Will Cain Country - David Sacks Stands Against 'Forever War' In Ukraine PLUS Jay Glazer Breaks Down The NFL Draft

Episode Date: April 23, 2024

Story #1: Will attempts to “steelman” the arguments in favor of support for the war in Ukraine, though he is skeptical and therefore sympathetic to the views of former COO of Paypal and Co-Host of the All In Podcast, David Sacks. Story #2: A story of a prisoner of war and her savior. PLUS, a breakdown of the NFL Draft with Fox Sports NFL Insider and Host of Unbreakable, Jay Glazer. Story #3: Will would take a thousand noes for one yes. Just make sure you’re asking someone with the ability to say yes.   Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail] Subscribe to The Will Cain Show on YouTube here: Watch The Will Cain Show! Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. One, I am naturally skeptical toward the war in Ukraine. I'm therefore somewhat sympathetic to the arguments of former. CEO of PayPal and the co-host of the All-In podcast, David Sacks. But let's play devil's advocate.

Let's steal man that argument with David Sacks. Two, I'll take a thousand nose for one yes. Just make sure you're taking those nose from someone empowered to say yes. Three, a story of a prisoner of war and her warrior savior. Plus the NFL drafts with Fox Sports, Jay Glazer. It is the Will Kane Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page and always on demand by subscribing an audio format at Apple or on Spotify. Just hit subscribe and the Will Kane Show will show up in your feed whenever you open up your phone.

Or if you prefer to watch the Will Kane show, you can subscribe on YouTube. There's a link right under this live stream in the text description, and you can catch up on past interviews with Stephen A. Smith, streamer destiny. You can catch up on episodes with Jordan Peterson or Tony Robbins by subscribing to the Will Kane show. My framework for understanding what has become a forever war in Ukraine is painted in skepticism for two main reasons. One, from the beginning of this war, it has been covered in dishonesty. We have largely been inundated with propaganda. I think the vast majority of Americans really have no idea what to think about the war in Ukraine. Their certainty on Capitol Hill and skepticism in America. And I think that skepticism is well earned because largely the information that we have received has been nothing short of propaganda. And two, I have yet to have a coherent argument made to me that successfully wins me over to understanding the importance of Ukraine in serving America first. But because of that skepticism, I wanted to steal man in my argument. And everybody's familiar with the concept of a straw man. A straw man is building

up a weak argument to easily knock it down. You know, I think George Will once famously said regarding some famous liberal commentator that he walks through a field of straw men with a flamethrower. You don't want to set up your opponent with the weakest possible argument so that you have the appearance of a victory. And if you want to feel firm, if you want to understand your own position, if you really want to arrive at the truth, you need to steal man your opponent's argument. You need to understand it and put its best arguments forward. So before I had a conversation today with David Sacks. David Sacks is the former CEO of PayPal. He's a venture capitalist in Silicon Valley. He's a co-host of the very successful All-In podcast and noted skeptic toward everything

regarding the war between Russia and Ukraine. Before I had that conversation, I wanted to talk to someone who is sort of all-in on the war in Ukraine. So co-hosting Fox and Friends this weekend, I turned to my co-host, Brian Kilmead. Now, Brian has been very strongly supportive of the war efforts in Ukraine. And I asked Brian, first I asked Brian this, what the hell are you talking about when you're talking about a gag order? Listen to this moment from Fox and Friends. Yeah, former President Trump will be back in court this morning for day six of his New York criminal trial. But before testimony resumes, there will be a hearing on whether the president violated his gag order.

Yeah, day two, we'll start with three hours of gag talk. Eric's showing his life from outside the New York State Supreme Court. Hey, Eric. Three hours. Yeah, gag talk, Brian. Good morning. Good morning, guys. Yeah, three hours of gag talk.

This is G-rated news here, Kill Me. It's really only rivaled by Fox and Friends Weekend where when, I don't know, a segment on Caso, Rick Reichmeuth turned to my host, Pete Heggseth, and said, these words. You can ladle that into my mouth anytime. So between ladling things into people's mouth and three hours of gag talk, we need to tone it back here on Fox and Friends. But with kill me, I did ask him to tune me in when it comes to Ukraine. I asked him to give me his best arguments. I asked him to help me steal man the conversation that I knew would have I would have with someone where I would have some natural agreement. I asked him to steal man my argument

with David Sacks. So I will undoubtedly fail, but I will also do my best to play devil's advocate. And let's start that with story number one. As I mentioned, he is the CEO of PayPal. He is also a partner at Kraft Ventures in Silicon Valley. And he is the co-host as well, the very successful podcast, the All-In podcast. David Sachs on The Will Kane Show. Hey, David.

Hey, Will, good to see you. So I was excited to talk to you today. I mean, you have been very, very outspoken when it comes to Ukraine. And in my introduction, David, I said, look, you're kind of, in many ways you're singing my tune. Like, I'm naturally gravitating to your position, but I didn't really want to have a half hour or 40-minute conversation with you where you and I just high-fived in agreement about Ukraine. And I don't think that's your nature either. I'm a fan of the All-In podcast. So, you know, I did ask, for example, my host, Brian Kielme, like, I feel like David for actually

the dozenth time, make me the best argument for your support of the war in Ukraine. And it always starts here. And so we need to start with this. And I'm going to put to his position to you, and I know you're well versed in it, so you'll be ready to respond. But the position of almost every hawk is Putin will roll through Eastern Europe. He will roll into NATO countries. He will roll into Poland.

So if you do not make a stand in Ukraine, you sacrifice Eastern Europe. That's the argument. I mean, yeah, no, this is the Putler argument, and I think this is the argument that the Speaker of the House believes and a lot of Hawks believe this. And there's simply no evidence for it. I mean, it's a completely made up, puffed up threat. I mean, the person to listen to on this is Professor John Mearsheimer. He's done a ton of work on this. and there is no evidence to support this idea.

Moreover, there's inherently a contradiction because we say on the one hand that we need to bring Ukraine into NATO in order to protect it because we know that Putin would never invade a NATO country. And on the other hand, we say that if we don't stop Putin in Ukraine, he's going to attack all these NATO countries. So which one is it?

I think that it makes no sense. make no strategic sense for Putin to attack NATO countries, and the origins of this war have everything to do with the specific circumstances of Ukraine. Since the 1990s, we've had a debate over NATO expansion, and we knew imminent foreign policy scholars and statesmen like George Kennan, like Bill Bradley, like Sam Nunn, they all knew that bringing NATO right up to Russia's border would provoke a hostile response from Russia. And our CIA director, Bill Burns, knew it in 2008 when he wrote the famous memo, Nyet means Nyet, saying that if we announced our intention to bring Ukraine into NATO, it would provoke a hostile response from the entire Russian

elite, not just Putin. And yet, as soon as this war began, we conveniently forgot the whole history of this conflict and this debate. And so there are well understood reasons for this war in Ukraine that everyone's just ignoring. And instead, they've made up this fantasy that Putin just woke up one day and, you know, and kind of went crazy and became a, you know, a madman in the vein of Adolf Hitler. And it's just not true. There's a long history of this conflict that is readily available if you're willing to look, you know, even at the media coverage in 2021, which was far more honest about it. And we've had some of those conversations. We've done some of those historical deep dives here on the Will Cancho, David, about, you know, the relationship over Ukraine to

