and pop culture, host of Rewind and Repeat with Cody Tucker and the Cody Tucker show on Instagram at the Cody Tucker and YouTube at the Cody Tucker show.

Gentlemen, thank you for joining me today. Welcome. Good to be back, man. Good to see you. We're jumping right in the soup, boy. We got a good one for you guys. Ready? Ready?

Let's get right into a sexual assault case covered by Sonny Hoistin on the view. I don't even know how do you say her. Hosten. Austin. Austin. Sonny Hosten of the view. I don't know if you guys saw the clip. Dan, let's start with the clip and then we'll get into our feelings on it and then play more clips.

Their current New York State law, voluntary and talk. or drug use, and she voluntarily drank a lot. She voluntarily took snorted ketamine off of one of the boys' body parts. Even though she was highly intoxicated when she arrived at the frat house. She was highly intoxicated, but had made plans to meet one of the young men. She allowed other boys and consented to other boys snorting ketamine off of her body. And under New York law, voluntary and

intoxication or drug use that merely impairs judgment does not legally constitute an inability to consent to sexual activity, right? So that means if you voluntarily ingest drugs, you voluntarily take alcohol, you can agree to have threesomes, which in her statement, she agreed to have two separate threesomes. All right. So full candor, so everyone who's watching knows my background. I worked for the New York Attorney General's office while at New York law school. So I prosecuted cases. It was for the anti-trust department. After that, I was a criminal defense attorney. I actually tried two rape cases.

And I was a municipal court criminal judge for six years. So I've sat in all of its chairs in the courtroom just so everyone knows what my perspective is on this. Just to set up the case now in case our guests aren't fully familiar with it and the people watching. apparently in 2024, this allegation was investigated and the prosecutor's office declined to bring the charges against the accused. Within, I guess, the last year, a civil case was filed by the woman in the case. Now, when a civil case goes filed, everyone sees it, it's public. And that has led to now potential charges being brought. the key to this. The original story, which Sonny just told, and the story that appears to be in the

civil suit, are two completely different stories. So my perspective on what Sonny said, just to get this thing started, assuming she's right about what New York law states, I always come from the place. And guys, you tell me if I'm wrong, why don't we just sit back and wait till we hear facts before we immediately start indicting people, before we start throwing people in jail, and worst of all, doxing people. I mean, Michael, you want to jump in here? I'm sure you have feelings on this.

Sure. I don't know if I have feelings, but I've used, no pun intended. My all-time hero, Camille Polly, I made this point that feminism has this bizarre perspective where women are allowed to be in any space that they want under any consequence they want and never have to have any consequences and responsibility for it.

I think that New York law, as you said, she had stated correctly, is very well advised. I think it's horrific to have legally the possibility that if a female has a drink, we're 20, and the next day she regrets it, young men's lives could be ruined. This is part of, as gross as might be for me to say it out loud,

this is part of the college process, where people get drunk, they hook up, just because it's a little bit not missionary. Somehow she gets to have people's sympathy, I think is horrible. And I'm surprised and gladden, frankly, that Hosten would realize this is a question of what the law says and not what anyone's personal opinions is of frat boys or of, you know, loose college girls.

And let's make this clear because immediately people jump on things and hear things that no one in this room is saying and no one in this podcast is saying in which no one is condoning sexual assault, no one's condoning rape. Let's put that out there before we start getting attacked. There's, oh, here we go, guys immediately defending guys. No one is saying that.

What we're talking about is this specific statute, these specific circumstances. And Michael, you made a great point. Cody, jump in here because, you know, there comes a point of, again, when you go out, when you drink, you have to take responsibility for your actions while you're drinking if you're at a level of, again, impairment as opposed to just you don't know anything that's going on.

Yeah, you can't, you know, consume what she was consuming and really function with any kind of, you know, intelligence. Like, you can't make rational decisions. So naturally, you're probably going to do some things that you might regret the next day. but regret should not get people put in prison. And there are people who, you know, college campuses are filled with people who are doing actual sexual assaults, actual rapes, drugging people against their will. Let's go towards those people. Right.

I mean, it's, you know. You're saying colleges are full of people getting a roofie? Is that what you're just saying? We have a news flash. They're telling us talking about it. If you go online, you would think that's happening. happening. I mean, it does happen.

Yeah. I mean, I'm not saying that it's just like- You said colleges are people getting mass roofied? What colleges are getting mass roofied? No, I'm not saying that everybody- It happens, though. Shows up to class is getting roofied, but there are, I mean, there are tons of parties

where people are getting roofied. I've seen a few. Tons of parties? Look, I don't. I mean, I don't have numbers, Dan. If you want to try to do a quick search for us in terms of, you know, the incidents that are happening. Name one college.

where people are getting mass roofied. Well, I never said one was getting mass roofied. But I can name a few that people are getting roofied. I mean, we just saw... Yeah, we just saw Penn State has got a whole cocaine ring going on there. Yeah. Do you think cocaine's the same thing as real hypol? No, but I think what Cody's point is,

is look, the fact that people are going, young people are going into bars, and whether it's college age or somewhere in that ballpark and someone's slipping something in their drink, I don't think this is a new story. I don't think this is not a fantasy. That's not a thing that doesn't happen in these huge numbers like people would have you believe. And it's kind of horrific to imply that there's huge numbers of women in these colleges and probably men who are getting federal hypol.

Well, listen, that's not the case here anyway. Just so we're clear, that's not what happened here. What happened here is, again, this was voluntary, as I understand it, voluntary intoxication, voluntary drug inducement. then she got to a point where whatever was happening in the room. And as I understand, again, if there's anyone out there that knows the story better to me on the comments, Dan, keep an eye. One guy tried to stop whatever was going on in the room and actually said, stop this. I don't know that she ever did.

And again, it becomes this point of, well, where does her mental capacity kick in as to what she knew what was going on? And when did it diminish to a point beyond what would be, I guess, whatever level of intoxication you want to call it. And look, there's, you know, you're buzzed, you're impaired. Then you're, you're full-blown drunk where you don't have control of your faculties. You don't have control of what's going on. And then as a guy in that situation, again, I've never been in a situation.

How do you know the person is to a point where she's not coherent at all? Obviously, if they're passed out, you know what the hell's going on. But if they're speaking with you, if they're engaging, with you, at what point do you know this is volitional or not because it's impairment? Anybody jump in? You're acting as if the guys are all sober as well. So if the guys are blackout drunk and she's blackout drunk, why is it on the guy to kind of have to face legal consequences?

Right. Yeah, that's another point. Great point. I don't know that. We know that what their impairment level was. Because as far as I know, you know, the investigation basically fell on her state. and her testimony, and it never went past that. So now it's a renewed investigation.

And listen, whenever you have these cases and they're two years old to go back and reconstruct this stuff also is really tough because you do have this two-year window of testing memories and saying, look, who remembers what happened back then? And Michael, you just made a great point. What if these guys were drinking too? And what if they were drinking? Now you're testing a memory of a guy two years ago was buzzed on a particular. night. I mean, good luck trying to get them.

