Will Cain Country - Exclusive: Gavin Newsom’s “Empire of Fraud” - $180B STOLEN! (ft. John Ashbrook, Michael Duncan, & Chris Rufo)

Episode Date: April 7, 2026

Tuesday night, April 7th, 8:00PM. That is the deadline President Donald Trump has given Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, before the U.S. begins striking the Islamic Republic’s energy infrastructure. Is it the end of the line for Iran? The Boys from the Ruthless Podcast, John Ashbrook and Michael Duncan, join Will and The Crew to examine President Trump’s comments on Iran, before reacting to General Qasem Soleimani’s niece’s violations of Sharia Law (and detainment by ICE) and sharing their theories on the disappearance of several UFO adjacent scientists.Plus, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute Chris Rufo shares the fruits of his investigation into California’s staggering levels of fraud, from a $114 million “butterfly bridge” to a multi-million dollar slush fund funneling taxpayer dollars to everything from “ancient Egyptian healing” to free doulas for “black-birthing” people and much more.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

This episode is brought to you by Tellus Online Security. Oh, tax season is the worst. You mean hack season? Sorry, what? Yeah, cybercriminals love tax forms. But I've got Tellus Online Security. It helps protect against identity theft and financial fraud so I can stress less during tax season or any season.

Plans start at just $12 a month. Learn more at tellus.com slash online security. No one can prevent all cybercrime or identity theft. Conditions apply. This episode is brought to you by FedEx. These days, the power move isn't having a big metallic credit card to drop on the check at a corporate lunch. The real power move is leveling up your business with FedEx intelligence and accessing one of the biggest data networks powered by one of the biggest delivery networks. Level up your business with FedEx, the new power move.

Is Trump about to nuke Iran? Are there aliens among us? And is that the reason scientists are disappearing with Michael Duncan and John Ashbrook of Ruthless? Plus, the Empire of Fraud in California with City Journal's Chris Rufo. It is Wilkane Country streaming live with the Wilcane Country YouTube channel, the Wilcane Facebook page here for you. Always follow on Spotify. or on Apple. I think I have a different standard than everyone else that works on Will Kane country.

I think I have higher tolerance or I have a harder time empathizing with people far away. But several stories sent to me this morning by Two of a Day's Dan, tinfoil patent, the mysterious lurking in the background, Connor, is that Howard Stern imposed incredibly stringent rules upon the people that worked for him and his house cleaners. And I think good for Howard Stern, Plex, a company, technology company, sends all of its employees on a corporate retreat that is suggested to be a nightmare. And I think it sounds like a hell of a good time. We're going to break all that down. Plus, this from President Donald Trump, who posted, a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.

I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have a complete and total regime change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionary, wonderful, can happen. Who knows? We'll find out tonight. One of the most important moments in the long complex history of the world. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death will finally end.

God bless the great people of Iran. Today's Dan, tinfoil Pat here with us, Along with now two of the four members of the Ruthless Podcast, it is John Ashbrook and Michael Duncan, joining us on Wheel Can Country. What's up, everyone? What's up, fellas? Yo. Hey, man.

What's going on? What is up? My head is massive. Look at my head compared to everyone else's head. That's so much larger than everyone. That giant brain you've got. It's kind of reflective. Big head, big star.

That's right. Thank you. They do say big head, big star. No, I think this is actually reflective of real life as well. Like, I think you do have a large head. You have told us about this. Aren't you a size eight in a fitted baseball cap or a cowboy hat? Wouldn't you wear an eight?

Wow. Yeah. Depends on how much hair I have. Yeah. Let's go around the horn. Patrick's an eight. I'm a seven and three eights at times a seven and a half. Dan, you look like you have a pretty big heed.

Seven and a half. Seven and a half. All right, ruthless. One with his hat backwards, one with his hat forwards. Quite a statement worthy of its own breakdown. Duncan backwards hat is in what size? It's like seven and three quarters. I have a pretty big head.

And my kids have big heads too. It's very hard to cut their hair. But you're not in the last run of the snap, though. You're good. Yeah, seven and three quarters. Is that the last snap on a snapback? Are you down to one? Like it barely reaches?

You know, I don't really know. I just know if I'm getting headaches. It's the wrong hat for me. Will, I'm looking at this right now. Yeah, I'm looking at it right now. And it's got three, he's got three snaps in there. Okay. That's pretty serious.

He's fastened three? Yeah. Or he's got three open snaps? He fastened three. It's a large brain. I am I'm two open ones. Like I could go too tighter. Do you know what I mean on a snapback?

All right, Ashbrook, what size is your head? Seven and a half. And I know this just because I just bought a fitted Cincinnati Reds hat in the honor of our team that's on a four-game winning streak here. Yeah. Most of those wins coming against my Texas Rangers in a recent season. series against the Reds. All right, fellas, are we about to nuke Iran? We're about to end the civilization, according to President Donald Trump. Are we about to nuke Iran, Ashbrook and Duncan? You know what? Nobody knows. Even the president in his own post said, who knows? And we're eight

hours now from the moment of truth. And what we do know is that this is a president who follows through on threats. I mean, just think about what he told the Iranians and first term when he said stop the violence against America, their proxies killed an American contractor, and then he waxed Soleimani. So this is a guy who follows through on threats, which is the opposite of his predecessor Joe Biden, who you guys probably remember, famously told the Iranians don't, and then the Iranians continued to kill Israelis and everybody in the region. And then he didn't really do anything about it. I mean, Trump follows through. and so he's capable of doing anything tonight, which is probably key to his negotiating strategy.

I mean, I got to agree with Ashbrook. I mean, Trump might not know what Trump is going to do tonight yet. It's all going to depend on what the Iranians do. And that's sort of the whole point of the negotiation in the first place is that he never takes anything off the table. And in all of these pressers he's had with members of the media recently, they've all tried to prod him for details on things. And what does he always say? I'm not going to tell you. because he holds all the cards, and that's his leverage in a negotiation.

We see this on everything from trade and tariffs. This is how Donald Trump operates. And, you know, so I agree with Ashbrook. I mean, don't cross a red line when it comes to Donald Trump. All right. I'm going to offer you my theory on what this is, but let me ask you a question first, and I'm genuinely curious about this. I mean, I say is Trump going to nuke Iran somewhat facetiously?

because I don't think that's an option that is on the table. I don't think he's considering using nuclear weapons, even though there are people out there, notably on the right, that are concerned today or faux concerns, that that might be exactly what is done by President Donald Trump. Do you think, instead, that bombing bridges and power stations, which many on the left are going to say is a war crime, if they don't have dual military use,

if there's civilian targets, it's a war crime, but more interesting to me than that debate is whether or not that is an effective tactic to doing away with the regime in Iran. What does what do bombing bridges and power stations do? It certainly will inflict pain on the population of Iran, but what will it do to dislodge the regime in Iran? I mean, hopefully open the Strait of Hormuz. because Iran is doing this to the world economy right now, they're the ones who are strangling the global energy supply.