Russia dating back. And by the way, that's what Putin immediately goes to deep history when he talks about that area of the world in their relationship to Russia. But I want to take this piece by piece. So, okay, so I know that their argument, again, I'm trying to play devil's advocate and steal the steel man their argument. So they would say in response to what you just said, well, Putin is already attempting to reestablish the Soviet sphere of influence throughout former Soviet bloc countries. Not all through hard power like he's doing in Ukraine, but through soft power. Georgia, pretty successful, you would argue, in Belarus, and at least bringing it under the sphere of influence of Russia. And so he is already active in Eastern Europe, in the former

sphere of influence of the Soviet Union in encroaching upon NATO. Now, David, I did say, wait a minute, wait a minute, that's not NATO. So are we to fight back on Putin, even interfering in elections in Georgia. But their point to me is his motivations of expanding the Russian empire are made clear not just in Ukraine. Well, the only other example they can really point to of Putin being an aggressor is the one-week invasion of Georgia back in 2008. And if you read the EU Commission's own fact-finding report on that, as I have done, the EU can includes that it was Georgian President Saakashvili who started the hostilities by shelling the sort of Russian enclave of South Ossetia.

I think it was on the night of October 7th and October 8 of 2008. And so Putin moved in response to that, and he was very eager to work out of ceasefire. The conflict only lasted a week. If he had really been the aggressor that everyone talks about, why wouldn't he have moved his tanks on Tbilisi? He didn't do that. that conflict was provoked by Georgia. Now, so that's the only other example that people can give of Putin being an aggressor.

Yes, there was the Chechen conflict, but that is a conflict that was within Russia. He was dealing with extremist separatists within his country, and I think that most countries would have reacted in a similar way. And then the other, that's the last final example that they sometimes give of Putin being an aggressor is Russian involvement in Syria. But Putin was invited in to Syria by the internationally recognized government of Assad. So there's simply, you know, when you actually start to examine the case for Putin being an aggressor, it really falls apart. Now, in terms of the Russians wanting a sphere of influence in their backyard, I suppose that there's some

truth to that. But that doesn't mean Russian domination of these countries in the manner of the Soviet Union. What was Russia looking for in Ukraine? They were looking for neutrality. They simply wanted Ukraine to remain neutral. And the deal that Ukraine could have made before the war or at Istanbul in the first month of the war is to officially declare neutrality to say that it would not join NATO and to respect the rights of the Russian speakers in the Donbass, give them the semi-autonomy that had already been agreed to by Ukraine under the Minsk agreements. And if Ukraine had done that, there would be no war today, and Ukraine would have lost no territory. But that was not good enough for the West.

It was the West who came in via Boris Johnson, and said, we want to pressure Putin not make peace with them. And that's why the peace agreement at Istanbul was rejected, and that's why the war continues to reach to this day. Okay, I want to come back to Ukraine for just a moment, but we're trying to, what we're doing is we're trying to understand the motivations of Putin because the hawks. point of view is you have to stop this before it metastasizes. Their point of view is that Putin has bigger ambitions than Ukraine. And if you do not stop him in Ukraine, then you will open the door to further aggression. Now, you defined aggression just now as direct military aggression. You pointed out Syria, Chechnya, Georgia. Now, again, whether or not he's attempting, however we define sphere of influence, the purpose of this part of the conversation,

to try to understand his motivations, right? Because that seems to be the core of the debate that's being had. Now, they would say, well, he's interfering in elections in Lithuania right now. They would point out to other soft power, perhaps not military aggressions, but soft power efforts to reestablish his dominance over that region. And they would say that points to his motivations that you should be very skeptical towards and make your stand in Ukraine. Well, I think the first point to make here is just to ask, you know, what's in Russian interests? Russia is already the largest country in the world by landmass. It has massive natural resources.

It has no desire to conquer other peoples that would be incredibly hard to subdue and rule. Remember, when the Soviet Union ran Eastern Europe after World War II, it was constantly dealing with uprising. Let's see, in 19, I mean, I'm going to forget some of them, but in 1956, you had the uprising in Hungary. Right. In 1968, you had the Prague Spring. In 1982, you had solidarity in Poland. And I don't think that Russia wants to be in the position anymore of trying to subdue these Eastern European countries. It's kind of been there, done that.

And they don't really have the capability to do that. they're not as powerful as the Soviet Union once was. Moreover, they have all the land they need. They have all the resources they need. There'd be nothing in it for them. And if you look at the history, if you just look at Russian history compared to European history, Russia was never an imperial power or colonial power. It was never, it never went abroad in search of overseas colonies. What it did do was look inward. It basically tried to incorporate Siberia into the sort of, they tried to bring the country closer together by creating the Trans-Siberia Railroad across the whole country. So what you see is a pattern that when the great European powers engaged in colonialism, Russia looked inward to sort of conquer its own internal landmass and achieve mastery over its own resources. So what I would argue is that this view of Russia as this imperialist, colonialist power is really a projection of Europe's own history onto Russia.

And Russia has behaved quite differently. Well, this might be a place where I do have some earnest disagreement with you. And other parts, I'm playing devil's advocate. But this will be a little bit of a chicken and egg thing. I do think the history, and I'm not an expert, but I am decently well read on it. I do think that history shows that Russia has some paranoia about invasion from Europe. And you could say, well, that's the Europeans provocations of imperial reaches. But whether or not chicken or egg, Russia does feel vulnerable from invasions from the east,

short march to Moscow, if you don't have Belarus, maybe Poland, standing in between you and Napoleon, you and Hitler, who've made those marches in terms. Russia. And so there has been some history to suggest they want that buffer zone between themselves and Russia. And they would be, no matter how big they are geographically, they'd be more secure with that sphere of influence in those countries in the Eastern Bloc. Yeah, I think you're right about that. I think that Russia, above all, wants secure borders. And that is because of their history. Like you said, Napoleon marched, made it all the way to Moscow. They only defeated him through the scorched earth policy, where they basically, they lit Moscow on fire.

Hitler, you're right, attacked Soviet Union, I think something like 27 million Russians dies, something like one out of every seven Russians. So they have this history that they remember well, and they have been invaded throughout their history, and those invasions have often come from Ukraine. So there's no question they want secure borders. But the question is, could that have been managed through a security architecture that actually took their concerns into account. They weren't saying that they had to subjugate Ukraine or Belarus or the Baltics or anything like that. What they wanted was for Ukraine to be

neutral. And again, I maintain that we could have addressed what I think are natural and legitimate Russian security concerns through, again, a security architecture. We've exacerbated those concerns by bringing our military alliance right up to their border. and then seeking to convert the most sensitive spot on their border, which is Ukraine, into a member of that alliance. So, of course, they've reacted in this way. So the part of the devil's advocacy that I would, that you're staking a stronger claim on,

because I hear you today saying, you just do not think Putin is an aggressor. I would, first of all, have trouble understanding his motivations, but I wouldn't take that off the board that he's an aggressor because of the motivations that I laid out for you to reestablish a sphere of influence, to give him some insulation, to create more protection for Russia. But then I would argue with the Hawk, I would say, well, what is the American interest

in a non-NATO country? Because, by the way, they'll take it straight to NATO. Like I said, do you think because he's trying to reexert control in Lithuania or Belarus that he's going to invade Poland? And by the way, they'll say yes to that. But I'd draw a hard line at NATO. So my point is to them, like, what is the American? interest in non-NATO countries. And here's an argument, for one, that they make. Well, when Ukraine,

who is not a NATO country, gave up nukes after the fall of the Soviet Union, we made a tacit promise to them that we would protect them in case of invasion from Russia, and we'd be betraying that promise we made to Ukraine. The Budapest memorandum? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I've read accounts of the It was memorandum by some of the negotiators. And what they say is that it was not a security guarantee. It made some vague assurances, but it was absolutely not a guarantee. And if it were a guarantee of their security, it would have had to have been ratified by the U.S. Senate with a two-thirds majority because that's the constitutional requirement. And of course, it wasn't because neither Bill Clinton nor the president proceeded in George H.W. Bush thought that they could get Senate approval of a treaty.