I don't know the case, the circumstances of this case, but it's sure, if this is a civil case, as you said earlier, not a criminal, this sounds like a shakedown. This sounds like, hey, if I don't get paid off, I am going to make your names public, your lives will be ruined. Whenever anyone Googles you for the rest of your life, this is the first thing that's going to come up, that you're drunk and rapist. People are going to imply that you roofied this girl, although there's no implication in reality of that, even by her own statement. And this is a very effective legal mechanism to get a lot of money. And I'm sure some of these kids who go to these fancy colleges come from money. So that's what I'm seeing here. And people online are doing that

for them. I mean, people are doxing them and doing that. And you can't even have a conversation online. I tried to have a conversation with my wife and her friends last night about it. And I just tried to bring up the point you were saying like, hey, you know, we don't know who did what and what happened. They're like, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. They're guilty. They're guilty. They're, you know, that's it. And this is for either one of you. Dan, the chat, whoever. I mean, how much of it plays into the fact of the college? I mean, does anyone think Ivy League school, you know,

you have a certain image of what these guys are, the money? Like you just mentioned, Michael, we have money background here as well. I mean, does that play into this in anyone's mind as far as, you know, immediately finding these types of guys guilty as opposed to if they go to, like, a state school? I don't know how you feel about that. It 100% makes people with, think that they're more likely to be guilty, I think. I think people have this belief that if you

come from money, then you're more likely to, you know, do things you shouldn't do, which is completely unfound. It's ridiculous to think that, but there are people who do believe that. They think there's people who have the perception that people who come from money get away with things. And so I'm sure there's people who, you know, are feeling that way about it, as opposed to this was like a community college or something, you know. Man, especially. Like, I wonder how different the reaction would have been. Well, we saw this with Duke LaCross how many years ago, right?

Wasn't there a similar case there? Yes, exact same thing. I mean, they did nothing wrong and had their lives ruined, yeah. But it's like if it's Duke University versus, you know, Kilgore Community College, like what is the different reaction? You know, I feel like there has to be some difference just in that. We're going to take a quick break here on Will Kane Country. we'll be right back, Vince August,

sitting in for Will Kane with Michael Malice and Cody Tucker. Welcome back to Will Kane country, Vince August filling in for Will Kane. We have Michael Malice, Cody Tucker with us. Do we know if this happened on campus and whether or not the university is a defendant in the civil suit? Yeah, it was at the fraternity, I believe. All right, so potentially the university is also a defendant in this thing.

Yeah, so again, there's another pocket, you know, going along with what Michael said. But they did an investigation with internally, too. So what is that, how does that factor in with, so the police and the DA or whatever didn't find enough evidence based off of that first investigation by the school? So the school does their own investigation for the purposes of securing the campus and the students on the campus. So if they find that you are involved in some type of violation of moral turpitude, they can

throw you off campus because they have a duty and obligation to keep the campus safe from people that whether or not there's a criminal charge or not. So they found something was done, right? Right. So whether or not the DA decides on bringing the case, the university could have expelled these students and they could have kicked them off a campus, which I don't think happened either. And that standard of review is far lower than anything that would happen in a criminal court. This reminds me of Christine Blazy Ford when the Democrats were like, well, they have to have the FBI get a full investigation. It's like, do you want them to have a time machine to go back to party like 30 years ago like literally what does an investigation entail something like this which

happened a while back i don't think there's any denial that intercourse took place so it becomes he said she said and at that point it's like what she had too many drinks so therefore ipso facto she's a victim i don't buy it and i'm glad in that the university and i think this is probably changed in the last 10 years or so i think since um betsy devas kind of changed some of these rules for these universities. I think that's changed that it used to be a presumption of guilt. If there's someone who's salty

about what had happened the night before, she has a lot of power to kind of screw up people's lives. And frankly, women are much more vindictive when it comes to using power as opposed to men who tend to use violence in act retribution. And listen, there's going to be a lot.

And in a civil case, here's the big difference in a criminal case. She's going to have to test. testify. She can be deposed. We're going to take a quick break here on Will Kane Country. We'll be right back. Vince August sitting in for Will Kane with Michael Malice and Cody Tucker. In communities across Canada, hourly Amazon employees earn an average of over $26 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 aboutamazon.ca. Welcome back to Will Cain Country.

Vince August filling in for Will Cain. We have Michael Malice, Cody Tucker, with us. Play another clip from Sunny, because she went on this a little bit too. Go ahead. One boy did walk in. One young man did walk in and say, everybody out.

So there was one person that did that. And according to her statement, three of the young men did not touch her. And so I say all that... But I say all that to say the pictures of these young men who have not been charged, not been adjudicated,

are being plastered all over the internet. I think people are reporting this story inaccurately. I think they're reporting it unfairly. And while this is something that we have to take very seriously, there is no way, according to her statement in 2024, that any prosecutor would have brought forth a face. Yeah, but she was intoxic. See, and that's what I...

Yeah, go ahead, Michael. You know, there's two points. One is, if this girl has such a clear memory that someone's walking and trying to stab a blah, blah, blah, she's not that drunk. She's not blackout drunk. And I think we've all... I can't speak for the rest of the view,

but I've been at points where I've been so drunk in college that I can't put things together that clearly. And you know what I think just clicked in my head? I bet you someone in Sonny's family got accused of something like this. And that's why she's taking this. Don't forget. She was a former federal prosecutor, too. So she's reviewed these cases. She's been... She has absolutely no more... It seems personal. So for her, go on the view and attack and disagree with those other screeching herpes

and go against the party line, that tells me this is something she has personal experience with. It was balzy. It's not just some kind of point of principle of which she has zero. And again, she's going to get cross-examined on this stuff on a deposition because it's a civil case. she can't run and hide from it. So the questions that were just posed there are going to get thrown at her. And she's going to have to answer those questions. Well, how did you remember this contemporaneously then?

But now, two years later, your recollection is what, somehow better than what it was then? I think we're forgetting legal kryptonite, which is white girl tears. So when white girls start crying, the amount of people who trip over themselves to give them whatever they want

is a force on a biblical level. So she really has that going for her, and it's going to be tricky when you have cross-examination and the defendant's lawyers ask her questions, and she starts breaking down, boo-hoo, she's a victim. Let's give her whatever she wants. And before we go to Cody, do we have another clip, Dan? I thought we had one more or two. Yeah, it finishes up here. Yeah.

But she was intoxicated. How did she? Under New York law, again, under New York law, voluntary intoxication. If you voluntarily drink 10 beers and you voluntarily ingest, ketamine, but that intoxication... That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the guys attacked her, whether she's drunk or not. No, no. According to her statement, she says she did...

They did not attack her. Her statement in 2024. She... She consented to the sexual activity. She consented to it according to her own statement in 2024. Now, I prosecuted sex crimes for 10 years. I believe women. I am not saying that we should... I am not saying that we shouldn't believe her.