So I think that everything has to be on the table when it comes to how we respond to that and getting this regime to change course. And it's not just energy supply. But the argument, though, John, is that the civilians will pay the price from that in a way that the regime will not. that they make this asymmetric. They put all of the cost on the population and they dig themselves in because they're unconcerned with the effect on the population. We'll see what he actually does. And it'll, of course, be based on how the Iranians respond to his request for peace, for a ceasefire. And apparently there's this 10-point plan that the Iranians submitted through the Pakistanis last night. and Trump folks say that they're getting, they're getting partially there. Maybe they'll go the rest of the way here in the next eight hours.

You know, and there are folks who are experts in military strategy who could tell you better the impact that the bridge campaign and a power plant campaign could have. But it's not just energy that they're bottling up in the Strait of Hormuz. There's an entire rural American industry dependent on fertilizer. And the building blocks of fertilizer come through the Strait of Hormuz. And I don't know if you've talked to farmers or guys in that industry, but they're saying red alert that the crops are not going to produce this year at the same rate that they would otherwise.

And we will start noticing it in the fall because of what's happening in Iran right now. And so, you know, I sincerely hope that they respond to his threats because they know that he'll follow through on them. But, you know, we'll find out in eight hours. So here's my suspicion, fellas. My suspicion is this is a message that is less directed at the people or the regime in Iran and more directed at the framing of a deal. So my suspicion is that we are somewhere in the process, as you point out, in the, the, negotiation of a deal with Iran. And this is sort of setting the stakes for that deal. And that by saying this this morning, President Trump can then, later when a deal is made,

say this was in response to this strong arming, this potential threat. My suspicion is that we are well on the way and that it won't happen tonight. I could be wrong. I mean, this is all a suspicion. and anything could fall apart as well in the meantime. But this is sort of setting up in the public, the American public's mind, the victory that will be the deal that's accomplished today. Yeah, I think you could be right, Will. Another thing that strikes me about it, we interviewed this guy named Brian Hook on our show a couple of times. He was the president's envoy to the Iran situation in the first term, expert on the area. And he says that the means of production and commerce in Iran are largely controlled by the IRGC.

And of course, the IRGC works at the behest of the Mullahs who are in power. And if they feel pressure to their bottom line and to the commerce that they control, maybe they pressure the Mullahs at the top to do something that they otherwise wouldn't. Just a thought. But this guy, Brian Hook, is very smart. I don't know if you've talked to him. 100% you should have him on your show. No.

But I think there might be something to that. And you know, Trump's understanding of the internal dynamics of Iran are based on, you know, 50 years of intelligence that has built up year over year from, you know, Americans who are experts in that field. And so I got to imagine that he is squeezing them in all the right places. Well, the other thing that this bombing campaign could unleash, you put it on your menu of possibilities, but I think that we can then dismiss it is will the people of Iran ever stand up and do something on the streets to begin this process internally? However, I don't think that's what America wants. Israel may want something like that, but I don't think America wants that because the inherently destabilizing effects of it and so forth. We've seen nothing from the Iranian people that would suggest they're about to. Now, in January, they tried. And what was it, 90,000 of them were shot and killed or something like that.

But we're not seeing it now. And you're like, well, why? When Trump says, like in this particular post, he says, now that we have complete and total regime change, it's kind of like, again, he is declaring victory on that front already. So the Americans wouldn't be sending a signal to the people. to do anything. Now, again, I think the Mossad and Israel's goals in this are totally different, and they may. And if that's the case, there's got to be an underground effort to be arming the Iranian people. They've got to feel like they're going to have some sense of victory based on how

many times they've been burned in the past. But I don't think that's actually on the menu of outcomes from desirable outcomes from President Trump. I don't think it's the chief, and I don't think it has been from the beginning that the chief demand that we get out of this this war. I think it's pretty simple. We want Iran to end its nuclear program. We want to limit their capacity for ballistic missiles. And we want them to stop funding the terrorists who did things like October 7th in Israel. So I think those are the chief reasons this war was started in the first place.

And if that's the outcome we get, that is success. I agree, will ultimately what we don't want here is something. destabilizing to the region. And it's not just Israel, it's the other Gulf countries who are extremely concerned about that. And that's why they've been on board with what Donald Trump's doing. Right. So you don't think Israel and the other Gulf states want a real total regime change? You know what I mean by that.

Yeah, I mean, I'm sure there's there's there's there's two different things, right? There's I would like to have a regime change or I'm going to do a regime change. right and those are fundamentally two different things I don't think our goal is the purple thumbs in Iraq and everybody's voting for a democracy that ultimately is not our goal and I don't think the American military is capable of doing that as we learned in Iraq but we what we can do is is force regimes that are hostile to us to respond to the incentives that we enforce and that's what Donald Trump has done to what every president for the last 40 years has said they were going to do and then not done by the way and he's had the will

to do it. But wait, okay, but short of that, what we're talking about is creating a zombie leadership of Iran, not unlike what we did in Venezuela, in that you take out enough at the top, hoping to reach some other parties underneath that are driven by either self-interest, that self-interest could be as simple as survival, right, or have lost some form of religious radicalism down the chain and now we can have them in charge it's a less than appealing outcome for the people of iran but to your point duncan i agree not our concern not our goal but the presumption as well is once you reach that let's call it a middle ground i don't know

how deep we're into the leadership of having taken everybody out that that is a rational actor that isn't a religious fundamentalist that we can trust those three things you laid out no nukes So what'd you say? No nukes, no funding of terrorist activity. Ballastic missiles. Yeah. And even if it's an imperfect leadership solution over there, their nuclear capabilities are significantly degraded beyond what happened at Operation Midnight Hammer. I mean, their ability to restart their nuclear enrichment program is, I mean, it seems like it's in ashes.

I mean, I'm not reading the Intel reports, but it sure as hell seems like we're dropping. and an awful lot of bombs on important areas over there. And their ability to manufacture and deliver those missile capabilities have been seriously degraded. So even if the mullahs are replaced by some sort of imperfect leadership, their ability to create as much chaos as they have over the last 47 years has been significantly degraded. Let's take a quick break. But continue this conversation with Michael Duncan and John Ashbrook of the Ruthless Podcast. when we come back on Wilcane Country.

Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're still hanging out with Michael Duncan and John Ashbrook of The Ruthless Podcast. Yeah. We'll see. I mean, I think it's a line from Donald Trump. I'm not sure, but sure is easier to negotiate with Catholics than it is with Muslims. The implication is, like, you can find Adelsea Rodriguez in Venezuela. I don't know if there's a Delci Rodriguez in Iran.

I don't know that we've found that. person who is willing to meet those three thresholds, as Duncan articulated. I guess we'll find out today, essentially. But you, I think, hit on something that is concerning that if there were such a figure in Iran, the chances are that they were among the 90,000 murdered in the initial days is pretty high. And, you know, if you're wondering why there hasn't been this popular uprising, maybe it's because those who are most motivated to do it are, you know, unfortunately, were killed in those early days.

But I mean, you know, like we've said over and over again here, we're eight hours away from learning what happens. We'll find out the end of a civilization. Okay, I'm going to admit to you guys something, all of you. I'm interested in this story in large part because of this, because of these pictures. Um, these, this is, go ahead, zoom in, Dan. Come on.