So it is less than a treaty, is less than a security guarantee. It is a vague assurance. But Russia also signed up for that assurance. And the problem is that I guess that deal was signed in 1994, and it was simply superseded by all the events that happened subsequently. Remember that it's not just Russia that violated that deal. If you look at the Minsk agreements, which were signed in 2015 and we're supposed to be operative from 2015 through 2021, Ukraine signed on to that deal, and Ukraine did not keep up its end of the bargain.

So, look, there's a history here of agreements, and this is a conflict between these two countries. I personally don't think the U.S. should be setting itself up as the arbitrator of these disputes between Russia and Ukraine. But more to the point, if we had never gotten involved, there would be no war today. if we had never got involved in what in the initial invasion we keep pretending here that Putin is the aggressor and did this for no reason because we want to exculpate our own involvement this was not an unprovoked invasion the Russians made manifestly clear over since 2008 that it was completely unacceptable to them for Ukraine to join NATO and yet we insisted on continually pushing to bring Ukraine into NATO.

That was the central provocation. In addition to that, we had that New York Times story recently that said that the CIA had set up bases, secret bases in Ukraine for a decade since 2014 that were engaged in spying on Russia, on identifying targets within Russia and training Ukrainian assassination squads. I mean, these are things that if the Russians set up in Mexico, or Canada, we would definitely consider them a security threat. We have the U.S. involvement in color revolutions in their backyard. I mean, first you had the Rose Revolution in 2003 in Georgia,

you had the Orange Revolution in 2004 in Ukraine. That didn't work. So then we backed a coup in Kiev in 2014, the May Don Revolution or coup. So it's the U.S. that's been constantly meddling and interfering in their backyard. And I guess the question, I would have for these hawks is if you don't think Russia should have a sphere of influence in its own neighboring countries through which it's been attacked throughout history, why should the U.S. have a sphere of influence in those countries? I mean, this is the neocon position, is that no other great power shall, except us, she'll have a sphere of influence, and the U.S. sphere of influence shall be the entire world. I mean, that's basically the position they set forth. Well, okay. So my position on this, I'm leaving behind some devil's advocacy, which I'll pick up in just a moment, is as an American, what am I supposed to care if Russia is attempting to reestablish a sphere of influence over Eastern Europe? And the answer to that is, well, I'm supposed to care when it affects NATO, because NATO is an agreement America has signed up for. And I think your point is well taken on the Budapest memorandum and everything that's happened since then that makes whatever agreements we had with Ukraine. Ukraine less than NATO. But the argument, so I had Senator Mark Wayne Mullen on the show about

this, okay? So I'm America first. That's the bottom line, you know, and I don't feel like any need to apologize for the idea that foreign policy should be predicated upon whether or not something is good or bad for America. And I don't think it needs to be equal. I don't believe that it needs to be fairness, you know, to your question, I don't care if America has a sphere of influence everywhere, and they don't allow anyone else to, as long as it serves America. And I've had trouble understanding why Ukraine serves America. Like the outcome of this war, why is it important to your average American out there? Mullen's argument to me, David, was, and this is a little bit, this at least is something that I can understand. Like Trump says

when we won the war in Iraq, we should have taken the oil. I get that. You fight a war, you benefit from the spoils of war. That's how it works. That's how it's worked throughout history. I don't care if it's fair. I think it's just how it works, and we're Americans. And his argument is, well, Ukraine is rich in resources and minerals, and we need those for America, not for Russia. We have all the minerals that we need, and they're a lot closer to home, and we can get them without provoking World War III with Russia. So I don't really get that argument. America is now energy independent. And if you want to get more access to oil and natural gas, just make it easier to drill and frack. I mean, it makes no sense.

to be pursuing... Well, it's not oil. Oil is a big one in Ukraine, but I think they reference other, like, precious minerals. They have farmland. They have farmland. Why is that? I don't know they have a lot of precious minerals

that are needed in your area of the world? I mean... We could get them through trading. Yeah. You know, in fact, it'd be a lot easier to obtain them if there was no war going on, and they were simply available on the open market and we could buy them.

This is why I'm sympathetic to your point of view. No, I really am, but I don't think it's worthwhile. sit there and go, oh, great argument, David. No, no, I agree. Throw the fastballs. Let's go. Well, the problem is you've got a pitcher in there who's trying to throw somebody else's pictures. I need to get a real neocon in here with you. So where was I going to go? You messed me up, David, by making me just not think ahead,

just be in the moment there for a moment. Well, I think that this question of sphere of influence, I want to really stress that what the Russians were looking for in some of these sensitive, country's was neutrality. It's true they want a buffer zone, but that doesn't mean that they're trying to subjugate those peoples. They've had enough experience with that, and it hasn't gone well. And the thing that, the line that these people always point to is that Putin said in some speech that he, you know, anyone who doesn't miss the Soviet Union has no heart. But the immediate next sentence in that speech was anybody who thinks we can get it back has no brain. He understands

that, you know, even if the fall of the Soviet Union from the Russian point of view was a tragedy, he understands it's not realistic to reconstitute it. He's made that abundantly clear. And it wouldn't be in Russia's interest. I mean, here's the thing is we don't really have to trust what's in his head because I agree to some degree it's simply unknowable. But it wouldn't be in Russia's interest to try to reconstitute the Soviet Union. It would be. It just create a lot of trouble for them. Again, what they're interested in here is secure borders. And if the US wasn't trying to bring its military alliance right up to Russia's border,

if it wasn't staging coups and color revolutions, if it wasn't basically putting nukes or the threat of nukes and American troops, weapons, and bases directly on Russia's border, I don't think we have a conflict with them. Fundamentally, Russia wants to focus on its internal problems. And we've prevented them from doing that by creating all of these security threats for the last 20 years. And now we finally find ourselves in the place that all the experts predicted when this debate over NATO expansion started the 1990s. We are in a war via proxy with Russia. This was completely predicted.