But in 2024, she said one thing. All right. And now in 2026, she's saying another thing. And I want to jump on this because what Cody said. Again, you know, there's a certain level of responsibility that you take when you're ingesting this stuff. And to what Michael said, again, you know, you have people like we just saw Joy Behar there invent facts out of the hair and say, well, she was attacked. I mean, Cody, I mean, where are we with this thing now? Well, I mean, Joy Bayhar is one of the dumbest human beings to ever walk this planet.

But no, I mean, if I don't understand what is even happening then. I mean, if she says that it was completely consensual, yeah, I was drunk, blah, blah, blah, but, you know, I agreed to do it. I wasn't attack. Okay. Then case closed, problem solved. I mean, something must have happened in the last two years, someone either convincing her that, oh, you know, I bet you could get some money from this. or I don't know, are you sure you consented? Or she was shamed into it.

Like all the women were saying, why aren't you doing more? Some outside influence is causing this to happen right now. And I think that that should just kind of erase, you know, what's happening right now. A lot of people are making the argument to like women that I've talked to that consent can change as well, right? So I know. And so they're saying that. But with the drugs, with admitting that you were on drugs. and alcohol, who knows, but that's another argument people are making.

Well, but it's true. It's true consent can change. And if she was being held down and screaming, stop, that is a very different situation. Right. But as Sonny pointed out, she herself said that's not what happened. So that point, it's amazing how when people, I'm not, you know, when people hear these stories, just, I don't think Joy Behar is being stupid here. I think she's being dishonest.

Right. Because they come to a conclusion they want, which is the frat boys are bad. Then they find whatever, what would get me to that conclusion? Well, they attacked her, which if that were the case, I think all four of us would agree. It's a very different situation if a bunch of guys held down a girl against her will. And she just, that's a story. They were similar with the Carmelo Anthony case. And Jasmine Crockett went on her pocket.

So something goes, oh, and he had this little itty-bitty knife with the blade this big. And it's like if a blade was this big, it's not possible unless you get right in the, I guess, artery to do something like that to somebody. Him in the chest, especially if someone was in shape, they've got some decent pecks. killing them, they're probably not going to need stitches. So it's amazing to what extent people make up stories to reach the conclusions that they want. With Lindsay Clancy as well. And what's the old story? A lie can make itself around the world before the truth even has a chance to come out.

And you know what, Michael, you just mentioned Lindsay Clancy. Let's get into this. Because I don't know if you saw this one yesterday. So now we have what's becoming potentially a new trial. And we have her attorney walking into court yesterday. with an entirely different tactic. Dan, you have a clip for us? So I asked the court to hearken back to the evidence that was presented

and ask yourself, where's the evidence that she did this? Where is the evidence that she did this? You have a situation where Patrick comes home. Iran recalls the evidence that he indicates that when he came home, that he enters the house, he puts the food down on the table, comes back from the restaurant, it's quiet, eerily quiet, as the government indicates in their motion. When you consider the evidence that the government has, you have the exercise bans, you have the woefully deficient DNA, you have the woefully deficient fingerprinting, you have the horrific, ridiculous investigation, using the term loosely by the police,

there was no investigation. It was not even a horrendous investigation. There was no investigation. This entire case is based on speculation. This is absolutely wild to me. And the reason it's wild as an attorney is looking at what this guy did in the first case, knowing you had this 11-to-one jury.

Okay? And now deciding, you know what, that tactic didn't work. for me to get a not guilty. I'm going to go with a completely different tactic. So for me, tactically, as an attorney, my question is, well, you've almost won the case based on the state's inability to prove that she wasn't psychotic at the time. She wasn't having this psychotic episode.

So now you're going to say, you know what? I don't know if I could pull this off again. I'm going to go to a completely different route and go with the OJ defense, which is, you know what, didn't happen. You can't even prove this. That one, it kind of blew my mind because he's painting himself into a different corner.

Isn't it called arguing in the alternative? I figure out what the term is. But legally it says, I'm going to set up one scenario. And if that falls through, I still have a backup scenario. So I would want a defense attorney. The burden of proof, as we all know, is on the prosecution. I want a defense attorney who says, I'm not giving a niche.

you're going to say that my client kill these three kids, you prove it. I'm not conceiving anything and make them do the work. And here's the problem with that is the cases become so public. It's become so known that you have, I mean, this is, who doesn't know about this case? There's public that believes she doesn't do, she didn't do it. Right. So there's so much information out there with regards to the first case. When you do a new trial, and this is basically going to be a brand new trial,

everyone is supposed to understand that whatever was said in that first trial doesn't exist. So this is your starting from scratch. So this doesn't appear to be an insanity defense. It doesn't appear to be a postpart in psychosis defense. Now it appears to be a you can't prove it at all defense. Wait, hold on. Can you clarify for this legally? Can't he say you haven't proven that she did it?

But if you did prove that she did it, she was still psychotic under the case. Can he be doing both at once? Well, here's the trouble with that, Michael. What you're saying is she didn't do it at all. There's no evidence that suggests she did it. And then to say she was psychotic at the same time when she did do it, you have to give up the element. If she did do it.

Right. But to say she was psychotic at the time, then what you're saying is she didn't do it. See, that's the problem here. He's trying to play both sides of that. And they don't work together as defenses. because the postpartant psychotic defense is she didn't have the mental capacity to commit the crime.

You're saying she didn't do it at all. So it's not that she didn't have the capacity. Yeah, please. Because he got her off at least temporarily for the first case, right? Right. So I think the tactic is if you get the jurors confused enough where there's one who thinks she didn't do it at all and a few who thinks she did it but she's psychotic,

they don't reach a consensus. You're not going to get a third trial. If he gets two mistrials, she's going to walk. I see what you're saying, but if you know the first time you were 11-1, why would you bet on something different this time? Why would you take this completely different approach? Because now you're really betting on, again. But to money the water, like Michael said.

Right. Well, you're betting on the internet doing your job for you and you're getting such a tainted jury that people are going to come in there. So confused. Is that a bad bet? I think it is. I don't know. I mean, but you just said everyone knows this fact.

So if he makes it seem like, oh, the facts are what you think. It's confusing. The prosecution never even proof. First of all, they're going to have to waste a lot of time trying to prove she did it. So that is just going to exhaust the jury. And then you're like, okay, we can, even in that hypothetical that she did it, she wasn't a right mind. Now they've got to jump through two hoops to get to that guilty.

All you need is one person on jury. I think the problem there is the husband, because the husband does come in and say, she did it, I don't think she knew what she was doing. So with regards to proving the criminal element of whether or not she did it, you have the husband. But now this lawyer is saying that she wasn't even the right mind when she was admitting that she did it. So that's starting from there and then you go into if she did it. I think the problem here is Patrick Clancy. And I think what Patrick Clancy knows and what he said.