Get us off the screen. If you're watching on YouTube or Facebook, this is the niece and grandniece of Qasem Soleimani, okay? If I'm just guessing what I'm looking at is the one in red is the niece 47 years old. The one in the white and the get up is the grandniece in her 20s. This is a massive compliment I'm about to give. I actually don't know which one is in the bikini. I don't know.

Is that the 47-year-old or the 20-something-year-old? I think it's the older one. I actually don't know. I don't know. Sunlasses hide a lot. That's the older one. She got an orange hanging from her mouth. She's got a lot going on.

She's got a tat. Check out the tat on the string. I don't know why you're so excited over this, by the way. This is important research, Will. My wife's going to love it. Yeah. Okay, hold on a minute. Mine's watching right now.

Let's just text, please. Look at the tattoo. Enhance. Enhance. It looks like a daffy duck type thing. Yeah, I can do it from here. Good idea. There we go.

I can do it from here. What are we looking at on that? Is that hello kitty? I think it's hello kitty. Do you don't need to go there? Is that hello kitty? Hello kitty is one of the biggest brands in the world. Okay.

All right. Well, the point is these two ladies, we're living in Los Angeles. And they have been living in nine. life in Los Angeles, complete with, I think, Armez and Louis Vuitton and all kinds of other Tesla and glamorous lifestyles all the while, not just being the niece and grandniece of, you know, the terror leader, now deceased, Kassam Soleimani, but also I think sending out some messages and being pretty supportive of the regime in Iran and anti-American. And so Marco Rubios began the process of taking away.

Were they naturalized citizens? Were they citizens? Were they green card holders, permanent residents? They had some legal status in America. I think it was a green card. Which, by the way, why are these people in America? I read today as well the lady who they called her screaming Mary, the PR propagandist from the 1979 embassy takeover.

Is it her son? lives in America as well and is a teacher. And he had come here on a student visa. I don't understand what we're doing handing out these green cards. Well, I do understand on some fronts. But I don't understand, you know, how we're inviting all of these people in. Listen, man, I don't disagree with you at all. And, you know, I feel like they all say death to America.

We hate America. It's the worst place on earth. but then they show you what they actually think by where they live. And the proof is it's a pretty nice place to live. And, you know, there are so many people on the left who just repeat this over and over and over again. And yet they all choose to enjoy the great gifts that our country offers on a daily basis. I'm so glad that Rubio is cracking down on this stuff because, you know, you never know, specifically if somebody goes beyond just criticizing everything about America and is sort of like, you know,

passing information back and forth. One of the things that I've, I understand about them is that they actually were going back and forth to Iran. So they, they were claiming that, yes, man. And so if they're so not dressed like this. No, no, that get him killed. But I do think it's, it's good to a victory lap that finally people are being held accountable for bragging on social media, you know? I mean, you see these photos, you know, travel Instagrams and things like that. Now finally someone's being held accountable for bragging. I think that's appropriate. Does this suggest that there are rational figures in the regime? Does this suggest because here, look, like the hypocrisy is worthy of commentary as well. They dress like this.

they have all these luxury items. They dress very sexy, very sexy. It's almost like it's not that bad. I mean, I don't even know what you're talking. Dan, it's like, what do you mean why I'm not into this story? Like, I don't get it. Are you telling me that I'm off base here? Yeah, I don't really find them that attractive.

I don't understand. I didn't know you were anti-Persian. I actually have a theory. Whoa. I have a theory about this world. Don't let my lefty friends hear that. So do you know your theory about, about Iranian women's soccer? Oh, boy.

Yeah. I think the niece. It's a fact. I think the niece might be one of them. I think she might be... Get out of here. Now they... Yeah.

The face shape is a little... The niece right there. No, no, that's the great niece. What are you talking? Oh, the mother? Well, had she had the niece then? I don't know. I don't ask how these things happen.

But, you know, we... No. Ruthless, do you know what we're talking about? No. No. In soccer team in Iran? Well, a little bit, but... You don't?

I know that a bunch of them tried to defect. You know this. Oh, no, that's the story. That's your mainstream media. Yeah, that's a real story. We get to the hard of things here. We got a real-ass tax here. This is where we get to the heart of the matter from the heart of America, man.

You know, you know that Iran is one of the world leaders in trans surgery. You know that? Yes. I did not know that. Europeans go to Iran to trans themselves. They go to get the gender surgery because they're one of the – you know how dudes go to Turkey to get a hair transplant. Others go to Iran to get it done to become a woman. They also force people who are gay in Iran to get transgendered surgeries.

They claim that there is no homosexuality in Iran. They got a lot of experience. That's right. That's right. Honestly, that's the truth. That's why they're the best. Yes. So when Ahmedinejad said, we don't have gay people, in a way, he was kind of telling the truth because they turn them all into women or whatever, right?

If you're gay, then they encourage you to head in the direction of becoming a woman. So it's dad or the roof, you know, so. Yeah, right. Yeah. You have feminine features. We should, we should transition. Who, me? No.

Redoubt. I figured it was one of us. I didn't know which one was one of us. So, back to this. I actually pitched this story to ESPN in 2015 or 16. I wanted to do it because I thought it was a, it is a real sports story. There's articles out there you can read it. The women's soccer team of Iran who wears wrist to ankle, whatever we call it,

and covering their head. That's that. He's job. I don't know what that is. The whole thing. The theory is that a lot of them are men. And if you look at pictures, and all you get to see is their face, really.

But that a lot of the Iranian women's national soccer team were actually men. And now Patrick's trying to say this lady, but she's not. I think my radar is. The one on the left. Good enough. Yeah. I have radar. No.

She's into. She's into self-improvement, Patrick. That's all she's into. So they can't dress like that in Iran. That's for sure. And I think that's pretty interesting. Back to the rational actor thing, because they're posting this stuff on social media. So do you think when they go back to Iran, any of the Moolers are like, ladies, what are we doing?

And if they're not, that suggests somewhere along the line, there's some rational leadership within the Iranian. We need to get to those guys, the ones that were forgiving of these Instagram posts, because those guys we can deal with in the West. Right. Right, 100%. I mean, if it's possible to get down to that level, and, you know, who knows, maybe they've, you know, the Israelis and the Americans have waxed enough of their leadership that we're getting close. But, I mean, maybe there are some rational actors over there, to your point. I got another idea. Could these ladies go?

Could we put them in charge of Iran? Like, they like Iran. They don't like America. Will, I got a great idea. Iran's next top of all. We got to do some more research on all of these posts on Instagram, got to dig into the likes on all these photos. And then we find the guys in IRGC leadership in Iran who are liking these photos.

And those are our hot leads, Will. That's modern day, that's modern day diplomacy. I'm not even joking. I think you're 100% right, Duncan. Somebody at the CIA needs to be digging into these IG posts and find out if anybody somewhere along in the regime, It's going to end up being some dude whose job is to guard some random thing. And he is all day sitting around on his phone, hitting like, guess what, man.