You can look at the historical record of the debates. You could look at the press coverage even in 2021. And it was really clear that we were violating Russian red lines. And yet the minute the war started, everyone pretended like there hadn't been this 25-year-old debate, and they just went with this whole unprovoked invasion narrative. So I know where I was going to go with you. And this will probably be where I leave the end of Ukraine, because I want to save a minute for something you said recently on the All-In podcast. But you've been tweeting that like the $61 billion that is just passed by Congress,

and you brought up World War III a moment ago. And in the beginning, I think we all wondered would this metastasize into nuclear conflict. But it's increasingly clear that the either intended, it doesn't matter if it's intended or not, but the outcome of this is a forever war. I mean, this is going to grind on forever. And it's readily apparent that the United States is going to keep funding it. And I guess in some cases, could be happy to, like could be happy to continue to fund this. You could argue for cynical reasons, for the military industrial complex,

you could argue for geopolitical reasons to keep Russia tied up in another Afghanistan. for a while, but it does appear that this is a forever war. Whatever you want, there's no win or loss to be had on either side. And it's pretty shocking that you've got so many members of Congress waving Ukrainian flags, like, all in. That's the hardest thing for me about this. It's like, just, I think the American public is 60% polling and kind of, you know, vague support for Ukraine. But Congress is like, the level of passion in Congress for this forever, war is pretty shocking. Yeah, I mean, you saw that with all the flag waving and the hootering and the hollering and the

cheering. They, these same people do not see what's happening at the U.S. southern border as a pressing issue or a crisis. They do see what's happening on Ukraine's border as a crisis. And you heard there was that one Democratic congressman who said Ukraine's border is our border. These people see no national border to be defended, only an imperial border to be expanded. And Ukraine is the tip of the spear. It is the border of the empire. It is basically the border of NATO. And they are hell bent on this imperial mission of expanding NATO, even if it means war with Russia. That's where they've gotten us to. What do you think that passion, David, what do you think that passion comes from? I mean, neocons before they were conservative were liberals. In the 70s, there was a change where the neocons became conservatives, a whole Irving Crystal wing of conservatism.

were literally liberals before, and they became conservatives under the banner of neocon. So I'm just trying to, like, my co-host on Fox and Friends, Pete Hegg said, he thinks that a lot of the passion is because Putin has become a proxy for Trump. Like you always hear him talk about, Clinton says, you know, Trump idolizes Putin and that they can fight a war against Putin as their proxy Trump. What do you think is the source of this passion? Well, I think there's no question that our domestic politics spilled into foreign policy after 2016. I mean, in 2016, you had the Hillary Clinton campaign create that phony piece of opposition research, the steel dossier, which was used to basically create a hoax that Trump was somehow a Russian agent. And then after Trump won that election, they needed an excuse for the incompetent campaign they ran. And so they continued with that hoax for years and years.

They kept attaching new ornaments to that, you know, to that Christmas tree. So we had the whole Alfa Bank scam, you had the whole Hamilton 68 dashboard, which was a total fraud that was the basis for thousands of stories that the Russians were involved in our politics. And even today, they say that Trump is a Russian agent, anyone who follows Trump is a Russian agent. So there's no question, I think, that part of the hostility to Russia has been generated by our domestic politics. and that domestic politics is ultimately based on a fraud. But I think there's also something deeper to it, which is that I think globalist is kind of a nice word for imperialist. I think that there are people, I think this is very common among the boomers. I think boomers basically view America.

It's very deep in their conception of what America is. They see America as a globe-spanning empire. And this, they grew up after World War II. And that was a period of time where the U.S. absolutely dominated the world in every possible way, militarily, politically, economically, industrially, the rest of the world was destroyed. And the U.S., you know, in the words of Joe Biden recently, the U.S. was not this the most powerful country in the world. It was the most powerful country in the history of the world.

There were no constraints. There were no limits. And then when the U.S. finally won the Cold War and we became the same. sole superpower. I mean, wow, that really clenched their view that America should dominate and run the world. Now, we don't run it by directly administering these countries. We just regime change leaders we don't like. But after the unipolar moment, we then got deeply involved in these forever wars in the Middle East. We basically pushed NATO right up to Russia's border. There's, I think, a strong belief on the part of these people that the U.S. should be

running the world. And that is what it means to be an American, is to be running this globe-spanning empire. It is not a view of America as a republic, but as an empire, as Pat Buchanan wrote so presciently about 25 years ago. And so I think there's something very deep in this. But I think the ordinary American does not care about this vision. They do not care about what's going on in Ukraine. It's not important to them that Ukraine become part of NATO. This is very much an elite view. I I think the average American wants the lawmakers to focus on our southern border. They want them to focus on domestic priorities. But the elite is very wrapped up in this conception.

Do you think you're winning the argument, David? Like you have a small focus group with – I don't care about X. You and I've had long conversations about X. I don't – I just – I think it's a free marketplace of ideas, which I appreciate. But I don't think it's very reflective of a wider point of view. I actually like your sample size. And so when I ask you, do you think you're winning, like, on the all-in podcast, right? That's a diversity of views.

Yeah, I've seen Chamath kind of moving your – I don't want to call it your direction, but I've seen him move in a direction. Do you think you're winning? Well, evidently not. I mean, Congress just passed this, and you heard through all those speeches on the floor. They just keep repeating all the narrative hoaxes that underlie this war, you know, that somehow this was an unprovoked invasion and NATO expansion has absolutely nothing to do with it. At the same time, they call for Ukraine to become part of NATO.

So it's totally contradictory. But in any event, I think that there are a lot more people who are starting to wake up to the reality that this is not an unprovoked invasion, that there's a deep history to the conflict. And of course, it's not just me. It's really thinkers who are at the top of the influencer food chain like Mearsheimer or Jeffrey. Jeffrey Sachs and people like that who I think have ultimately made a big difference. And I just try to help amplify their views so that, you know, we can get out of this mess. Well, you had an interest. I wanted to save a minute for this. You, you had an interesting take on the most recent episode of your podcast. Like, I spent the morning talking about all these

protests across college campuses, you know, in, you know, I think the biggest thing for me on this takeaway is that it's hard to separate the earnest, college student who, I don't think any point of view ever is totally devoid of some kernel of truth or legitimacy, right? I think you should probably listen to everything and find out if there's something in there. And, but when it comes to these protests on college campuses, when it comes to Israel and the Palestinians, it's so wrapped up in, I think, in many cases, some obvious anti-Semitism, in other cases, you know, direct support, at least rhetorically for Hamas. There's also, by the way, some organizations behind all of this stuff as well.

so it's not as authentic as you think. But that being said, you still had an interesting take where you said, by the way, even the earnest kids, David, I've made the point this morning. They have to be understood through the prism of the education they've been getting through colleges for the past several decades where they teach critical theory, and the only way they can see the world is through oppressor and oppressed. So they see Israel as oppressor and they see Gaza and the Palestinians as the oppressed. But even through all that, you said, well, we're not going to fully understand the legitimacy of portions of this protest for quite some time.

We're not going to understand it until time has passed in the same way we understood Vietnam War protesters. Yeah. Well, I think that there are some similarities here of what Israel is doing in Gaza to Vietnam. The first is that that war appears to be a quagmire. You're up against a guerrilla force, the Hamas, that is deeply enmeshed with the local population.

