Will Cain Country - Is The Hunter Biden Verdict Lawfare? PLUS, The State of the Presidential Race! With Pete Hegseth

Episode Date: June 12, 2024

Story #1: Does the conviction of Hunter Biden prove that there is no such thing as lawfare, and that the justice system is not rigged? Is President Biden in firm control of the presidential race? Plus, what is the ideal height for men? Another 'Off The Rails' segment with Will's FOX & Friends Weekend co-Host, Pete Hegseth. Story #2: Your feedback: a Q&A with the listeners of The Will Cain Show. Story #3: Suing to protect Tik Tok. Is banning TikTok a violation of the 1st Amendment? Will sits down with the President and Co-founder of BASEDPolitics, Hannah Cox 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

One, does the conviction of Hunter Biden prove there's no such thing as lawfare? Does it prove that it's not rigged the justice system? Plus, what's the ideal height for men? We go off the walls, off the rails with Pete Higgshead. Two, your feedback, a Q&A with the listeners. The Willisha of the Will Cain Show. And three, suing to protect TikTok is banning TikTok a violation of the First Amendment rights of Americans. It is the Will Cain Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel, the Fox News Facebook page.

And always on demand, wherever you get your audio entertainment at Apple, or on Spotify. You can also subscribe on YouTube. Yesterday, here on the Will Kane show, we talked about the number one voting issue for not just Americans, but apparently people across the globe. We've seen immigration play a role

in the elections in Italy, France, and Germany. And those elections have been described as a win for the far right. Well, I opened today's show asking you, Is it far right to want to protect your country from terrorists? Bill Malusian reporting this morning, breaking per federal sources, ICE, in conjunction with the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force, have arrested eight Tajikistan nationals with suspected ISIS ties in New York City, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. Malusian is told all eight crossed the southern border illegally, receiving full vetting, and had no initial derogatory information that flagged.

I'm told derogatory information includes potential national security concerns, and apparently these individuals were released into the United States. Sources were unable to say when and where they crossed illegally into the United States. All are now in ICE custody pending removal, proceedings, and an act. active federal investigation. Eight suspected terrorists, reportedly talking about bombings, were caught in New York City, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia after crossing illegal through the United States' southern border.

I would say this is a surprise, but this has been predicted. Something will happen. And I ask you, to want to protect your country from terrorism, Is that far right? Look for the European Union and immigration to give an indication of what will soon happen in America. Let's break down a prediction of the election plus the four characteristics of leadership with story number one. He is my co-host of Fox and Friends Weekend, my co-host on Off the Walls and on the Will Kane show here. Off the rails, he is Pete Hegg said.

What's up, man? Not much. I agree with what you said. You know, I'm sitting here today. The guys have already made fun of me here wearing a golf shirt. And I used to host the Will Kane show in a T-shirt. Clearly, I just got off the back nine. And today, I've gone with the golf shirt. But I've noticed big movement on the Hegg-Seth social media to move not just to the T-shirt, which you're wearing right now. But I was really fascinated with a post last night pushing War on Warriors, where we went with

the tank top, although not really a tank top, more like a sleeveless tea. You know, it didn't taper at the shoulders. It just cut off at the shoulder. It's cut off. It's cut off tea. You know, it's a workout tea. You got to show the guns while you're working out in the gym. And it was real because I was on the elliptical, the old man elliptical, and I realized this live signing event was in a couple hours and I hadn't promoted it. And so I set up a phone in my backyard and I did a thing. Yeah, it wasn't intentional, truly. But yes, it was a little much. Yeah. It was totally natural. It was spur of the moment. Hey, I'm outside haying. I got to cut a quick video about war on warriors. Oops. I'm just wearing a tank top. You're right, man. I totally buy that. It was just totally planned in about a 30-second period, not all day. That is certifiably 100% true. I know you don't buy it, but I'm telling you, it's the truth. All I could think is I saw the guns and the delts was like,