You're the new, you're the new Ayatollah. He's like, why? And they're like, we saw your Instagram activity. It's going to be amazing. All right, one more before we go. Congressman Tim Burchett, so I did this story a few weeks ago, guys. or a few days ago. It went pretty viral about these missing scientists in America. Okay, they've worked at Los Alamos, National Laboratories, NASA Jet Propulsion Center.

Over the past two years, and then it seems to have picked up some pace where I'd say four, eight total. Burchett told me it's more than eight. Like four or five in the past just two or three months alone have either been murdered and they're unsolved murders or they have gone missing. Like they've gone on a hike and never came home type thing. And they all are involved at some level with access to classified information, sensitive information within these very few. It's two to three institutions. Like I said, Los Alamos and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratories. And, you know, my first instinct was, well, that's some kind of foreign power.

If they are connected, and we're not assuming that, there's still the power of coincidence, although it's a lot of coincidence. once, twice, three, I don't know, eight, okay. At some point, you go, who is it? Russians, Iranians, Chinese. But Congressman Tim Burchett,

and I just caught this at the end of our interview yesterday, Patrick said I did a poor job in the interview of not really catching it and falling through. So TMZ gets more of the scoop. Congressman Tim Burchett says aliens are real and there's been human contact. Burchett is suggesting these scientists are connected to a silencing campaign about what's actually going on in outer space.

What say you, Ruthless? Dubious. I'm more lean towards the foreign actor component of this. Will, if there is some sort of conspiracy that's taking out mid-level scientists in our, you know, defense and industrial base and, you know, those scientists, of course, have access to, you know, highly classified information. I find it hard to believe that aliens who, if they, can come here have mastered interstellar travel and our technology, their technology is way more advanced than ours, would sort of like delicately try to rebalance somehow the future of humanity by taking out mid-level scientists.

I feel like they would just vaporize the entire program if they wanted to. You know? It's an internal thing to silence anybody from potentially talking about the UFOs. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, we were talking about this earlier. The idea that they're going to start wax and mid-level guys to protect people from seeing their flying saucers is a little bit of a stretch. But I don't even know that it's foreign actors. I think there's so much money changing hands from our government to people who are stealing it.

And I know you're going to talk about the situation in California later on on the show, the $180 billion that's out the door and gone into somebody's pocket. there's so much money that's changing hands. I think there's also incentive by people who are involved in receiving that money to stop anybody from closing that revenue stream. I think that this is one of the biggest problems in our country today, and I'm so glad that the administration is trying to crack down on it. But I think it's just as likely that there's some sort of organized crime effort to protect their revenue stream as it is that they're aliens.

you know, shooting their laser beams. It's scientists. Okay, four options. One, organized crime. Two, the United States government silencing people who could potentially talk about UFOs. Three, the aliens doing the job themselves. And four, foreign state actors. Four options there.

What percentage do you put at it's just a coincidence? Pretty low. Me, pretty low. Eight people is a lot of people. You know, you said it yourself. Like, you know, three is enough for a trend in, in any media environment, eight is more than double that number. I put the coincidence very low.

I mean, these missing scientists could also be part of some new program. We don't even know that's super classified, that they disappeared, and they're part of some government program for something that we don't even know about yet. You know, that's possible, too. So, I mean, I think that's on the table. I would say coincidence less than 10%. Something's going on. I think you go Occam's Razor on this, Will.

Don't do that. Don't go Occam's Razor. That's boring. What? Yeah, that'll be good for content. Yeah. I think these guys are right. Let's go with the easiest answer.

No, don't do that. It's true, Patrick. Occam's Razor is boring. Like, what a guy. He just took all the fun out. Like, sitting around one day, he's like, you know what? Everybody's having way too much fun. Let's just razor this thing.

Everybody's like, Hockham, get out of the party. He's a Debbie Downer for sure. Nobody invited you, Ocum. All right, you can always catch Michael Duncan and John Ashbrook at the Ruthless Variety Program. It's an excellent show. We love every moment. We get to have them on the show. I'm not seeing you enough these days on television.

Just real quick. Okay, we already started with the head size. Like, are you always a hat forwards guy, Ashbrook? Will I ever catch you with a backwards hat? You know, only if I'm on a boat and it's going to fly off my head. Only for, are you always a hat backwards guy, Duncan? Just with the angle of the lights in this room. I don't like the shadows on my face.

Smart. Plus, you know, beautiful face. It must be shown. Yeah, real smart. As a tech producer, that's really exciting for me to hear. I got to tell you guys, I'm a little disappointed in your hat game of late. I haven't seen a whole lot of hats out of this crew yet. That's true.

We've got to go cowboy hats. One man with two hats, and he doesn't wear any hats. Yeah. On any of the shows. Two hats, two shows. I subscribe to the Duncan philosophy. I covered this baby up. Both of us have been accused in the show being the most feminine-looking dudes of their life.

Let it shine, maybe. That's very 2015. All right. John Ashberg, Michael Duncan. Thanks, fellas. Have a good day. Thank you. Thank you.

There they go. Check them out again at the Ruthless Variety Program. I actually love this diplomacy by Instagram philosophy. I think that we should look at who is liking these photos of the Iranian nieces and grand nieces. I think within that analysis, we will find the rational state actor and we will find your future leader of Iran. And by the way, what's going on with the orange? The orange is really interesting. Patrick, did you say you think the bikini pick is the niece or the grandniece? Is that the older one or the younger one?

The older one? The older one? The 47-year-old? I believe so. I think the younger one looks a little more round, a little more feminine to me. You are not appreciating the work that a 47-year-old has put into herself and bought. I think that's what you're not fully appreciating. Dan knows a lot about plastic

I do my wife updates me every That knows a lot about that kind of stuff That's what he was saying Yeah, that lady's just done a lot Yeah A lot of filters A lot of fillers But you know who else has a lot of work

Trans people So I'm just saying Well you're right That's not false You're right That's the And it makes sense They have to keep going back to Iran

To get you know To get work Get the you know follow-up surgeries and stuff? I don't know. I'm just saying. Have we not caught up to turkey on the whole hair transplant thing? Why are dudes, is it a cost thing?

It's just more expensive in America? It's just more expensive. We talk to a certain, someone we know about this, and it's just the price difference. Yeah. Who? You know, someone that's on TV now that has some nice lettuce these days. Oh, Joey? Mm-hmm.

Joey talks about it. No, I know. He didn't hide it. No, no, no, I was just, I didn't know if he had. So I was just saying, but he has great hair. Did Joey go to Turkey? No, he did the, he has TV money now, so he could do the, uh, the expensive one. Oh, interesting.

Yeah. Fascinated. I want to do a whole podcast with Joey on that. Coming up, Chris Rufo of City Journal has dug in and done the investigation into the massive amount of fraud in California when we come back on Wilcane country. It's never too early to plan your summer story in Europe with WestJet, from rolling countryside to cobblestone streets. Begin your next chapter.

Book your seat at westjet.com or call your travel agent. WestJet, where your story takes off. In communities across Canada, hourly Amazon employees earn an average of over $24.50 an hour. Employees also have the opportunity to grow their skills and their paycheck by enrolling in free skills training programs for in-demand fields like software development and information technology. Learn more at aboutamazon.ca. Joining us now a bit more of a serious topic. It is Chris Rufo of City Journal, who has a new investigation out into the Empire of Fraud in California.