And I don't think they can really tell who's Hamas and who's a civilian in the same way that we really couldn't tell who was Viet Cong and who was a Vietnamese civilian. So you have this really difficult situation where they're up against a guerrilla force that those guerrillas are using tactics like ambushes and booby traps and snipers. So, you know, it's not like Israel wants to have a lot of troops in there and they've pulled out their troops because they're, they're tariff. targets. But because of this, I think that Israel is not going to be able to achieve its military objective, which is regime change in Gaza. Again, the whole stated objective of Israel's invasion of Gaza was that they were going to destroy Hamas and they would change the government of Gaza so that, you know, it would be, again, it would be administered by somebody else. And I just don't believe that that objective is militarily attainable. I mean, we'll find out.

soon enough, whether that is, whether that's true or not, but you're already starting to hear a number of Israeli generals saying that the war in Gaza can degrade Hamas, but it can't defeat it. So I think, I think that's the issue that Israel has. All right. Last, we have Tesla earnings tonight. You can give us any insight? You got to know something, David. You know, I don't. I make it a point not to ask you long about stuff like that. Make it a point, huh? I don't need any trouble with the SEC. I guess we'll find out tonight.

Tesla earnings come out. All right, David, I'm sure I did a poor job of attempting to play devil's advocate and steal man the argument because I do have so many natural agreements with you when it comes to skepticism towards the war in Ukraine. But I appreciate you entertaining it. And it was great to talk to you again. Yeah, good to see you. Thanks well.

All right. David Sack, C.O. Former C.O. of PayPal, Kraft Ventures Now, and host of the All-M podcast. I want to read a few comments there. You were chiming in during the Commerce Station. Angie Lent says they still have given no account of the money they gave. Sachs, by the way, was tweeting about this recently,

about the amount of money that has been stolen, corruption in Ukraine. Judy Gillott says, I agree with Angie. We need accounting of where all the previous money went. Anne Kennedy, Anna Kennedy says, rethinking U.S. foreign policy, fix the border crime, and make young people normal people again. Yeah, I mean, in the end, it's a matter of priorities, you know, like where do we give our finite resources attention and priorities? And it's hard to think about reestablishing, or not reestablishing, establishing that global empire he referenced if you can't take care of

whatever your problems are at home. And the most obvious egregious example of that is the southern border. Heaven Guy says we are taking on debt to fund Ukraine. That's another great point, compromising our domestic priorities of how long can we sustain this type of money printing and debt financing while we support a forever war in Eastern Europe. All right, coming up, I'll take a thousand nose for one yes. I was a quote to one of my sons recently. Or that's been a quote a lot of places. But, but you got to make sure you're taking nose from somebody who has the power to say yes. That's next on the Will Cain Show. I'm Janice Dean. Join me every Sunday as I focus on stories of hope and people who are truly rays of sunshine in their community and across the world.

Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com. It is time to take the quiz. It's five questions in less than five minutes. We ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at thequiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. One of my sons recently told me I had one of the top five Sigma quote. You know what Sigma is?

Yeah, Sigma. It's like Alpha, but Lone Wolf. Sigma, big among the kids, right? So what was my quote? What was the top five Sigma quote? That's coming up in just a little bit here on the Will Kane Show streaming live at Fox News.com, the Fox News YouTube channel, the Fox News Facebook page. You can leave a comment.

We want to interact with you, the audience. We just did after our big conversation, Steel Manning the argument about the war in Ukraine with David Sacks. You can also hit subscribe, Apple, Spotify, or on YouTube. A thousand knows for one, yes. That's coming up just a moment around the Wheel Cane Show. But I want to get to this because now, right now, I'm joined by Fox Sports NFL Insider

and the host of Unbreakable with Jay Glazer. I'm joined by Jay Glazer. What's up, Jay? What are you doing, brother? Man, I put on my Sunday best for you today, man. You did? What did you got there? Unbreakable performance.

Yeah, a little gym shirt, man. I'm sorry. I know I should have come a little bit nice. No, I like you like this, Glazer. I like it better. You know, you're... I like me a low rent like this, yeah. No, this is the glazer that's like in the gym with, I don't know, all your buddies.

It's like Stray Hand and the Rock, you know, and all the NFL guys. And then there's the Sunday Glazer. And do you do a wins or not? You go big on the knot on the tie. You know what's crazy, man? I actually never knew how to... tie and not. The guy who taught me how to tie my tie, uh-huh.

Howie Long. All right. Which is pretty bad. So it's a one and a half, but when I used to do sidelines or Fox, I'd have all these coaches walk over me and going, what are you doing? Like, and they tie my tie for me while I'm trying to get information for them. Really? And eventually, I think Howie also looked to me like, all right, this has to stop. Like, we've got to do something here. So he told me how to tie a tie. The biggest takeaway for me on that story is not that Howie Long knows how to tie a tie. It's to all these NFL coaches do. Like, I'm shocked.

Because, like, the days of Tom Landry are over, right? A suit and a, what was his hat? Was that a fedora? I don't even know what you call that hat he wore on the sideline. Man, it's all like windbreakers now, so I'm shocked. Well, sponsored now. You have to. You have no choice what you're going to wear.

Right. But here's the thing. Yes, we in the NFL too, we're children. Like, I don't know how to take care of myself. So they all do. They dress us. And, yeah, I admit it. I'm a child.

I got no idea. Jay, let's talk you're not a child. You're a huge supporter of the military and on your podcast. And we'll talk about the NFL draft in just a minute, but on your podcast, Unbreakable with Jay Glazer. It's a Fox Sports podcast. You have this really cool moment. You took part in, not just in putting them on air, but bringing these together. It's Shoshana Johnson, she's America's first black female POW, and Kearney Russell, a Marine. She was a POW in Iraq in 03. under Saddam Hussein, and he rescued her, and you put these two together on your show. Yeah, actually, it's wild because I had them on my podcast. Before I met them on, you know, I created a founded a charity called MVP, merging events and players where I took former combat vets and merged them with former pro athletes. I know it's not the same job, but I put them together because the transition is the same suck. So I just want to give them a locker room again.

And, you know, we met these two on Zoom. they never met before, and besides the rescue. And what you kind of, what I didn't realize, it's not like the movies. Like Shoshana, who is a, man, she's incredible. She's so inspiring. She was held captive for 22 days and taken from place to place and put in the back of a truck, pick up, and really, you know, beaten and spit on and just really went through a lot.

And the last spot they had her was really close to Saddam's. hometown and Kearney Russell and his crew and Kearney is 18 years old. This guy, we want to talk about a hero. He's the first door he ever kicked in. And he kicked down this door, took him like three or four times, by the way, kicked down this door, rescued her. And when they rescued her, they got her on a, you know, helicopter and I think to Kuwait. And then Kearney went back and fought for years. So they never met in person after that. That's 21 years ago, like two, I think the rescue was like two weeks ago, 21 years ago. She never met. So I had them on my podcast for Veterans Day, my Unbreakable Mental Wealth podcast. It used to be a mental health podcast. Now I changed it

to mental wealth because we could build up our mental health. Well, health is wealth, baby. And I had them on on Veterans Day last year. They still, to me, it was incredible. They still hadn't met since then. So I gave them my word. So I promise you, I will get you to meet in person at some point. We try to get it for the holiday time. but we weren't able to, somebody else from their team, Elliot Ruiz, was another Marine who helped run point on this for us. And I flew them out here to Malibu, which is where I live, you know, a couple weeks ago. And it was incredible, man. I got them to meet and I felt like, I'm trying to keep it together here. I felt like I was part of their team and part of their family. And it was

beautiful. And I flew out Elliot and Kearney. Somebody else from their unit showed up to Andrew Whitworth from the Rams. He showed up. He's like, I got to meet these people. They had somebody else FaceTime him in, but it was beautiful. And for me, it was just about keeping my word. But the cool thing was is, like, Kearney had never talked about it, including to his family. And I was just having them come out because I wanted to keep my word. And Kearney was like, no, we're going to do the podcast, right? Because he said, you know, it's so important that we start talking about this. He never talked about it. And, you know, again, he's 18 years old.