275. He's benching 275. And he's proven it right now. And I did analyze the video. I'm like, let me just see what kind of definition is throwing up 225 pounds 10 times and 275, four times. And I just sit there and I just analyzed the gun show. That's a little disturbing, Will. That's a little disturbing. I think we should not talk about that. Except that I'm not alone. This is all. everyone was thinking about and because that was it was intended in your well-planned video with a tank top you were sharing the guns with america we have done the same a thousand times over uh in the hudson river i will just say this i have loosened up my social media

parameters a little bit more uh just off the cuff i'm pretty canned can be pretty canned in that stuff so that was a casualty of that yes i apologize to you will try to do better all right speaking of casualties i want to address a bit of perhaps criticism i want to address a little bit of

audience feedback yesterday here on the will cane show we spent the bulk of the hour breaking down hunter biden's conviction in delaware and swxte says on twitter so the justice system

rigged or not hard to follow you folks. And Jamar Martin on Twitter says to me, in response to a tweet that I had published about a month ago, wherein I said, we were promised to return to norms. Well, lawfare is the new norm. You can't close this Pandora's box. And Jamar Martin says to me, waiting for your dumb ass to retweet your own tweet. Is the conviction of Hunter Biden, Pete, proof that we have a fair and even Department of Justice, that the justice system sees no political party, that Donald Trump is not a victim of lawfare? No, not at all. If anything, it just restores faith in average people in Delaware, who looked at a pretty obvious case that was really straightforward

and didn't belabor it or pretend. They just talked for a couple hours and said, yeah, he was high. He was a user who illegally filled out a form and so guilty, guilty, guilty. If anything, If you're paying any attention at all and you want any intellectual honesty at all, you have to recognize that the process that led up to both of these cases is what is the evidence of lawfare in our society. So by cherry picking and finding any possible crime they could in the Trump case, they put their thumb on the scale, including bringing in new prosecutors, reviving old cases, stretching statutes, stacking cases, everything they could to try to manufacture something. that's one side. The other side is Hunter Biden, where they tried as hard as they could for six years not to charge him with anything, including sweetheart deals. And they haven't charged him with the most significant stuff, which is the foreign, you know, born agent, acting as a foreign agent, the tax stuff's coming up. So all the real shady significant stuff where he should have

registered, he was leveraging his father's influence, they, they wiped that all away. And they went with the most straightforward charge possible. And yes, a jury. And they didn't want to even charge that. And they tried not to. And then when they did, the jury found him guilty. There's no risk for Hunter, though, because his dad, regardless of what his dad says right now, he'll never see the inside of a jail cell between November and January.

That position will be conveniently reversed. And Joe will pardon Hunter, of course. He'll never have these charges with him. And that's that. So I think the process proves the dual track of the system. perfectly said I hope that Jamar Martin or SWXT are watching the Will Kane show

and I know that it can come off of sounding like yeah but but indulge the conversation for just one moment hear us out Pete Exeth has said it perfectly the results of a criminal trial are not what proves or disproves the existence of lawfare it's the process of bringing the trial

that proves or disproves the existence of a corrupt system of justice or department of justice. No one sit here and says that our justice system is perfect. It's not. It's just better than the alternatives. And it will always be handed over to 12 of your peers. And in Donald Trump's case, 12 of your peers in New York City won't guarantee justice. But the lack of justice is revealed in the fact that the case was brought in New York, after passed on by the Federal Elections Commission, the Southern District of New York,

after it was passed on by federal prosecutors, it was handed over to a jurisdiction where this had never been done before. This type of case, literally, in all of jurisdictions across the United States, had never been brought, but it was brought in Manhattan by a district attorney in Alvin Bragg that a lot of evidence points to, coordinated with the Department of Justice, and the outcome, as we talked about, wasn't the point of that trial. It actually wasn't necessarily, it wasn't necessary for a convicted felon Donald Trump. But the case itself, tying him up in trial, painting him in ugly pictures in the media, and taking him off the campaign trail are the evidence of lawfare. In Hunter Biden's case, the process also is revealed, Pete, because I think what has been swept under the rug is he was offered this incredible plea deal that was going to wipe away