And look, when you have the husband who's saying, look, I know she did it. There's no doubt in my mind she did it. she didn't apologize for doing it. I just think it's a tough gamble to go with a whole new strategy that you don't know will work when one already did to the tune of 11 to 1. But for one, hold out, especially when you know that jury pool is most likely going to be similar to what it was the last time. Cody, feel free to jump in on you?

Why would the jury be similar? Don't you think now that the prosecution are going to do a much better job sifting through those potential juror. You're a judge. Yeah. Like the second time, aren't they going to be like, okay, we got to look out for that one dude who's going to cross his arms and say, screw you to the 11 people. I think you have to look at the area. And if you look at where they are, I think you have a lot of consistency and just, you know, the culture of that area. If you look at Plymouth, I think you're more likely to find if you went down to that public in general, I think you would have had 111 just walking down the street.

So that's where I'm coming from is I think just the demographics of that area tend to have skewed towards going back and having another situation where at best you're going to have a holdout. Right. So they don't have to. Smart for them to be like, okay, like a white man is going to be probably more willing to bend the knee to 11 screeching white women. But a black guy might be more likely to be like, I'm sick of your white women bullshit. So that's who they're going to weed out. And again, knowing your demographic, you're going to be. hard-pressed to find that one guy as a prosecutor who's going to stand up. I mean, you know,

Cody, jump in. Do they have to present like an alternative theory like of who did it if she didn't do it? I mean, they don't have to do that. They can just say, hey, you can't prove it's her, so it doesn't matter. All on the prosecution. It's their case to prove. But even. That's hard as hell, man. Yeah. And even again, with the postparton psychosis defense. The defense attorney did not have to prove anything. He did not have to prove she was suffering from anything. It was up to the state in Massachusetts to prove she was not. And again, that was a tough burden.

And this is why I say to people that watch this case and were like, I can't believe these 11 people. I'm like, no, no, no, no, no, no. Listen, you have to understand what the reasonableness here is that they're looking for. And again, beyond a reasonable doubt, it's not just a doubt. It's a reasonable doubt. can you reasonably believe that someone that did this was suffering from a psychosis? Well, when you think of the crime in and of itself, immediately the first thing that comes

to your mind is what mother in their right mind would do this? Right. Yeah. How would it not be a psychosis of some sort, whether it's postpartum psychosis or something? I mean, it's not a sound mind that kills, you know, kills your own children. As opposed to what mother would commit murder and kill her kids? Well, that we have a ton of examples in the news over the course of history. So that's why, again, Michael, getting back to why you're saying, you know, the question you were asking me is, does it make more sense?

I don't think it does because, again, the reasonableness of a person suffering from psychosis doing this. Yeah, okay, I can have a reasonable doubt to that. But a mom killing her kids. Have we ever heard this before? Yeah, a lot. So that's where I'm coming from, at least in terms of strategy. I think you're thinking as a judge and someone with an informed opinion of the law. Could be.

And you're not thinking as a juror who are like mouth-breathing malcontents who really don't know how to put two and two together. Right. So the more confused they are. I see that. Yeah. I see where you're coming from. The more harder it is to get a consensus, or not consensus, excuse me, unanimity. Right. 12 unanimity.

So I think the more confusing it gets for them, the smarter it is for the defense. But I'm not a lawyer or judge. And then what happens? What happens after this, say it goes to another mistrial. It's done. She's out. Yeah, then you get to a point where states start looking into whether or not it's worth bringing a trial because, you know what? She's already institutionalized.

Can you do bench decision? I don't think. There's no way the attorney would waive a jury. No way. That defense attorney? No. There's no way in that area again. And that's knowing your demographic.

That's knowing where you are. There's no way he would waive. But he would look at facts cold and, you know, without a opinion. There's a possible this is a strategy to try to get a plea too. He could just be looking for a plea deal here and trying to get the lowest possible plea deal he can get just to not try to case again. But I do want to bring it back to our conversation about the other story about the online, because I saw a lot of these posts like all men were so loud about Lindsay Clancy and now they're quiet about this Cornell thing. You know, that's kind of what's happened with this discourse and this online attraction. into these stories and how people talk about them.

I mean, well, you guys tell me, is that because they're afraid to talk because they don't want to be attacked? Or is it because the roles are flipped as to who the defendant is? I'd feel more sympathy if that girl in Cornell was strangled to death. And then people were supporting her stranglers.

So I don't think these cases are now legal at all. And I think it's kind of disturbing how feminists always just take the female, many feminists, as you wouldn't clarify, just inherently take the female side. that's a big function of feminism, which is, you know, women should have the right to always say no, but never be told it. I mean, I like where Cody came from, too, is the frat boy thing.

I don't know how many guys are running to defend frat boys right or wrong just because, again, of that image of what you're trying to defend. Am I right, Cody? Yes. Yeah, I think that there's a, you know, I would say fairly inaccurate, you know, public opinion on what frat boys are. And it's, yeah, if you come to their. defense. I think a lot of people are just immediately going to attack you for taking their defense.

Not everyone, obviously, but a lot of people do. And so people would just say, I think I'm just going to sit this one out, even though they, you know, obviously do feel that way. All right. Let's lighten it up and move to an almost criminal case that happened last night. And where else do we go for violence and, you know, basically modern day roller derby, but the WNBA. Michael's favorite thing. So last night, typical of the WNBA, we have an incident that happens on the court with a player and not another player this time, but a fan. Dan, can you roll that?

Fowl is called, and it's going against Cunningham. We have another angle after those two, but. And Wilson with some words to say to a fan. Behind the basket. after brutally fouling Sophie coming out. For something they said. So here's the other angle. Yeah, the other angle's more telling.

So watch this. So you're watching so you could see the guy standing pointing at her because she made an obviously intentional foul. So can you guys see that? Michael and Cody, can you see that? Oh, yeah. So there's a woman pulling the guy down to sit down right there. Yeah.

All right. So a lot of opinions on this, I'm sure, are going to come flying as to who's right, who's wrong with regards to. Let's start with the fan because none of us here are professional players. None of us walk into that environment knowing what the player is going through. So from a fan perspective, where are you guys with regards to how far can you go as a fan? And Cody, I'm going to jump on you because you're a Texas guy. This is, you know, rabid football country, college football country down there. I mean, at what point are you a fan and at what point are you really creating a problem? Once you step on the court, I think, is a problem.

I think if you're behind the line, yeah, think you're doing all right. I mean, if you're not, you know, if you're not throwing something at him or doing, you know, pointing at someone yelling, whatever, get over it. I don't think he crossed any line. Yeah, I mean, he didn't cross any line and it would be the same for any sporting events. It's not just a WMBA thing. I mean, just, you know, that's kind of what part of one of the things you're paying for when you sit, you know, relatively court side is you get to kind of have that interaction. And yeah, I'm sure it's annoying for the players, but boo-hoo, you know, you'll be all right. Michael, are there fighting words that go beyond anything that you could say from the stands that it's like, all right, that is too far.