Chris, I'm just going to pull up your newest headline here because this, This is, here it is. You're not alone in this work, so we just want to give everybody credit, right? Ryan Thorpe, Kenneth Shrewp, Haley Strach, Gavin Newsom's Empire Fraud, California has lost more than $180 billion to fraud, according to officials and experts. There's so many, the hard thing now, Chris, and is like there's so many different angles to the fraud,

you've got to help us keep track of it. Like, what's fraudulent now in California? Yeah, so it's a great question. it's a question that we're starting to answer methodically one piece after another. The big picture, there are three main buckets of fraud. There's Medi-Cal, which is the state subsidized and really federally subsidized, health care system. There's unemployment insurance fraud, which spiked during COVID.

Still a problem. And then there's kind of general welfare fraud, homelessness, food stamps, other programs that are smaller in scale. And if you add these all together, under Gavin News, some experts and HHS officials estimate that California has lost somewhere between $180 and $280 billion. Now, that's like the GDP of New Zealand. It's a lot of money. And the problem for the federal government, for J.D. Vance's anti-fraud task force is that there's so much fraud. It's going to be hard to actually unravel a lot of these schemes because the federal government simply doesn't have enough resources, doesn't have enough investigators, enough prosecutors, and enough researchers to get to the bottom of it.

So my goal with these stories is to surface all of the places where we know there's fraud taking place and hopefully spur additional action. Yeah, you know, this weekend over Easter, I spent some time with some friends, I was at a ranch sitting around campfire, and this guy says to me, like, what's ever, like, nothing's ever going to happen to Tim Walts. nothing's ever going to happen with all these Somali fraudsters in Minnesota. And like a lot of things, I think people just get frustrated like with, well, when is anyone ever going to be held accountable?

Yeah, I'm one of those people. I'm very frustrated by that. You know, of course, we were the reporting team that brought the Somali fraud into the national headlines late last year. And I have been, frankly, disappointed with the pace, with the scale and scope of the federal counteractions against them. Federal prosecutors told us kind of on, you know, under shield of anonymity, that they simply didn't have enough resources to prosecute all of the Somali fraud. They had only started to prosecute or investigate the very tip of the iceberg. And even in the cases where we did

see prosecutions, convictions, jail time, in one case recently, a Somali fraudster who stole millions of dollars from taxpayers was only sentenced to one year in prison. And so if you are a fraudster, you're going to think, you know, 98, 99% of the time I'm probably going to get away with the crime. In that 1% of the time where I might get caught, maybe I'll serve a year, maybe two years in prison, but you're still walking away with millions or tens of millions of dollars at the end of the day. And so the ugly reality, and this is a criticism, frankly, of the federal government right now under President Trump, is that they're going to have to significantly. scale up these efforts if they want to deter fraud in the future. So tell us about, we're going to talk about a couple of those different buckets that you talked about, but it is the, what struck me in looking through what you have done,

it's not hospice. It is a program to help the elderly and the disabled, right? Stay at home. And what struck me in this and services for them inside the home is the estimated amount of fraud in your investigation versus the admitted amount of fraud that the state, I guess the state always accounts for some level of fraud in these programs, but the delta between what you think that fraud is and what they're suggesting the fraud is. Yeah, that's right. And so look, it's hospice, it's in-home care, it's pharmacy, it's other kind of sectors of the medical or

Medicaid system. And in this particular case, the in-home care program, which we report, reporting on extensively tomorrow is, you know, is now the number one job in the state of California. And so the government pays people to stay home most of the time with family members and take care of them, watch them, do their laundry, cooking, cleaning, you know, watch television with them. And so we're paying approximately 800,000 people to stay home or to stay in the homes of the care recipients and because it operates essentially on an honor system it's not like a hospital surgical suite where there are organizations you know accountings potential places where you could locate it this is a home-based service where the government pays individuals and it's all done in private and the discrepancy that delta you're talking about is so enormous because in California's case this is 800,000 people receiving public funds in the privacy of their own homes in most cases And there were a couple thousand of whistleblower reports and a couple hundred investigations and fewer than a hundred prosecutions. And so kind of where it actually ended up being a legal procedure.

And so you're only investigating a tiny, tiny, tiny, vanishingly small fraction of cases and then claiming, well, you know, we only uncovered $8 million in theft. But experts, and this dates back to Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration in the early to late 2000. thousands, they said somewhere between 25 and 40% of this entire program is fraud. Because we know that that is now a $30 billion annual program, we estimate between $5 and $12 billion annually is getting stolen from taxpayers. God. So 20% of the program, roughly, possibly, between $5 and $12 billion lost to fraud annually. What do you mean when you say it's the number one job in California. So the federal government has job codes, right? You're a radio host television presenter. I'm a writer, journalist, someone could be a marketing manager. So the government actually

tracks all of the different jobs, all the different occupations and occupational codes. An in-home care provider, which is publicly funded through this program, is now the number one job in the state of California. It is the most common occupation relative to all other occupations, truck driver, waitress, teacher, whatever it might be, all have fewer people than this publicly subsidized job, you know, up somewhere between 20 and 40 percent of which is just fraud. Incredible. It's the number one coded job in terms of quantity, 800,000, the largest job, number one job in California. What do you do? I'm an in-home health care provider. I mean, what do you do is pretty simple. And so look, in some cases, there's a legitimate need, right?

If you have a very elderly parent or you have a child that has significant, you know, physical or mental disabilities, the idea and the kind of compassionate use of the program is for people who really need to be taking care of full time, This is a subsidy so a family member can stay home to watch and take care of that person. Laundry, cooking, cleaning, et cetera. Two problems. I mean, one is just fraud. So the system is very easily gamed, and so people are cheating. They're pretending that their family member has some kind of condition or exaggerating some kind of disability.

So they get paid to just stay home and watch TV. But you have to also ask, say, wait a minute. You know, I'm a taxpayer. I pay for childcare. I pay for, you know, other services. My, you know, my elderly grandmother who just recently passed, well, my mother and other family members took care of her. And so say, wait a minute, you know,

if you're a middle class or professional class taxpayer, you have to pay for the care of your immediate family members. family members, but if you are just kind of living off the system, you can stay home and others will pay for it. And so I think there are two levels of argument where we're saying, wait a minute, this was supposed to be a very small fraction of people that were truly incapacitated and in need. And now it's expanded so that essentially it's a shadow welfare system. And I think California voters are starting to look around and saying, wait a minute, this is now 10% of our state budget. It's, you know, it's $30 billion a year. What on earth are we doing? Why do we

seem to be paying for everybody, for everything, including fraudsters, when the quality of life in California for middle class working people seems to get worse and worse? Yeah. One of the things that's interesting, you said, even dating back to Arnold Schwarzenegger, it was estimated to be about 20 percent. So this doesn't all land at the feet of Gavin Newsom, but there's more. than just this program, right? Like, there's the $114 million dollar butterfly bridge that has been built in Southern California. It's an overpass on the highway for everything from monarch butterflies to mountain lions. And so far, it's overdue and over budget.