his tax aversion case. I don't think it wrapped up into his child's spouse or his spousal support case, but it also would have wiped away this gun charge. It would have never seen the light of day of a courtroom, but for one judge who was appointed by Donald Trump, who said, well, this is rotten. This plea deal stinks and allowed it to go to court where Hunter Biden had to face a jury of his peers. And I just think you've said it perfectly. It's not yeah-buts or, you know, equivocating. It is when you talk about lawfare and you talk about the weaponization of the Department of Justice, what you're talking about is process. Yes, for sure. And it's the extraordinary versus the ordinary. And if they could have used the ordinary against Trump,

they would have. Remember, what do they say famously? They got Al Capone on tax evasion. Like if they could have found anything on Trump, they would have brought that lock solid case against him, but they didn't have that. So they made up the extraordinary extrapolations and touted that out as justice. And they avoided everything complicated with Hunter and went with the straightforward and ordinary, which ended up being an easy slam dunk case. But it was the lightest case that they could possibly bring. I want to talk to you about leadership. you bring to this appearance into your life many examples and experiences where you can analyze leadership, notably your experience in the United States Army. A German general named

Kurt von Hammerstein Eck Ward came up with a prism for leadership, Pete. He said there's four characteristics, and all people embody at least two of these characteristics. He said those characteristics are as follows, clever or stupid, industrious or lazy. At any given time, you're on a matrix with those four characteristics, and he laid out the combinations that lend themselves to leadership. He said the following. He said, stupid and lazy is somewhat harmless. Those people can only do so much damage, and in many cases can be led and given small

tasks to execute. He said, clever and industrious are the people that you want to mark for the general staff. They get stuff done. Put them in high positions of people that get things done. done. He said, clever and lazy, mark for the highest levels of leadership. These are material, for example, for President of the United States. He said these people will focus on efficiencies and not concern themselves with the busy tasks, and they are therefore qualified for the highest levels of leadership, clever and lazy. Stupid and industrious are the most dangerous individuals

out there. They cause catastrophe. They lack self-awareness. They get things done. And And the things that they get done are damaging. In your experience, Pete, how does this matrix work of leadership? First of all, hat tip to the Will Kane show for the B block being about Von Hammerstein from 1933 and his leadership qualities. It's impressive reach that you have here. The story that you sent me to is from the Green Notebook, by the way, that's a tip to the Green Notebook. Young Officers carry around in the military. I have a bunch of them.

I'm not familiar with this matrix. I don't think it includes, doesn't include a virtue box. So I think that would, this is sort of all amoral or a virtuous in a certain sense. But I think he's pretty, pretty spot on, on where you would want to put people. The problem is there are a lot of stupid industrious people across all organizations, not just the military. I know this is pertained to the military, but, and that's where foolishness comes in. Like highly efficient, foolish people peddle things that other people fall for and makes for a really bad result. Stupid and lazy can be pretty useful in certain situations just because you give them a straightforward task and they'll execute it.

Some of my, I don't know, stupid and industrious, though, can be really useful in a military context. because if those guys are great squad leaders or they're great team leaders, they don't have to reinvent the wheel here. The tasks you have to get done are pretty simple tasks. You don't have to be a brainiac. But if you're good at them, you're going to be really, really. So dangerous could mean deadly, meaning deadly to the other guy, because they're very good at the simple task that they're left to execute.

So I sort of like, I would flip that category a little bit. I don't know. Yeah, the general staff, if they're smart and will work hard, that's your staff we need them. They're the ones that do all the stuff, and then they give it to the lazy guys to execute. So it's kind of interesting. I just need to know how you stumbled upon this. That's kind of the real story here. Well, I don't think it's limited to the military.