I mean, do you feel like a fan can go across the line just with words or no? In Europe, they wave bananas at the black soccer players. Yeah, it's insane. So it is insane to, and any one of us, the bigger your platform, the more you see it, on social media, gets told the most horrific things, including attacks on your children, parents, grandparents, and siblings. So this, and you know what else? this broad's full of crap because this is like hold me back bro hold me back bro she wasn't going to do

crap that guy could have taken her in two seconds which is the whole point of there being a WNBA so it was completely performative completely ridiculous and if you're a fan I hope you hold up signs that say the most despicable offensive things because that gets in their head

and then your team wins and that's part of participating in the game and kudos to him and they're so sensitive right now because of the Sophie Cunningham pointing thing So that's what she was reacting to. She's overreacting. I don't even know what that is. Yeah.

Don't even need to know. Yeah. So if you're going to get him and she just pointed at a girl and it caused this huge ruckus of, oh, she's, she's taunting, which the whole taunting. Which the whole taunting. You ever sat around an NBA game? They say the worst stuff you've ever heard. I hope he comes back and holds up a noose like Jesse Smollett. And then watch her really lose her mind.

Good. I mean, Michael makes a great point here. The whole point of home court advantage is getting into the heads. of the other side. You know, so, I mean, look, I'm sure there's... I'm so benign. Yeah, I'm sure there's something written on a ticket. I'm sure there's something when you walk into the stadium

with regards to what you can't say and can't do. And there it is. Those are the rules. So apparently they said they kicked him out for this. But what they really did is just moved him to another section. Yeah, they moved them up. No, they didn't throw him out of the building. Yeah, they just... We're just going to put you over here.

Yeah, they just took him out of his seat. Right? And listen, my... I'm a Seriaf fan, and if you look at certain games, Lazio fans are absolutely brutal when you go to play Lazio in Rome. They chant horrific things there. Like you say, they make monkey sounds in the stadiums,

in European stadiums for European football, which is soccer here at all of the black players. And listen, they call them the hooligans, and they've been trying to crack down on it, and it's something that happens there. I mean, listen, as a fan going to a, a game. I understand booing. I understand cheering.

I think there's certain lines you don't say only for the fact of the company you're in, especially if you're at a game and you see you're sitting around families and there's kids there. I think you do have to be a little bit aware of what you start chanting and throwing and doing.

Not throwing. You throw something you should be tossed out of the stadium immediately. I think you do have to look around and be a little bit aware of what you're yelling in front of and who you're yelling in front of, and who you're yelling it in front of. If there's kids around, I mean, I don't know how you guys feel about it. I think if there's kids around you, just be cognizant of what you're yelling.

And some people say, hey, you shouldn't have brought your kid to a game. That's how I learned all of my favorite cuss words was from watching Cowboys games with my family. I mean, I, yeah, I mean, I heard, you know, Quincy Carter get called some horrible things as a child. And, you know, I've kept him in the back pocket. So I think, no, I think that's part of the experience is to see. and some guy acting a little belligerent, you know, and it's fun. It's like, hey, there it is.

I think a lot of it's just American athletes, American professional athletes, are some of the most, like, sensitive people I've ever seen. Because it's not just a WMBA thing. Remember last football season, I think it was D.K. Metcalf attacked a fan because he called him by his, like, full name. It's like, oh, my God. I mean, how dare he? And I think it's just like an across-the-board kind of thing.

LeBron James did this same thing. He had a court side fan tossed from a game for saying whatever he said. And listen, my thing is when you're on the court, I don't know how you're hearing any one particular thing being yelled at you. If you're locked into your game, I'm sure if the stadium's quiet enough. And listen, I've been to the Yankees game where there's a quiet moment and someone yells something out. And I've seen it happen where literally the player will laugh if it's funny enough.

Yeah. You know, and just kind of go with it as opposed to egging them on, whereas if you just turn around and laugh about it, you know, that's it. You defuse the situation. But now that she does this and people see, oh, look, we could get to her. I think all you've done is create a situation where the fans are going to do it more so. By the way, it's the green dildo situation. Right.

You know, one person through one, and now you got hundreds of them getting thrown out. By the way, I like this. This is basketball in Serbia. like look at this they wouldn't be able to handle that imagine if that was the WNBA crowd and they're mad about one pointing yeah it's not possible that that would be

a WNBA crowd good point fair yeah I tell people all the time you think you know fandom here if you haven't gone to a European football game I don't care in what country whether it's the Premier League Bundeslite La Liga Seria you haven't

seen that kind of rabidness. There's difference here where fans are having a fist fight in the stands. No, the chance, the songs that are made up on the spot about the other team, players, wives, girlfriend, it's wild what happens at these games and it's constant. It's from the moment before the ball's kicked. When A.C. Milan plays Juventu, the first song is a take on an Italian song, Burkete d'Amma, where they literally call fans from Juventus pigs in the song. You're a pig from Torino is the way it translates.

And that's before the ball's even been kicked. But no, this starts. This point is that's bad. Yeah. I mean, look, again, you know, I don't know how extreme it was, what he said or what he did. And here's another thing for fans, too. Don't start picking a fight.

You can't win. Because I'm not sure that that guy could take Adja Wilson. Are you kidding? I mean, she's 6-8. I don't know. I don't know. Oh, you're kidding. It's a female.

She's a big girl. I don't know if that guy can fight. But seriously, fans, yeah, don't. I do like the wife pulling him down, though. Yes. I think the wife knew something there. Stop. Stop.

Yeah. I mean, if the wife sat him down that quick, I don't know that she can't knock him out. But listen, fans have to be careful. I remember there was a game where Ty Domi was in a penalty box and a fan reached over. The Plexi glass gave out. and the guy wound up in the penalty box and Ty Domey went to work on him. So as a fan too, yeah,

don't pick a fight with a professional athlete you're not going to win. You're going to win against the female. Like the guy was not a small dude. Michael's dying to get into a fight with a WMBA player. I'm not at all. He gets to hit a woman so bad. It's insane to think that a woman can hold her own

against a grown man, even a WMBA player. Oh, my God. We're going to take a quick break here on Will Cain Country. We'll be right back. Vince August, sitting in for Will Kane with Michael Maloney, and Cody Tucker. Welcome back to Will Kane Country.

Vince August filling in for Will Kane. We have Michael Malice, Cody Tucker with us. All right. What's our next topic, Dan? Let's get to the fun. What was the third one? We came up with another one that was really good.

People are starting to talk like chat. Oh, my God. This is a great one. Yes, the chap GPT one. So we have examples of some of the words that people are starting to use and morph into as they start plugging in their own thoughts with they, which because apparently completing a coherent sentence is very difficult for society.

So now we're all starting to talk like AI chatbots too. So, and we're seeing this a lot where people apparently are putting a thought into chat GPT, and it comes out in a coherent sentence because sentence structure is just so difficult for people to do nowadays. And I guess from the repetition of doing that, they're picking up words and this is becoming the new lingo. I mean, are we getting into a dangerous place or are we finally seeing people get educated somewhere other than a school system in this country? But this is not new.