He's kicking down the door in Iraq. And that's a lot to process for an 18-year-old. But he said, after we did that first podcast, his daughter went downstairs, listened to it and came upstairs, came a big hug. And it's like, why have you never told me you're a hero? That's awesome. Right? And he said, I wish I'd talk about it more.

I never told my dad, never told her mom. They passed. So this was our way also He didn't tell that story Celebrate them all And they deserve to be celebrated He didn't tell that story in his life To the people's life

Never told it Never And then as a result They were able to take his other daughter And take her There's a mural of Rescue in 29 palms They were going to take

His daughters too To that recently And they showed me on video They're like Look Daddy's a hero And it was cool Now these two are talking all the time Yeah

We all got in the text chain together And that's how it should You know, we all walk this walk together. But for me, it was just about keeping my word, but it's become a lot bigger. It's kind of family that I needed that I didn't know I needed. So you focused on Kearney because I would have thought, like, the emotional side of this conversation has to be from Shoshana, like meeting the guy that saved you from being a prisoner of war.

Yeah. And the first time they met again was on Zoom and she realized it. She, like, fell out of the screen and started just, oh, my God. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for saving my life. And we had like 100 of us on the Zoom. We're like, what are we watching? This is better than any movie you could ever imagine. But also it was great. Like Shoshana, the way she talks about it is every sentence to me is like the wow in a Hollywood movie. To her, it's like, yeah. So they gave me what I thought was my last meal the night before. I'm like, whoa, your last meal. And they actually, how about this? This is wild. Because the great thing also by reuniting them, Kearney got to talk to her about her end of the mission, which he never got her perspective. They never got it.

She never knew his end of it, which was, again, they're trying to kick down this door. And he said, it's not like the movies. You don't just kick it through and you're going through. It said, you think about that stress. And every time you try and kick a door down, it doesn't open up. He said, all these other people came out from the roofs.

And I just couldn't help put the thing about Black Hawk down. and what happened down there. That's a lot of stress and pressure, right? But he got to interview her, and she said, you know, they shot both of her ankles. And at one point, hey, came to her and said, we need to do surgery on you. The thing about this, the Iraqis who shot her, now I want to do surgery on it. So, you know, obviously I dove in and that. I said, that's got to be the most stressful thing in the world.

She said, yeah, but I figured if I, you know, if I don't, then, you know, I'm going to die Anyway, and if I do, then who knows what's going to happen? But the wildest thing is, before they did the surgery, they made her sign a medical release for it. Really? Like, they're more afraid to get in Sue than it's incredible. Like, even they're afraid to get in Sue. It's unbelievable. I want to.

But she's so, I'm sorry. No, no, please. The other thing about this where I think it was really cathartic for everybody is Shoshana doesn't give her. enough credit. And she was talking about what this person's done, that person's done, this person's done. I'm like, Shoshana, no, like you were a P-O-W for 22 days. There is nobody you will meet ever in any room. You'll never walk in a room where someone's done more than you, ever. And I said, I want you to start shifting the way you view yourself. You walk in every room like, I'm above everybody else in here. You're different than everybody else. And different is good. Different leads to

success. So it's really cool to be able to talk to her about that. Well, you can not only hear that story, but you can hear that moment on Unbreakable with Jay Glazer. And I want to move to the draft, but you said something earlier I wanted to follow up. I've always been fascinated by this, Jay. And I know you're super big on mental health. I know. It's like, you're huge on it. You know, if I'm being honest, Jay, it's not really one of my prisms that I view issues through the world.

And it's not a dismissal of it. It's probably the privilege of not having, that I know of, issues that I'm struggling with, right? And, and... By the way, you don't think you're screwed up when you're kidding me? I think I'm pretty, I'm pretty dialed in, Jay. No, you talked about, you work with vets. And I think you do work with a lot of high-level vets, too,

meaning special operators. And you work with players as well. And I've always seen, even... I used to talk about this dating back to my time at ESPN. And now at Fox, I get to talk a little more about, you know, broader culture issues. Like, one of the things, Jay, that I think is, is... afflicting society, especially young men, is a lack of purpose.

And I think anytime take a human being who doesn't have a purpose, and the purpose can be grand or it can be small in society's view, it doesn't matter. Whatever, you wake up every day, you're like, this is why I'm here, and this is what I do. Then you have the breeding ground for a mental illness. You have the breeding ground for depression. You have the breeding ground for all sorts of stuff.

And the similarities, and I think PTSD exists, but I think that what happens, and I've used to talk about this, with a lot of these guys who really performed at high levels, you know, whatever, seals, green braes, whatever, and now they're no longer doing that, right? Or you're an NFL player. I don't care if you're an all pro or not, but if you have a job for 10 years in the NFL, you're good.

And all of a sudden, you don't have it anymore. You have two types of people that are very similar in that they're thrust into this world of now lacking a purpose. And that is the breeding ground for a problem. Well, purpose and structure, but let me get back, So the mental health part, right? So I have, I'm clinical, depression, anxiety, ADHD, bipolar. We'll throw that in also.

And I didn't sign up for it. But it's also not something allowed to hold me back. I've never missed a day of work now. I have, my depression's bad. It's an everyday thing in my life. And it's my only memory, like since I was a little kid. And I know my life is great, but between my ears sucks. And so I've had to learn over the years how to not just,

deal with it. I had to make my superpower, which I have. Like, man, my anxiety, I'm great in chaos as a result of that. And I am incredibly relentless because of it, because I'm so afraid of the other end of it. If I didn't have that anxiety, I probably wouldn't be as driven. My ADHD allows me to do six things at once. Like I've turned it all into my superpower. So it's allowed me to kind of dive into the weeds with people who, again, my pain, I've gone through the pain so I can help others to theirs. It's where I do it. But as far as these vets, these guys and these players, when they lose that locker and you lose that structure, they've always been told where to go, when to go, who to sit with, who to eat with, through the, and bam, it's gone. And it's worse for military when they get out, because in the military, you're told, don't talk about it.

I always tell these guys, your scars, that's your equity. Your experiences, that's your equity. And our military gets out of the military, and they're like, don't talk about it. Why are you supposed to get a job and get another team when you don't talk about it? Where everybody else is lying on their resume, they're not talking about it. And I actually just have this talk with a very high level Delta commander. And he trying to get in the NFL and he won't talk about it. I'm like, I can't get you the job.

Like you've got to learn how to talk about this. Somebody's not just going to want somebody who says, I was in the military. I led in the military. No, you've got to really talk about your experiences. He just wasn't able to do it. And I think it's unfair to those guys. I think we need to start teaching them how to use your experiences to move forward so you can get another structure so you can get a locker room.

Right. And losing your locker room, man, it's scary not to have a team. I always tell people to get through my mental health stuff. I need a team. And I have that on Fox NFL Sunday. I have fight teams. I have all these different groups that I'm around that I lean into a lot. And I'm also like I know to talk to people.