How did this even – I can't believe the voters of California. Like, yeah, you know what? We do need this. We need a butterfly bridge. I mean, you know, look, there actually is a decent argument for wildlife crossings. So the idea is you have large animals like mountain lions or elk in some cases, not in California, but elsewhere. And it's actually not only good for environmental conservation or kind of creating, kind of maintaining the kind of wild landscape, but it also reduces traffic accidents because when you get large animals crossing over a bridge, instead in crossing over the land. And then it's, you're not going to crossing over the land. And the highway, cars aren't going to hit them and people will not get injured. And so in theory, there's a good argument. But what happening in California and why this is such a scandal is that in other states, these things cost maybe $5 to $10 million. In California, this bridge for

mountain lions and butterflies is now $114 million. It's more than a year behind schedule. And they were spending, you know, we did this investigation. We found they were spending money on insane things like the state was subsidizing these nonprofits that were performing Native American healing rituals on the bridge to try to kind of I guess keep native spirits alive. They had dispatched left-wing environmentalists to kind of roam through the countryside, collecting seeds, and then spending their time in what they called in their in their materials, sacred solitude. And so you say, well, wait a minute. You know, build the bridge, fine.

But this is now a jobs program for left-wing activists and environmentalists who don't know how to build a bridge. And in fact, the woman they have leading this project is a woman with no construction experience who actually carries around a stuffed animal of a cougar and wears a hot pink, you know, construction vest. And you just look at it and you're saying, wait a minute, if I were building big infrastructure, I'm a writer. I don't build big infrastructure. But if I were building big infrastructure, this is not the profile that I would be selecting. A woman with no construction experience. But in California, it seems like they want to just spend as much money as possible.

And who's really benefiting? Contractors, these big construction conglomerates, they love when things go over budget and over schedule. And then left-wing environmental activists who are just using this project to site. and off millions of dollars in public funds. Man, it feels like they can't build anything in California. I mean, the train idea, whatever, is so absurd at this point in the multi-hundreds of billions of dollars and really has gotten nowhere. I mean, the Gavin Newsom thing, it's like, I don't know how anyone could make a serious

argument based upon his executive experience in California that he has qualified in any way for higher office. All of this, you're reporting. the flight from California, meaning people leaving and moving to other places, it ought to be in a rational world the ultimate indictment. It ought to be fireable, not promotable. It ought to be. And look, when I kind of have studied Gavin Newsome, it seems like his qualifications are threefold. He's handsome. He's articulate. And he is utterly kind of shameless and single-minded in pursuit of power. I mean, this is someone who will do.

or say anything to accumulate power. And so I think Democrats are looking around, looking at the field, thinking about Kamala Harris, thinking about Tim Walts, and it seems like a natural conclusion where you want to have people running on your team that have that animal instinct, that have that charismatic appeal that, you know, despite their actual failures, failure in the real world, seem plausible as a president. And so my warning to conservatives is that, yes, Gavin Newsom has been a disaster for the state of California. He's a completely reckless and incompetent manager of public funds.

And he is shamelessly ideological. But that doesn't mean that he's not dangerous. And in fact, I think Gavin Newsom right now is the most dangerous man on the left. And I think he, look, could be a very fearsome competitor for the presidency come 2028. I actually think you're right. I just think for a rational voter, the case that's being made here, among many other cases, including his wife, ought to be an open and shut case. But I actually share, I understand the power of emotion and aesthetics and all of those things. And I agree. He's very dangerous. This last investigation that I wanted to talk to you about as well, well, in some ways connects to Gavin Newsom, because he is a product of the city of San Francisco. Also, the Zoroamam Dani has a new equity program that he's looking into launching in New York City, which the feds have said they're going to be paying very close attention to. And your headline is Inside San Francisco's Racialist Slush Fund.

It's called the Dreamkeeper Initiative, spends millions on groups that have offered all-black drag show, ancient Egyptian healing, free doulas for black birthing people, potentially in violation of federal law. to me, obviously, in violation of civil rights. And something that serves seems to be, at least in some respect, a model for what Mom Dani wants to do in New York. That's 100% right. And look, let's call it what it is. This is a racially segregated government program that provides benefits for only one group at the exclusion of other groups.

That's what it is in practice. And some of the reporting that we've done exemplifies that. And then you have to, you know, I don't know. you but I've never had ancient Egyptian healing it's not something that I would trust for my ailments and one of these groups where they were kind of funneling money to was actually giving massage therapy to black criminals like that was the program that they were running and so the it you know the San Francisco is facing a massive budget shortfall so their city is in the red as far as their

budget and they're still dispensing this some hundred and thirty million dollars to these NGOs that again are just a slush fund for political activists, a slush fund for this racially segregated ideology that they're pushing. And not only that, but there's also a fraud angle. Actually, after we published this story, the woman who had initially run this program, the director of the Dreamkeeper Initiative, you know, she's been now indicted and will be prosecuted for fraud, for allegedly stealing these funds through a kind of network of friends and kind of laundering them through various shell companies, nonprofits, back into her own pocket. That's what prosecutors are alleging. And it shouldn't be a

surprise. Look, when you have a kind of race-based slush fund for ideological causes, it's going to be certainly wasted in every case, but it's also going to be a magnet for fraud because people realize that the people running this program and the voters, frankly, supporting this program are not the kind of people who even really care about fiscal responsibility and they're too guilt-ridden to even question where this money is going. Let's take quick break, but continue this conversation with Manhattan Institute Fellow and City Journal investigative reporter Chris Rufo on Wilcane Country. Okay, when I sell my business, I want the best tax and investment advice.

I want to help my kids, and I want to give back to the community. Ooh, then it's the vacation. of a lifetime. I wonder if my out of office has a forever center. An IG Private Wealth Advisor creates the clarity you need with plans that harmonize your business, your family, and your dreams. Get financial advice that puts you at the center. Find your advisor at IGPrivatewealth.com. Welcome back to Will King Country. We're still hanging out with

City Journal investigative reporter and Manhattan Institute fellow Chris Rufo. Right. Honestly, the fraud angle of it is the least offensive angle to It is just the openly racist. It's the embrace of openly racist funds, I mean, programs, slush funds. I, it's just, and I know you've been all over this, and we all have been to some extent for years now. But the fact that America went from wherever it was in the 1990s and early 2000s, I would say, into the teens where open racism became acceptable, laudable, virtuous. It's absolutely a scandal, a disgrace, and it's what I call the racial retrograde, meaning that we've actually gone backwards. We've kind of gone not from progress, but we've gone in reverse on racial issues.