Yeah, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. People used to repeat stupid things they saw in sitcoms. So used to be like, oh, I guess Andrew checks notes, didn't, you know, didn't learn that presidents could only be like for two terms. Oh, so what you're saying is blah, blah, blah. And it's like, Alex, like I'll take, you. You know, Andrew doesn't know, nobody's talking about $500, Alex. You see it constantly social media.

People are mindless, and they only repeat the syntax of what is on their screens, whether television or computer. But the funny thing about this story to me is chat GPT is going to evolve faster in its vocabulary than the simpletons to use it and repeat what it tells them. Not going to be able to pronounce the words. Yeah. For 10 years while chat chitp t has moved on. Yeah.

I still can't say meticulous. Do any of you guys use it? I don't use it for anything. I do. I don't know if you guys use it. Just as a tool to organize. That's all. Okay.

Can I tell you how I use it? Yeah. It's helped me, it's one of the biggest things in my life. So I use Grock a lot because there is a mechanism that human beings have used effectively from the time of Pharaoh until 2025, which is if me and you were having an argument, you just dig in your heels, you pretend you don't understand. If I tell you, hey, this is why you could say, the jury, you know, wanted to let Lindsay Klance to walk.

There was zeroed out. Nope. There's no reason about there's no evidence. I just say, hey, Grock, explain to such and such a person what the evidence is. And then they go argue with Grock and I don't have to wait. I've seen you do it. That's more fact checking than to me sentence coherence. Am I wrong on that?

It's not just fact checking. It's that they want an argument. They want to not engage with what you're putting out. but act as if they're better than you because they don't have to acknowledge what you're saying. Great. Goodbye. Go talk to the robot. Go talk to a robot.

Yeah. Well, I mean, are then, are we completely losing the ability to have conversation with each other? They never had it. Yeah. There's no we here. There's a lot of people who are literally incapable of having a conversation and are uninterested in doing it. And that's the whole point of media is to program them to have a personality and point of view. Now, but see, Michael, you bring up a good point, though. You say, look, I can ask Grock,

hey, look, what is the real fact of this case? But, I mean, are we at a point now where you could ask Grock to say, support this argument, even if it's factually wrong? Well, yes. So this is hilarious. Yeah. Because then they come back and they say, hey, Grock, tell Michael, blah, blah, blah. And Grog goes, you're wrong. So then I screencatcher and quote, Then I go, Creighton is invoking GROC, only to be owned by it, is one of the greatest technological dancements in 2026. So it will, that's a myth. It will not back you on no matter what you say.

GROC is much better than most people at putting the simpletons in their place. See, that I like. Well, one of the best things about Chad GPD is just whenever you get an answer to a question, ask, are you sure? Yeah. And it will give you a different answer. Oh, really? Actually, now that I'm thinking about it and then it'll give you something else.

So it's really just kind of, which I love just trying to trick my chat GPT as much as possible. And like trying to do little workarounds. And yeah, and you just every time it gives me an answer, are you sure? And it's a whole thing. Actually, upon further research, like, God, like, you're not going to give me any bright information. So it's easier to change chat GPT's mind than a human being's mind? Is that what you guys are doing? He has more of a mind than most people.

That's what I'm saying. Think about it. You can I, maybe maybe we should move. To just talking to Chad GPT. I mean, are we worried about it taking over the world and ending the world? Who knows? Yeah. I'd rather Chad GPT take over than the average voter.

Yeah. I would actually agree with that. I mean, so at what point does Chad GPT start doing? I mean, does Grock do it on its own on, on X or Instagram or anything? So, I mean, is it possible to start programming these things where people start putting up comments and without asking? Yeah, so like a community note, but on an old. automatic community note. Does anything like that exist that anybody knows about or no? Not that I know of. I mean, that would be amazing. So this way, the computer basically shuts down the argument before anyone has to jump.

That's skynet already, basically, at that point. But then you have chat, GPT, there are things that won't talk about, like politics. It is a little more left-leaning. Oh, really? Yeah, totally. Like, I try to put things in for our show, like a title or something or figure something out. It'll be like, I can't do that. Sorry. And it's so. So that's me. Yeah. Good. This happened me last week. I was in Mexico City and I got a cool pair of sneakers that were like a vans exclusive.

And some guy replied to me and goes, oh, sneakers with flowers on them. Why don't you just show a photo of you with another man? And I go, hey, Grock, hey, Grock, point this guy to photos of men together like he wants. And like he asked for it.

And Grock just says, I can't do that. So there are absolute guardrails. Oh, yeah. So, so, Cody, do you use it for anything? Like, any of the stuff that you put out or no? No, not for any of the stuff I put out. But I do use it for like organiz-like, saying like some organizational stuff. Okay.

Yeah. I mean, or just like random questions. Like if I just, you know, the same way that I've just replaced Google with Chad GBT for the most part. I mean, I tend to not just wholeheartedly trust it. But now, because I kind of like my videos to be my voice, you know. And I feel like if I use Chad GPT, it would be very obvious because I don't, you know, I'm not the most intelligent. human on the planet if you can't already tell, but what Claude is very good at, because it's all these AIs are programmed on people's behaviors is predicting what someone will do next.

So it is kind of like a profiler, because I have a legal situation and I've been asking Claude, like, what do you think given this trajectory and it keeps the background in mind, what would be their next move and they'll break down? And you know this as an attorney. If you're at a certain juncture in a case, there's like four moves that person will probably make. And you could probably, you know, reasonably guess me professional opinion what the order would be of those four choices. So it's really good with that. Now, do you use it professionally and anything that you do in terms of your writing or any of your creativity or no? No, I don't trust it because this just happened to me recently. I was having a Biden moment. And there was a book from the 1890s. And I remember the cover and

it's green and there's a bomb on it. And I'm like, what's this book from the 1890s? And it's just giving me things that I'm like, no, that's not that it. And then it gave me one I hadn't heard of. I started Googling and go, and they go, oh, I imagine that this book doesn't even exist. So it gets to that point of hallucination. And in fact, you're probably seeing this legally as well. It's been the case that a lot of people, especially pro se litigants, are using chat, GPT, to write their opinions. And it makes up citations or the citation doesn't say what the person claims.

Right. And judges having to deal with this. Oh, wow. And you can always tell. Yeah. My sister's a high school teacher. You can't always tell, though. Yeah.

My sister are a high school teacher and says it's killing education system. Yeah, I won't use it as a lawyer. I refuse to use it. I mean, I'm, then again, I've been doing this. This isn't to be my 30th year of doing it. I'm one of these people I write. I can't have a secretary. You know, I can't speak into a dictaphone.