And by the way, for more on leadership in the military, go check out War on Warriors. It's a bestselling book. It's been out for about a week and a half. It's Pete's book. And he, of course, wrote a bestseller called Battle for the American Mind, talking about the American education system. He's taken on another of the institutions in America, the United States military, which he has direct experience. And he's talked to men who are at every level sometimes anonymously. And I know he's heard from a lot of them after the fact.

If you really want to know about what's going on in the United States military and how it represents a true existential threat to America, check out war on warriors. But I don't think this is limited to the military. I mean, this is leadership in general. So, you know, I actually struggled. I think it's interesting. And I like simplifications and I like Matrixes. but I got to thinking, well, what is Joe Biden? Like, which of these two characteristics does he embody?

And, I mean, I definitely think, I know this sounds partisan, and we'll actually do Donald Trump. But I think that Joe Biden is stupid. I don't think he is necessarily clever, although for decades he was capable of working the mechanics of dealmaking in Washington. But I think there's ample evidence, even when he was coherent and not senile, that he wasn't the brightest bulb in the Senate. Yeah. I think that's an opinion, not just from a partisan perspective.

I think it was an opinion that was shared by Barack Obama. A lot of people felt that way. Barack Obama was not overly impressed with Joe Biden's intellect. Industrious versus lazy. Like, you would, it's hard now because he's so old and tired. Like, that's not the same thing as lazy, right? So I don't know. I mean, he has to be clear.

He has to be stupid and lazy at this point, but it's not like a character flaw lazy. It's just like, hey, he's 81. So I don't know where he was in his prime, but it's somewhere between stupid and lazy and stupid and industrious. Yeah, I think you're right. Clearly, he was effective, effective navigator at some level. It doesn't mean he had a bunch of smarts, but he knew how to play the game, which politics doesn't mean, industrialists in politics doesn't mean, I mean, you have a lot of utility or usefulness anywhere else. You're just good at manipulating and maneuvering and posturing inside

institutions to be the next in line or to get the next vote or to, you know, he was elected so young. He was elected when he was 30, I think. And so in a relatively safe seat in Delaware. So here's a guy who didn't have to worry that much about reelection, was super young. And so that's a novelty in and of itself. And if you can, if you can leverage kind of being one of the first, the youngest, the up and coming, then you focus on foreign policy, which is always what he tried to do. But that was clearly ambitious. You do that because you're from a small state and you want to be seen as someone who can work on the global stage. He was running for president as soon as he was able to. So this is not a guy who's lazy. I think he's a guy who's

probably, you know, ready to maneuver, which would put him in the dangerous category, which is sort of exactly what we're seeing now. I guess you could have predicted the fact that getting elected was the most important thing. And so once that happened, he was going to cater to whatever constituency would sort of keep him there. And that became the far left. I don't know. That's, you traced back as he had to have worked hard in the political context to get where he got, considering how many times you ran. So at one time, stupid and industrious and now stupid and lazy. And it's, again, I don't think that's lazy as a character trait in his case. I I think it's just a matter of fact because he's tired, man. He's tired. Let's do Donald Trump really

quickly. Now, if we're being real, and we should be real at all times here, Donald Trump's critics would definitely describe him as stupid and industrious. I don't think anybody could make the argument that Donald Trump is lazy. That would be a very hard argument to make. Yeah. I think so, therefore, they would describe him as stupid as an industrious. Now, his fans, and I do think anybody that watches Donald Trump over time has to come away with, this guy's not stupid, and he's proven over time that what he says in, let's say, in artful or unpolished ways, is proven out to be true over time. I'm sure he's not batten a thousand, but like, you know, we could go back to COVID, and most of his proclamations on COVID that were dismissed as stupid turn out to be true. true, whether or not we, you know, famously, for example, the death rate where he said, you know, it's way lower than what predictions were. And he ended up being right on that. But I think that

he's, he's a guy where his critics will say stupid and industrious and his fans will say clever and industrious. I think that's a proper characterization. I don't know where you, where instincts fall into that, but this just feels like a guy with his own set of instincts, which I do think inclines heavily toward being clever, understanding, reading rooms, reading people, reading situations, understanding power dynamics, leveraging them for your own benefit, whether it's in business or in politics, like it's pretty hard to argue over the last 20 years that anyone's been, especially in the Latin, since he's entered the political arena.