I know like we talked about how we long before. When I'm having my loony moments and my sky has fallen and I just, think the world is caving in on me, I'll say something to Howie now, where I wouldn't have in the past. And I'll go, man, I'm having one of those days. The sky is just falling. And he'll talk me through. Here's the badest SOB in a planet talking me through. So no one's questioning my man, so I'm able to talk about it. Yeah. And I think we can't talk about it. The vulnerability makes us strong. I've ever reproving myself in the other part of it, the physical end of it. So no one's going to question my manhood. And it's also gotten me so much closer together

with these warriors that I work with. You're lucky, and I say that as someone who is also lucky, on the team thing. I mean, it shows. You guys get along so well. That's why it's such a great show. But it's just a rarity. I've been doing TV long enough. You have to.

It's a rarity to have that kind of relationship. And I have it. And I have it today with my two co-host on Fox and Friends Weekend. And it's super rare to actually have a personal relationship and care and like and want to spend more time than the amount of time you have to spend with someone at doing that. We go away together. We're going away together this weekend. After the draft, like, we all go away together.

Where you are? We're, Bahamas. We are, listen, we're best man at each other's weddings. There's been a lot of weddings. That's awesome. Between the six of us, a lot of weddings. I'm actually getting married next week, by the way. You are?

Yeah, I'm a loping Italy with my fiancé, Rosie Tennyson. You're loping. You're not going to take them and have one of them be your best man? Guest list is zero. I'm not like any of my knucklehead friends. Are you kidding me? I like my money. I'm not bringing them.

But where in Italy? I'm Elfey. Oh, man. Congratulations, man. A week away. That's awesome. Yeah. I know.

And I'm 54, man. And this is the first time I really haven't sabotaged the relationship. I talked about the mental health part. When you have this depression and anxiety, you feel like you're not worthy of it. So you sabotage relationships. You ruin them all. I've done that. And because now I started talking about this.

and I wrote my book Unbreakable about my turning my depression, anxiety, and a motivation, and my podcast, Unbreakable. I've done so much work for the first time in my life, I'm not sabotaging a relationship. And I'm able to tell her, too, this is what I need when I have my crazy moments. And she's, man, she's incredible. Never too late to find love, man. She's awesome. That is awesome.

Congratulations, man. Give me the good stuff. This is my drug. Okay. This is my downtime. mock draft simulator, reading mock draft, reading Dane Bruegler's 300, I probably read about 300 profiles. I read all the profiles. I'm ready for who the Cowboys could pick at 24, 56, and the Cowboys aren't even ready for who they're taking. And 87. I got every, I got to stop at three

because they don't have a fourth round pick. I love this stuff. It's my drug. Here's what I want to know. Like, you're hearing stuff. Where's the movement going to be? It's got to be targeted at quarterback somebody's moving up i guess for j j mccarthy what's going to happen i don't see that actually happening right at this point i know everybody else does hey here's the thing jay mccarthy also listen jim harbaw smart he talks about jac j mccarthy being the best quarterback out there trying to get people to really really believe it's somebody will jump up in front of them because then four quarterbacks go in front of them and they get the pick of the litter for everybody else because they're sitting right back there at five um and just you know i've always i'm doing the first

round of this draft for Fox Sports Radio. I'm going to the Bahamas with the crew. And I do it differently. I don't do a mock draft because I am, I've always proud of myself on trust. I'm a relationship broker and an information broker. And if somebody says, I glace, here's who we're taking,

but you can't tell anyone. But I can't tell anyone. I'm not going to lie to the fans. Or they lie to you and use you to manipulate everyone else. It's my 30 second draft. They don't lie to me anymore. I used to it. But also now, kind of like I'm in the middle, and it all comes out when I'm on Fox Sports Radio.

I'm in the middle of teams will actually call me and say, hey, so I'll give you an example. You bring up the Cowboys. They told me that a couple years ago, they want to one of those top corners in the drafts, Shetan or J.C. Horn. And I said, can't get them where you are. It's not going to happen. He said two teams in front of you want them. If you want to get them, you guys have to move up to at least five. And they're like, if you want to pick of those guys, like, yeah, I said, who's your next guy?

Said, Micah Parsons. I said, okay, you could drop back a few, but not that far. And that's what they did. So that's like teams will tell me, hey, Glaze, this is who we love. Can we move here? Can we move there? And I don't sway them in it. Like, if somebody, like, I had one team tell me they loved somebody all the way up like

10 a couple of years ago, and nobody else had them in the first round. And I tell them, hey, you got quite a ways you can move back. But I never say like, oh, this guy's terrible or anything along those lines. But it's fun. I get to be kind of part of it. And so I, you know, I see. Look, I see Caleb Williams going one, Jaden Daniels going two, Drake May going three. I don't see, everybody thinks the Vikings are going to move up to three.

I don't think they have the ammunition, to be honest with you. But are you saying, did you think, will the Vikings be able to get J.J. McCarthy? What are they at 11, the Vikings? Yeah, but he'll drop that far. But I think there's going to be a conversation between him and Pennock said. I don't think it's just clear cut like everybody thinks. Really? Yeah, I think there's a conversation.

They might. And I think, but that's where I think the Vikings are placed also where there's a little. lot of opinions room. They debate, debate, debate, debate. If I'm them, I go, okay, who does Kevin O'Connell like better? But there's something else I hear from you there. If somebody else does move up to take J.J. McCarthy, and it's not the Vikings in the 789 range, you might look for Michael Penning's to go. No, but you're not saying 789. You're saying three. Well, whatever. Four quarterbacks gone. What I'm also hearing from you is you could have five by the 11th. No, I'm saying, I think three will go on the top three. Yep. Then I don't see somebody making a

move with, let's say, Arizona, well, I shouldn't say, as of the other day, I don't see somebody making a move for Arizona having the ammunition. Now, if somebody like a Minnesota wanted to move up, I think they're going to have to give a lot more than, I don't think they want to give their second of two first rounders this year. So it kind of almost be like, well, the first round of this year, a one next year, some other stuff. I'm sure any team will go, we want both ones this year and a one next year and a three, and of this, and of that. of it may say, okay, they may say no. The problem with the team like Minnesota,

they still have a lot of holes I get to fill. And you start just giving away your draft copy. Yeah, but my takeaway, what I'm hearing from you as well, is even if McCarthy's gone, well, Pinnick's still there. So we could look at five quarterbacks in the top 11. I don't know. Yeah, you could. Yes.