I have a secretary type everything out. I feel like the more I type it, the more hands-on I am, I just have a photographic memory. and when I go into court, especially if a judge is in a call off, what exhibit is it? And I know I put it together and I did it. It's just going to be so much easier for me. And I saw an attorney struggle with that a couple weeks ago arguing a motion

where they couldn't find it. And that wasn't even chat GPT. That was the associate clearly put together the motion and they didn't know where the exhibit was. They get through law school. Well, no, because what they do is they rely upon reading the argument. They rely upon seeing, all right, the exhibit is marked in here. But when you don't do it,

yourself and you don't put it together yourself, I think you're hampering yourself. Like showing your work? Yeah. I'm not. You're not hitting your client. Yeah. Because you don't know what the question's going to be from the judge, right? It could be anything. You need to know it inside and out. If they ask an outlier question, it's right here. Yeah. You have clod in your ear. Just answer it for you, listening. And I know we have two creative guys here to writers. There are certain things I still write longhand before I put it into a computer just because of the process. I, I think. I think, yeah.

You're, you're, I can't remember the statistics. I don't want to make it up, but it's a, it's a very high number of like likelihood to remember something by handwriting versus typing. And I firmly believe it. I mean, I have a pretty solid memory. I mean, I got at least one thing going for me. But I think it's mostly because I handwrite most things. And I mean, at least just at first, I just like the feeling of, of running.

And I think that that's a lost. I think that that's. more of an issue with schools now than anything is that everything's moved to like laptops and tablets and like typing and it just you know even if you are writing it out you know it's not the same as just like back you know when i was in school of hand-rows scientists there's studies saying handwriting activates far more of your brain than typing engaging motor skills yeah i agree yeah without a doubt yeah and so i still i still do it for for most things i would say i would guess it probably works better because you're right when you write, you write the whole word, but when you type you do a letter at time.

So you're remembering the word you wrote as opposed to letters. I think that I would guess. Well, as a book writer, I'm curious. Do you... You mean author? As an author? Yeah. You write books.

Screw you, Michael. All right. You write book good. That's out like chat GPT. I would have put book writer into chat GPT. I would have said author. Thank you for doing it for me. You douche.

Thank you. as an author. A bookman. I'm curious as to your process, Dale. Do you do a voice recording first? Do you go straight to a computer? Do you type? Do you write?

How do you do it? I'll tell you exactly how I write it. Yeah. I have a certain amount that I have to write every day. Let's suppose it's three pages. Right. When I'm done, I'm done. So I have someone in the tank for tomorrow.

Then I don't have writer's block. And then the page numbers creep up. And the time I'm done with the first draft. It's a complete mess, but it's done. Then you go back and you make it coherent, and then you go back a third time and make it pretty. That's my process. And that's what I would recommend with everyone.

All typed? It's all typing. And here's the other thing. If you have a scene or an essay later in the book that you're thinking of now, double space it and write it now. It doesn't have to all be in order. It just has to be all there. And emotionally, it's very motivating when those page numbers start creeping up.

even though if you know a lot of it's crap, because you know objectively you're making progress. And Cody, when you do your videos, I know a lot of people have now the phone thing where it does a teleprompter. Do you use any of that or? No, I just memorize it for the most part. I mean, there's such short form videos.

Like it's not a whole lot to memorize. And by the time I actually record the, you know, one to two minute video, I've read this, you know, information 50 million times. I've tried using a teleprompter and I can see my eyes moving across the screen whenever I'm doing it. And it looks weird. Vince has been using one the whole time. So it's, yeah, I don't know if people would notice it or care, but it makes I don't like it.

I don't like it. I don't do it. I hate when news, when I see it on the news, when I see a correspondent on the news and you can clearly see their reading. Yeah. I can't stand it because I know what this person is. This person is a model reading the news. This is not a journalist. Yeah, this is just the best-looking person we could find that we want to read this.

Don't take shots of Will. And you can literally see Will's eyes. Did I say Will's eyes? You could literally see their eyes scrolling. You could see it. I know, it's that left, you know, just that constant. I don't like it. I just, you know, I just memorize.

I recommend everyone watching this. Don't look Will King in the eye. You will get to. No. But I do write it out. I brought it out as like a script, you know, if you want to call it that, but I just memorize it. It bothers me as a stand-up comedian when I see other comedians going on stage with notes. I don't.

Let me ask you this, though. Isn't that sometimes they have to do it if it's new material that they're working out, you're not going to always have it committed. I get that, but you know what? You should go up with a couple of buzzwords in your head to know what the, and then just play with it. Because if it is a new bit and, you know, what are you memorizing if it's a new bit? It's a topic.

And you just have to go up. I mean, is your mind that full of all of these topics that you don't know where to go? You know, I know. I mean, do the performance because I saw one of my idols in Vegas when I was performing out there. Someone said, hey, you want to come see Carlin? I said, of course. And he went out with a notebook.

Now, he was getting ready for an HBO special. And back then, he would do the rants. And he had to get through the rant reading it out. And I was like, that I get. But to see someone go up with notes and be like, what's my next thing? I'll be honest. I have a ton of notes here.

And I don't, I didn't want to look at them at any point in time. The only thing I knew I had to get right is I wanted to get the both of you and your credits right because that's the respect for the guest on the show. But to sit here and flip through notes, no, you know what? I had a half hour. I prepped, went through everything and let's get ready. I don't like that.

I feel it's a disservice to an audience. Without a doubt. And Carlin's thing is a little bit different. doing it in Myrtle Beach in January with Dave Landau, and I haven't done it a lot. So this is going to be longer than what I've done before. So I don't know that I'm going to have that half hour committed to memory. So I'm going to have that as like kind of a safety net. And I'll make it clear of the audience that that's what's happening because I think it's like,

okay. Right. That's fine. That's fine. I don't think there's any issue with that. I don't think any audience member is going to be, you know, thinking negatively about that. No, that I'm fine with.

The problem with a lot of comics is that it's just, it's going from bit to bit. Yes. And it just, it doesn't make sense why you would need a notebook. And they address it not even in like a comedic way. No. Oh, well, okay, what was, what's next? Let me try this on you. Yes.

And it feels very, right. Why did I pay to come here? Right. You're not, you're not my audience. You're my lab. Yeah, exactly. That haven't even seen that, because it just seems so unprofessional to me. Yeah, no.

It's a lot of open mics. I've seen it open mic stuff. and things like that. Yeah, you normally wouldn't see it in a... No, because you know what it is? There are headline comics out there that just want to walk into a room and try something out,

and they know if they walk into an open mic room, everyone's in a roll out the red carpet. You're right. Yeah, and like, yeah, come on in and let's do it. And it's not their audience. Right. Which helps. You tend to get a little bit more, you know,

an unbiased view. Right. You know. Right. Yeah. We got one last story. Dan. Let's do the host.

thing. This was a, I love this story. You are no longer invited to dinner. So apparently, people are hosting less and less parties at their house, having people over. And it's just, and people are, look, with regards to church numbers, playing cards. Yeah, look at all of the numbers dropping dinner parties. It's pretty wild how people are becoming more and more isolated. And I am completely guilty of probably every single one of those categories, because I'm the type of guy. I don't know about you. At the end of the night, I just want to go home.