And you really see that division start to happen towards the end of Obama's second term. And so social scientists have tracked racial attitudes, and it's very clear around 2014, racial attitudes start to go in steep decline. You have the rise of Black Lives Matter. Then you had everything blow out into the open with George Floyd and DEI. And we're still grappling with this. And while I think that Trump's victory in 2024 was a significant blow against DEI, against this new racialism, the fight is by no means over because in cities like San Francisco and states like California, they are fully committed to this race-based ideology. And we should not, you know, close our eyes to it or consider the fight over. They're on their heels, but the fight has just

begun. Real quick, Chris, you know what I think is fascinating about the macro statute talked about? You've seen, I forget the phrasing of the polling, but it's how do you feel about race relations, generally positive, generally negative, right? And it does. It starts to decline, like you said, in about 2014. One of the arguments that would have been made by, you know, black racial agitators or whoever may be activists, because I heard these arguments, honestly, when I was on ESPN. You didn't know it. White people didn't know it, but black people know it. And now all that's happened is white people know about the negative racial. But that's not true when you look at that polling because it also separates it by race. And black people in the early 2000s, up through 2010-11, had a generally positive view to the tune of like 60 to 70% of race relations. And their view went down to, to 30 or 40% with the same time of the rise in this racialism of America.

They're convinced at that point that it's negative in a way that they were not before. Exactly. It's such a smart point, such a great point to raise, because that's, you know, part of this tragedy. Actually, things were not perfect, but going well. Everyone basically agreed on that. And isn't that the ultimate disappointment with President Obama? I mean, President Obama, you'll remember he ran in 2008 on healing the divisions, not left or right, not red or blue, not black or white, but, you know, American. And it's such an irony that by the end of his second term, that not only did he not bring us to a kind of higher level of colorblindness, equality, fraternity, the kind of fellowship

of being American as a citizen first and then a member of a racial group second, He actually flipped it. And now attitudes have gone back, you know, 40 or 50 years. It's such a missed opportunity. And I think it's such a tragedy for our country. And it's going to require all of us to really at the very beginning, at the very outset, speak honestly about it. What's gone wrong these last 10 years?

And how can we move forward? I think they would blame it. I know you have to go in a minute here. I think if I were trying to think what they would say, they wouldn't blame it on Obama. They would blame it on Trump. even though he's not yet president, that he's on the scene, birtherism, all of that, they would say the right's reaction to Obama is what drives racial relations down.

I think that's what they say, don't you think? That's what they probably would say, but I think the reason why we know that isn't true is because it only hits in 2014. And if the right was having a kind of race-based reaction against Barack Obama, you would see those numbers immediately start to fall right after 2008. But in fact, they didn't. They actually remained steady for the first six years of his term. And so by 2014, Obama was not a new figure. I think it really is the left's disappointment with Obama.

He didn't bring about a kind of American utopia that he promised. And then this is an interesting thing, but I think there's truth to it. It's also the rise of the iPhone and then social media, which really started to take off around. Chris, and BLM and BLM at the same time. So if you look at a timeline, what happens in about 14? That's Michael Brown. That's Ferguson. Zimmerman was a little bit before that.

But all of these, yes, in some situations, anecdotally, not good situations, blown into systemic conversations about totality of race relations. And what was BLM? at the beginning, the BLM was a Twitter hashtag. And so it was a movement that only started because of that initial burst of activity on Twitter and then across the pages of kind of left-wing newspapers and magazines after that. But yeah, I think it's this very interesting moment that we're still grappling with all these years later. What happened? What went so wrong?

And I think it's important for us to keep asking those questions. Yeah. All right. Chris Rufo of City Journal, a fascinating conversation. Check out his work on the fraud in California at City Journal. Always good to have you. Thank you, Chris. Thanks, well.

All right. Bye-bye. All right, there you goes, Chris Rufo here. Dan, Dan, do you think I characterized the left's reaction or explanation of the decline in race relations accurately? Do you think that's what, look, statistically what Chris I just described is true. It's true when it goes down. And that's pretty fascinating. Forget what white people feel about race relations.

Just look at what black people felt about race relations, okay? Up through about 13, 14. And then a steep decline. Why? You know? And I think that their explanation would be, oh, the rights, racist reaction to Obama or Donald Trump doing birtherism. But it doesn't quite match the timeline. You know, the right didn't freak out about Obama in 9, 10.

He's reelected in 12. It is, I think, I think it starts with Zimmerman, which I, what year was Zimmerman? 12-ish. 12-ish? 2011, 2012. Okay, but then Michael, Michael Brown and Ferguson is 14. 2013. And that's when it really, which one is 13?

Zimmerman. Zimmerman. And is Michael Brown and Ferguson 14? I think it is. Yes. That is 14. Yeah. Do you think I actually describe the left?

I do. And their thought, Dan? Yeah, I think that's, it's interesting. I haven't really thought about it that way, but I do. And it's funny, like you talk about BLM, like, black friends of mine thought about it way differently than white people did. They're like, why is this such a thing? And there was just such a disparity in the way they looked at it.

So, yeah, it's pretty interesting, but I think you're right. Hmm. All right. Before we go today, I want to talk about two quick stories. I think I have a different reaction to than at least Patrick. Story number one. This story from 2017 that is now people are speaking about, I read about the article in MSN. It is the name of the company is, what is it, Patrick? It's called Plex. What's the name of the company? P-L-E-X. Yes. Technology company.

does a company retreat, half a million dollar company retreat in Honduras. And it's designed as a team-building activity. It is thematically centered around the concept of survivor. And in the course of this retreat, it sounds like the way the article is written, everything goes wrong. They arrive in Honduras. The hotel has lost its management and its chef within days. It's surrounded by armed guards, making it. them all wonder what is going on here.

They've got sand fleas every day. The room has to be fumigated for sand fleas. The CEO who was going to play the Jeff Prope's role, got E. coli in the first day because he insisted on eating a salad. They were told to eat everything that was fried and nothing fresh, no vegetables, no salad. They hired a Navy SEAL to make them, like, crawl through the sand. We should do this. It was miserable, apparently, all the physical activity. Well, here's the thing.

And it goes on and on. There's more. a porcupine fell into somebody's room overnight and was locked in the shower and had to be removed that's not real it's all real they wouldn't lie in the wall street journal well patrick i read this and i was like not that bad not that bad you're a psychopath like this article's well did you did you read it dan did you read the quotes Patrick you read it right have you ever had e coli poisoning don't want the E. coli. That guy ate a salad. That's on him.

You know? I mean... You don't need to eat like a rabbit? That's what happens. The people in the end said it was actually a very fun trip. It was actually a good trip. I bet it really brought people together. I bet it was a great team-building exercise.

Unless you were one of those 20 who got left behind, couldn't fly out because the planes were too small. Oof. Yeah. I read that part too. They went on an island excursion off of their Honduran retreat where they had built a baseball field for locals. They all had a good time that day, celebrating it with the locals. They went on little island hoppers.

There was 100 people in the company that went, and they had only a prop plane taken eight at a time back to Honduras. They ran out of daylight, and the landing strip didn't have lights. So two plane loads, like 16 people, had to be left behind that night on the island. It said they drank beer all night and partied with the locals and caught the flight out the next day. What was Tom Hanks character? Not so bad. Castaway. Do you speak Spanish?

Me? Yeah. Um, a piquito. I think, I think we'd have two different, two different types of experiences. Yeah. Yeah. Question is.

Patrick, I think you would have a hard time on a company retreat to the suburbs. I think you would have a hard time at the Gaylord, Texas. just outside of Dallas, an all-inclusive, everything you need here in one spot. If you had to leave your room, you would have a hard time and declare it miserable.