But I think we're in all said and done. Because I think if you don't have a quarterback, go, let's say, four. Like the other teams, besides the John, actually looking a quarterback. I don't see that happening. I don't see another quarterback in the top 10 outside those three unless somebody does jump up. Now, team wise, team wise. As it starts going down and met maybe a team like the Vikings go, okay, we can go get one of these quarterbacks and move up three spots, let's say. But I don't see them jumping up to three

or four. Right, right, right. That can change because they may say, okay, listen. And now also, here's what happens also. Everybody thinks that these boards have been set for a while when the truth is kind of get them somewhat set Friday, last Friday. Then they, a lot of teams go take the weekend off. Some teams still linger around. Then they come back Monday and they really reset them. A lot of teams kick everybody else out the draft room. And that's when like the head coach and GM will really kind of, you know,

batting down the hatches and change things. But then certain teams, they stick to their board. Some teams, it's paralysis by overanalysis. I'll bring it another cowboy story. Years ago, they were set on John Merriman with their first. first pick set set he was the guy absolutely no doubt about it the morning of the drafts i get a call from some of the cowboys saying hey we heard this and this is about sean and you check this out and you know i came back and i'm like yeah this is no big deal though then he said yeah it actually

doesn't matter by the time i had gone check it out and it was it would be a good scoop for me also which i would have broken but it ended up not being it was nothing there by the time i'd come back to them they said actually we already went off Sean and we're now on to Marcus where that was the day of the draft worked out they had set they'd been set on Sean yeah and we went to demarcus that day and yeah it worked out pretty damn well yeah they almost Marcus Spears that pick instead of both of them but we're convinced man you'll get spears later on and they're able to get to mark they're right uh well indulge me then uh it i mean all signs point to an offensive tackle and it's just a matter of who makes it to 24 yeah and and and and

there's no, there's not a consensus, even like, I think, you know, Joe is the best offense tackle on this draft, best lineman, but he's actually not the consensus of everybody. I would say he's probably number one, and at least of the teams I've talked to, probably about three, four of those of them, but it's not unanimous. And then, you know, you have Latham from Alabama, you have the Oregon State kid. What, what do you mean? You can't say his name? Do you get all the, you get, hold on, the Oregon State guy, the Penn State guy, and the Washington guy.

You just look some notes. Don't, what are you looking at? I got it right here. I don't want you to. Oregon State. Yeah, yeah. I want to mess them up. Right.

Let me see if I can do it. I got nothing in front of me. You tell me if I get it right. Talisi Fuaga, Oregon State. Troy Fatanau, Washington. And then this one's the one I can't. Olau-U-F, I can't do the Penn State guy. Fashano, right.

Fashano. Yeah. That's why I'm looking down. Because that one I'm messing up. By the way, do you what the crazy part is? When you talk to teams, they don't have a right. They don't have a right. Yeah.

I don't have a right. Yeah. All right, before we go, since you're so plugged in, can you do this for me? I'm going to ask it two ways. I asked this of Pete Priscoe recently as well. Give me the one guy that's going to go higher than everybody thinks. They're not talking about it. There is always one guy.

the rest of the, every draft coverage, you'd be like, oh my God, I had him rated way lower. And he went, but, you know, you shouldn't. The Cowboys did that with Tyler Smith. Tyler Smith, nobody thought he should go where he did. They picked him and everybody was like, oh, my God. And he turns out to be great. So one guy like that and one guy who everybody thinks will go really high

that will be sitting in the green room really late. Based on what you're here. The guy that's really kind of, I can just tell you, the guy that has been talked about the most to me this week, has been Byron Murphy, defensive tackle from Texas. Yeah. Games love him. So not going to make it to 19 where all the mock drafts have him at the Bengals.

Yeah. No, he might because here's the other thing. There could be a run. Let's say once there starts being a run on wide receivers, sometimes people then start reaching for these receivers. Oh my God, they're going to go so fast, and they start reaching for guys. But no, he can go, you know, he can go anywhere from like 12 all the way down or 11 all the way down.

Like it's, yeah, he's, he's just been getting a lot of love. He might get slotted down there, but he's getting a ton of love this week. And who, another guy who's getting a lot of love, by the way, is a Cooper de Chene from Iowa. Yeah. More was a safety than a corner. Yeah. Doesn't mean he's going to go out pie, but just a ton of love him. Just trying to look at my lunch.

Lunch pale guy. Hard worker. First in, first out. Very, very, very, very, very, very. He really is. But I'm trying to think who else here who could really, really, man. Well, you already told me who's my slide.

I think you were saying. Well, I said, because McCarthy is not going to go in top four and everybody thinks he is. So that's not. That's what I was going to say. You kind of hinted it's McCarthy. Yeah. And I think Bo Nix also was not going to be really high up.

Like, you know, he's going to, you know, maybe late first, but I, you know, probably could be second. Let me think. You know, the one, the guy also that everybody kind of, they have such a high grade on. on his latu from UCLA, but he has a neck that's so concerning, but skill-wise, he is off the charts, but then you look and go, man, some teams will sit there and go, man, we got them all the way up here, but this neck and some teams will then say, yeah, we're going

to ignore it. We're just going to roll a dice and hope we get lucky. And other teams will sit there and go, nope, we've got to take them off no matter what, even though we're sitting right here. So that'll be pretty interesting what happens. The neck got late in Vandreish. They'll catch up to you. Great stuff. You can, by the way, go hear the story about the Iraqi POW being reunited with the Marine Savior here. It's Unbreakable with Jay Glazer.

Great conversation, Jay. Thanks for setting us up for the draft. We'll be listening on Thursday night. Have fun. Get married. Whoa. It's it, baby. Draft Bahamas marriage.

That's a hell of a week and a half you got. Bam. How about that? All right. Thanks, Jay. Thanks, brother. There he goes. Jay Glazer.

All right. We've gone long today. That's all right. We'll finish off here. Sigma. My most Sigma quote, according to my son. Next on the Will Cain Show. It is time to take the quiz. It's five questions in less than five minutes. We ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at the quiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. All right, I got to go. I got to go catch a flight.

But I want to share this with you. My son recently looked at me and said, that's one of your top five most Sigma quotes. It is the Will Kane show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel. Do you know what Sigma is? Neither did I. Sigma is like alpha.

You know, some dudes are alpha, some are beta. But a Sigma is like an alpha but a lone wolf. I don't know why all the young kids think Sigma's cool. I'm like, you want to be a leader of men. Be an alpha. Don't be a Sigma. Anyway, that was the compliment I got. This is one of the most sigma things you've said.

This was me on the ruthless podcast. And my life lesson for everybody on that guys is like, first of all, I've never been afraid of hearing no. And I don't care if you get a thousand noes. It only takes one yes. But make sure you go to the people that have the ability to say yes. I could have asked a dozen people under him. And all they would have been able to say is no. They wouldn't have been able to say yes.

But he could say yes. And so what I'm talking about there is my first job of media was conservative analyst. CNN and I guessed at the email address at the president of CNN one night first name dot last name Turner um and send him an email and he responded within 15 minutes off and running um but that's kind of and I try to teach my sons at look what's it matter if somebody says no to you like you're at the same place you started you're not set back you're just at the same place you started but the trick is not just being resilient or thick skin to hear know, but don't constantly set yourself in a position to be, to fail. Because if you're asking

someone, hey, can I get a job? Can I get a meeting? Can I get this approved? Don't ask someone that doesn't have the power to say yes, to say yes, because most people and most businesses are only empowered to say no. They're gatekeepers, they're filters. They do have power, but that power is to say no. So make sure, don't be afraid of that no, but at least get it from someone. that has the power to say yes. That's why I went right to the top, sent the email to the top. I went in the business. I was nobody.

I still am. But you might as well. Take a thousand nose. That's my son. He said, it's one of the most Sigma quotes ever. I'll take a thousand nose for one yes. I'm like, that's right. And then my son said to me,

yeah, you begged to President CNN. You got down on your knees and begged him for a job. Nice. So my Sigma or my beta? What are you making fun of me here for? Anyway, thought I'd share that moment with you. I got to go. I got to catch a flight.

So I'll see you tomorrow on the Will Cain show. guests.