But even before that in the sort of creating an image and building a business and building a brand, you can't do that if you're stupid. You just, you can't. Again, these are oversimplified, but so I, here's the thing, he would be industrious and clever in my mind in this matrix but i wouldn't appoint him to the general staff i don't he's he's not a worker bee in that you know the general staff is full of people ready to plug and chug uh he's certainly more on the side of you know a point to highest leadership posts but which but but he's not in the lazy box so i i don't know you know that's where these simple matrixes don't really break down

uh because yeah industriousness might not be the right word for him though he's sort of And if you're an entrepreneur or if you're a brand maker or a market maker, you're not lazy, but you're not industrious. So he's definitely in the top left quadrant of this, but it's unclear. I wouldn't want him on a general staff just because. All right. We'll return to politics in a moment because I want to address some of the latest predictions, the prediction market for president between Biden and Trump. So, Pete, I was I was Googling yesterday. Let me tell you what my Google search is included.

how tall is too tall for men so my sons went to the dentist yesterday okay and i oh okay here we go i know little did i know they take your height at the dentist okay this is what we're coming in at all right this is what we're registering right now the oldest son who is 16 will be a junior next year is six foot four okay that's going to be my guess six four he's tall drink of water he is he's a tall drink of water. And I grew through my first year of college in height. It starts to slow down, right? But I bet from where he is to where to freshman year of college, I might have grown.

I was a late bloomer, so I think he's growing sooner than I did. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's got another inch, inch and a half of growth to go, putting him in the 6'5 to 6.6 range, right? Maybe, maybe not. the younger son Pete who's 13 came in at 510 and you're like okay but like it's kind of hard to understand 510 at 13 it turns out his brother at 13 who's now 6 4 was 5 8 so I'm like how tall is he gonna be wow like if he's already two inches ahead of his brother is he gonna come in at like 6 7 6 8 and then the Google searches how tall is too tall right and here's what I came back

with. First of all, the Internet is awful because, you know, average height is six foot, and then you start doing global stuff, and of course, with race and genetics, it all varies very greatly. But, you know, I'm just shy of 6-2. I think, what are you, 6-1? Six. In that range? Yep. Yep. I got an inch and a half on you, probably. It's a good height, right? You're tall, but you're not like, hey, look at that tall guy. In our business, people always say, they did it this morning. I did a diner with Brian kill me. You're taller than I thought. I know. I know. I always get that. But when is it too tall? There is an answer, right? I mean, there is a point where heights stops being an asset.

I guess, first of all, whatever you're feeding your cane boys, send it out here to Tennessee because my kids refuse to grow. Like, I don't know if I'm, I don't know what's happening here. They're all late bloomers or something, but they're, I just look at them. I'm like, guys, come on. It's got to be coming at some point. Because you want that. Let's be honest. you want your way and i mean i look at it often from a basketball background but it's not just that it's just a life background now this is going to end well for for your sons this is a good thing i mean being tall is not bad so you should be double thumbs up i don't know what i feel like you get over six seven and you're pushing sort of everyone notices when you're in the room

and and they assume you're a basketball player that's probably right You know, that's coming. And that's always a shame, because this is how that goes, by the way. My boys play soccer. So you walk into a room and you're 6, 7, and everybody goes, do you play basketball? And if you say no, my boys play soccer, then the guys who ask you that question go, oh. And because it's like, oh, you're super unathletic. You know, you're 6, 7, but you can't move.

Like, that's the immediate, you were the goof, right? You're the big oaf. And if you don't play basketball and you're 6, 7, then you are written off. You went from the first pick in the pickup game outside to last pick. And that's my point. At some point, the height becomes a social detriment. And I don't know, I think you're probably right.