I want to shut it off. I don't want anybody there. You never finished the book. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. No, you know what? What's funny? What's not to law school?

No, because of the two careers, I only do audiobooks now. Oh, yeah, you're right. I only do audiobooks. And I'll listen in the car. And the wild thing about an audio book is if you lose me halfway through, and sometimes it can be a narrator that'll lose me halfway through, I won't finish the book, even an audio book. I can't do audiobooks at all.

I was on Gutfeld a few months ago, and there was a story, which Kat Tymf validated because she's like a millennial, that people watch movies from the 90s or 80s, and they have these house parties. And kids these days showing my age didn't know if that was real or something just for the movies. Like they never even did it. Oh, we never.

And to me, I guess the three of you, growing up, this was a very common thing. You know, I'm from Brooklyn and even college, you would do it as well at after college. But it's sad because that's really such a great way to have fun. Bluff steam, meet people, roofy them and then have your way with them. Bring it all the way around. Bringing it back around, Michael. I love it. No, I've never been to a house party.

Whatever. Like any kind of dinner party. No, I mean, well, okay, well, we didn't do like, we didn't do like a raise. Well, we just did, you know, like my uncles would get drunk and fight each other. That was like our house party. So I guess we did do like versions of that. But I've never been to like a actual house. I mean, I've also never had dinner with my parents.

Like we never ate together. I mean, it was always I ate. People. Yeah, I ate in my room. I mean, and I know it's crazy, but I don't think it's as rare as you might think. That's pretty common. Like my age. Yeah, my R.H.

I'm 30. Sam, I don't know if you're around that, but yeah. I'm not saying it's good. I wish it was. No, no, no, no, no. I know. I don't think it's good. I wish that I would have grown up in like the, well, what I can call, you know, the TV family.

Yeah. Because I just never saw in real life. But of eating around a dinner table, having these dinner parties, you know, hosting people. But we just, we never, ever did that. Like we, my family never hosted a dinner party once. Was it the thing that your family was having dinner without you? You had to go. Yeah.

Yeah, you just got in trouble all the time. He just wasn't inviting. He'd eat everything. So they made a separate. They were happening. They were happening. He just wasn't getting invited. No, that's more than we're going.

Yeah. I mean, they basically just dumped everything in the troth and then, you know, fed me on the side. They hear the bedroom door open. He's coming. He's coming. Yeah, they're hiding plates and everything. They're like, oh, no. Yeah, no, we just, we never did.

I mean, you know, the occasion of barbecue and Thanksgiving and whatnot. But otherwise, this is not a thing. I'm the son of Sicilian immigrants. My first language was Italian. Every Sunday was a gathering. Guaranteed at least once a week. And Sunday, you know, we'd call it dinner, started at like two. And it ended at night.

It was just, you know, people over. And I guess for Italians in general, it's not about eating and then going on. Having dinner as an event where you sit down. Yeah. Yeah. I grew up in Benson, which was an Italian neighborhood when I was growing up. And I'm sure there are many times growing up

where there's people in your house who you're like, who is this guy? Yeah. And you never saw him before or you never saw him again. Yeah. And then there are people that you're not related to. It's like a cousin. He's a cousin.

He's a cousin. He's a cousin. He's a godson. So that was my godmother's cousin's nephew. He's a cousin. Bring him. Yeah. And it was just people would come in.

And it was one of those things where, I mean, every Sunday. And in my house, one thing my dad wanted was dinner time. That was his time to sit with all of us and we would all be together. But yeah, now I'm at a point with regards to having other people over. Oh, no. Kill the lights, duck in cover. We're not home. Are we a more isolated society and why?

I mean, social media. Social media is a big part of it. I wonder also is it that people tend to live further away from their hometown now versus, say, 40, 50 years ago. You know, like I'm just saying because, like, if your family was all getting together for Sunday dinner, I imagine all your family must have lived decently close to each other. My family, nobody lives around each other.

Like, it's all spread out throughout Texas. If you're spread out, that's a huge factor. Are you sure you have their current address? Oh, yeah. Not really. They may all live in the same neighborhood. They just close the blinds and they'll walk around. Well, they just left one day.

Cody, you get the house. We're leaving. Yeah, that could be entirely possible. Yeah, but I just wonder if that is a part of it. I mean, I think people tend to live more spread out. People aren't just communal what their family is. But I think people. I'm going to push back.

Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead, Michael. I was going to say, I feel like there's something new that happened last few years, which is Galentine's Day. which is when single women get together in Valentine so they're alone. And Friendsgiving is also a thing. So I think there's some aspects

where it's gone in a better positive direction. I think there's two reasons why it goes in the negative direction is I think because of social media, you know everything about everyone. So to get together, what am I going to talk to you about? I already know.

I know. I thought it was more like I looked up your Facebook. You're awful. I don't want to negative. I've seen. Well, that's the second. So the first part is, your political takes, I'm not coming over.

I've seen all of your vacation pictures. What are you going to show me? So, yeah, I know everything you know. You're a trashing being. And I think the other part of is what you just said, because there's so many hot button topics. If you see somebody post something, and now it's like, oh, man, you know what?

We agree in a lot, but we don't agree on this. If this comes up, this is going to be a war in my house. And I just want to sit down and eat. And I don't want to have a war at my table over one topic. Because you know what's going to come up. Someone has to sit down and be like, Hey, this Clancy thing is crazy, huh? On an Italian house, forget it.

We're going to kill each other. I was in Tokyo two years ago, and I turned to my friend because I just had this light bulb moment. I'm like, isn't it great to be in a place where you know people aren't just going to bring up Trump for no reason all the time? Yeah. Because it's just like you're going to have a group together. Shut up.

Can we just have one night where you're not talking to president? Regardless whether you think of him. It was probably in Tokyo. Probably ran into Cody's family there. Oh, yeah. Yeah, for all I know. I mean, they're all over. Did that not used to happen, though?

Like, I mean, I'm, you know, I'm 32, so I'm, like, relatively young. But, like, in the times of, like, Reagan, Carter, whatever, it wasn't. It was not a thing. People wouldn't talk politics. Never. Rare. So that has to be a big part of it. No, Iraq.

Yeah. No. Rare. Very rare. Yeah. It didn't become. Until politics became religion of people and when we became this tribal, it wasn't a thing. It wasn't a thing.

Yeah. Well, that makes a lot more. thanks then too, that it would be. Yeah. Guys, thank you so much for jumping on. Michael, thank you. An author, not a book writer. An author, Michael.

A bookist. A bookist, everybody. Cody, great to see you again, brother. We'll be back tomorrow off of suspension. Leave your comments on the thread. Thank you for joining everybody. Thank you, Dan. Great job once again.

Listen to ad free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcasts. and Amazon Prime members. You can listen to this show, ad-free on the Amazon music app.