I did well in New York. I was able to... I walked six blocks that one time. Someone in the chat goes, next week, Will Kane Country is just the gang who goes through Seer training for company retreat. The military training?

Yeah. Yeah. We should do it. I would be up for putting you guys through something. I would do it. I don't want to do that. But Fox has a literal show called I'm a celebrity, get me out of here. What is that thing where they put people through? Oh, no, armed forces.

Like Dr. Drew's done it. Why are you not on that show? Oh. Oh. Is that where they do like special forces training? Yeah. I think I've seen a little bit of one of those. Yeah.

Give me a couple months again. We should totally get you on that. Who do we have to call to get you on this? I don't think I can do it. Who's going to host my show? You could definitely do it. The entire time I'm on a game show. That's correct.

That's a good point. No, it's fine. That's a lot of guest hosts you're going to have to book, Patrick. A lot of guest hosts because I'm going to win. I'm going to be on that island. I'm going to be on that island for a month. No one's going to outlast me. Yeah.

Well, I thought Dr. Drew was going to put me on traitors. You think you would do well on trainers? Put me on Survivor. I do. I know I would do well on traders. But I think you would fall into the trap of like, you know the game and how to play it so well and you're very smart that it would turn against you because everyone else isn't as smart. That could be. You know what I'm saying?

Because like your strategy is smart with smart people. Yeah. Yeah, I'd play the game and playing the game is actually a mistake. Exactly. You have to be, you have to play stupid. Yes. The whole time. So it would be hard for me not to get in the mix and start like, hey,

you guys realize this is happening, this person is this, and just start analyzing and breaking down and making rational arguments. And the minute you do, everybody's like, he's suspect, which is fascinating about human nature and psychology. At home, we're watching like, he's doing it right, he's doing a great job, and then it gets voted off. Yeah, totally. You're a threat if you're making sense. 100%. If you start making sense, you are a threat. By the way.

People take you out. Innocent people. Michael Royal in the chat said Willstaff just wants them to go on reality TV to get mugged I would get mugged I definitely would get mocked I'm feeling myself getting mugged more and more these days I just want to see it I think I think it'd be fascinating

I'm going to call Lachlan right after this yeah see what can be done I bet you are I bet you'll call Lachlan over on Facebook Amy Spivak Lackin, why are you so excited for a nuclear war? I'm not, Amy.

I'm not. I don't think there's going to be a nuclear war. You'll be fine. New York, I'm in trouble. Welcome to the show, Amy. Farida, Hamoith, Lala Zeri. That sounds like an Iranian name, doesn't it? It does.

Free Iran from Mullah regime. The Iranian people are not supporting the Mula regime. We've hit. I know Farida, but you're going to have to do that yourself. I don't think Americans are going to do that for you. I think maybe the Israelis will. Mark Toasty Killian, you think Trump will nuke the nuclear sites? I don't think Trump will use nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

I think he is extremely anti-nuke. Assy Rudd says, what the hell with lots of other real events, we could be discussing but a head size. Welcome to the show, Ashley. Welcome to the show. You don't have to use nukes. Lots going on in the world. We've got to see how tall people are and what head size they have. And talk about the ladies from Iran living in L.A., posting bikini picture.

Tiki Cam says, as I got older, I can only wear size 8 new era fittets. Suzanne Nico, who's here a big loyal member of the Willits, says, Will. Will literally measures everything. I find it very comical. From head size to height, Will measures everything. You should just tear a tape measure around with you in your belt buckle. Yeah. Just in case. You're not really sick, too.

Ashley Rudd, with all the other real events, we could be talking about headside. Why are we talking about head size? Well, we have other important stories as well, actually. Like the story out of the New York Post that Howard Stern required his housekeeper to sign NDAs that covered exactly what he ate, his habits, his sleep habits, his travel habits. She couldn't talk about anything. It was miserable working for Howard and Beth. Patrick's characterization of this story, which I think is fair is the elites and the way that they live versus the way that they talk and the way that they preach. And I get that. And I also will say, I think it would be miserable to work for Howard Stern and his wife.

I can probably think of a – that might be the most miserable job. To be anyone that is expected to wait, hand and foot on Howard Stern sounds absolutely miserable. However, I don't think this is a bad thing for him to do. I mean, Howard Stern is somebody that everybody likes to report on in every detail of his life. Yeah, and if he's got somebody that basically lives with him and is in his life and he says, hey, you can't talk about this, you can't talk about that, you can't talk about. I think that's totally reasonable for him to make that a condition of employment. Sign the NDA, and now she wants to tell about it, probably because she wants to write a book or go on podcasts, and I have a hard time seeing her as a victim of this condition. I mean, there's plenty of other things.

If she could actually tell her stories, I'll bet we would feel very sympathetic to her because I bet it's miserable to work for him. But this angle of it, I don't think makes him a monster, Patrick. No, I actually, I just plug in the headlines into AI and then it just pops it out that knows me well enough to kind of make determinations. So that's why we got to the elitist angle. But I agree with you. I also don't understand why all these people sign NDAs. and then they're able to break them. Like, there's no, without consequence.

Have you noticed that, like, in the last decade? It has happened more, yeah. Well, I can tell you from law school, you learn an NDA is basically worthless. Really? They are basically worthless. Yeah, you can't really get somebody from talking. Ironclad. Well, there's no real enforcement mechanism to Patrick's point.

Like, what is the enforcement mechanism on this? You just sue. Yeah, but you sue, in this case, a housekeeper for what? You know? Yeah, that's true. She's kind of judgment proof. There's no, like, judge that can say, you have to be quiet. You can't talk.

You may make yourself somewhat civilly liable, but I still think even that is very, very hard to enforce. And if you have somebody that doesn't have much to lose, to hell with that NDA. Like, they're not as valuable. Like, you paid them 50,000, 100,000 or whatever. I mean, some of these NDAs, why aren't you getting that money back? Yeah, I mean, she could write a book, sell it for a couple hundred thousand. He gets whatever the cost of the NDA was, something like that. I think NDAs, NDAs in popular culture in your mind, like your point, are way more important than they actually are in the real world.

In my head, in my head, I'm like, oh, man, like everyone everywhere must be signing NDAs at a high level. And it's like this ironclad secret thing. But apparently it's not, like you said. I think you can get it on the corporate level. Well, most of them that's why people settle something. Right. Interesting. Like, we've signed, I've signed NDAs before for, like, certain work.

In a court case, if you settle, you sign something that say you can't talk about what happened, why you settled. Or you give up your settlement fee. Or you give up your settlement fee. Right. Got it. Yeah. Interesting. It's conditioned upon that.

Yep. Okay. Lots of important things in the world. We're now T-minus about seven hours until the deadline President Trump put on. Iran. We'll see if it is the stakes that has been described and everybody seems to be fearful of. In the meantime, we'll be on the lookout for a deal. We'd love it if in the meantime, you hang out with us every day at 12 o'clock Eastern time, Fox News, YouTube, Wilcane, Facebook, Spotify and Apple. We'll see you next time. Listen to ad free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcast. And Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad free on the Amazon music app.