For a hot second, six, six, seven range. In college for a hot second. But then after that, they're successful strapping young men with broad shoulders and they're tall and everyone thinks they're good looking and it goes well for them. That's why they'll have to push through a few. few awkward years where that is used against them, but eventually they're golden. I used to think 6-6 was perfect because that was Michael Jordan. I thought, wow, that's, I mean, that was my, now I've kind of narrowed it on, I think, 6-3 is just right there. That's what I, that's, I mean,

you're pretty much there. You're not too tall, you're tall, but you're, your, your head above the retent. It's good. So maybe, maybe you'll, maybe Charlie will stay. Who knows, sounds like West might be a seven-footer. want to get them in the gym right now because if that's the case you could that's the whole point like it's also about proportion it's just it's really hard to get the right proportions when you're six eight you know what i mean like if you start combining height with weight like if you're six four five you need to be coming in i think you need to be coming in at 200 to 210 probably i mean that's that's that's a good weight right and you know if you're 170 it's uh it's uh you're a tall skinny drink of water. Let's just say you're playing with blessings right now, though, because I could be

looking at 5-6, 5-7, 5-4, at the pace the hagg-sess are going right now. But a legit conversation. Everybody, everybody hits it at their own pace, different rates. All right, let's go back to the presidential election now. So a historian named Dr. Alan Lickman from American University who's gotten they'll pass 10 presidential elections correct. Every presidential election since 1984 has said that the election favors Joe Biden. Now, Pete, his prism is he basically breaks it down into stability versus an earthquake. If you are stable, then it elects the incumbent. Any type of earthquake, war, economic, it favors the challenger.

And his estimation is right now it's too stable for Joe Biden. so it favors Joe Biden. I looked, and 538, who's been pretty decent, I think, over the last couple of election cycles as well, has Biden at a 52 to 48 advantage over Trump. But then I have the economist, and the economist has Trump, two out of three, Biden, one out of three, two-thirds to one-third, and the economist breaks down the all-important states, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, where Trump maintains one to two point leads in those particular states. So as you look at this right now, I think, and you and I

joked last week when John Stewart made fun of us, that, wow, that didn't even hit my radar. I guess we're in a bubble. And I think this is part of like, let's check our bubble, because there's a sense in our conversations, I believe, that this is heavily leaning towards Trump. But here we have several systems of analysis here that are still pointing to Biden. Yeah. I think you're exactly right. We got to check your bubble a little bit. 538, by the way, has been, has not been all that reliable. They've been sort of perceived as having a bit of a Biden or left-wing polling bias

over a couple of cycles that have tried to say they've corrected for it, but maybe they have, maybe they haven't. This Lickman, I'm familiar with them, and the predictions, I think is a rare case of someone who's able to be completely dispassionate. There are so few people in the political realm who actually can be analytical and dispassionate without putting their finger on the scale and even pollsters that tell you they aren't, they usually do. I think the challenge for my brain on this is just watching the enthusiasm gap, is just looking at, and again, maybe that's a bubble aspect too, just because 35 to 40% of the

population is massively enthusiastic for Donald Trump and will turn out the tens of thousands in the heat and the cold, and Joe Biden couldn't draw out a dozen people if he tried, doesn't necessarily, doesn't necessarily preview who will demand the most votes once the political machines get fired up. I do think, you know, what's the top story on Fox this morning, at least from what I saw, was these eight ISIS guys that came to cross the border illegally and were vetted and still released into the country are now being arrested. It depends on how much regular Americans view stuff like that as destabilizing. Not an attack, which could happen, which no one's wishing for.

That would, of course, destabilize everything. No one wants that. But just the perception of an abdication of our border and our responsibility is this is panic button time. Like we really end the economy on inflation, which, you know, it has a slow burn effect on people. I don't know. You're right. in the last probably week and a half, I've been looking out at the universe after, maybe it's just after the conviction and saying, well, there hasn't been a huge shift. Maybe the polling suggests a point, half point toward Biden. But this leveling out, considering everything that's happened, is scary in and of itself. And it's not, it's going to be close. I don't care what anybody says. I'd like to think it's going to be the type of place where Trump can compete in all these non unconventional states. And maybe he will. And the power of his message and the, the, the, the, The terrible policy of Biden should, would suggest that.

But I think our recent track record says this is going to be a nail butter in the end. I struggle with that enthusiasm gap like you. And, you know, I try to be self-aware because I got it wrong in 2020. I thought Trump would win in 2020. And, you know, for the first time in my life, Pete, I'd been to a Trump rally. I had seen something that you just don't see in politics. But even beyond the rallies, you know, he was in Newport Beach, California. earlier this week, and the streets are lined.

The streets are lined with people. And as you point out, you just don't see anything like that. Like, nothing in the realm of comparison when it comes to Joe Biden. And so you're like, well, is what I see so stuck inside of a bubble? Is what I see so different than what I read, like these polls that I just read to you, that I just am not seeing or hearing this majority of Americans that could reelect Joe Biden? I just, I don't know. And to your point on, like, this ISIS story.

I do think there's something to this analysis of stability versus earthquake. And when you get an earthquake, you think it has to be acute. And so a huge drop in the stock market and a follow-on recession or a war out of the blue. But can an earthquake be a slow-billed earthquake? Because I think this is what I talked about yesterday on the show. When you analyze what happened with the European elections and you understand that immigration is the issue that's pushed to everyone. And there's no particular terrorist attacks that would have provoked a voter reaction in Europe at this point, just a slow build of a loss of jobs, a rise in crime, a loss of

culture. So can you have a slow building earthquake? Because if the answer is yes, you are having that in America as well. And it played a role in 16 with Trump. Yes. And I think it's going to end up being the biggest issue in 2024. I think you're right. I mean, 2016 was a slow build earthquake. had Brexit was the precursor to Trump, just like you saw in some of these European elections. There's no doubt. So it's impossible to know. I think it's also difficult to assess dissatisfaction inside each side of the spectrum because you see those dissatisfied with Biden out in the street protesting, you know, Hamas and Genocide Joe. And that's all, it's all very evident in our faces. And I still think you and I, I know, I'll just speak for my

I don't often calibrate well kind of that never Trump or Nikki Haley number, which is more under the surface of people that say, hey, I'm a Republican, but I'm not voting for Trump, but they're not out in the streets. They might be on Twitter. Most people aren't paying attention to that. How big is that group vis-a-vis the group that Biden is dealing with, which is very public. So if you've got very public dissatisfaction with Biden, very public support for Donald Trump, and then quiet support for Biden because they're not going to vote for Trump, and then quiet Trump hatred on the Republican side. There's a chance that there's a deceptive current that when we observe it, we're not factoring in. But I still think that growing dissatisfactory, that slow motion earthquake like you talked about is a good explanation. And anybody who's paying attention to the security of our communities and our own economic satisfaction, man, they've only got one way to turn right now.

All right. Last story, huge controversy. Joey Chestnut, 16-time Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest Champion. He's won every hot dog eating contest on the 4th of July since 2016. Has been booted from the competition. Why? Because he took a, I believe, you know, seven-figure endorsement from impossible foods, plant-based, vegan meat maker, hot dog maker.

And I didn't realize this, but, you know, like, I guess participating in the Fourth of July Hot Dog Eating Contest is part and parcel with sort of a brand advertisement for Nathan's. And so if you're out there endorsing impossible foods, impossible meat, you can't be a part of the Nathan's, you know, professional eaters or whatever they call it, professional eating competition. And so he's out, like, beyond Tiger Woods. beyond Tom Brady. I mean, Joey Chestnut's championship belts put almost everybody to shame. He's above Bill Russell.

So are you outraged? Not at all. I think if any, I think Joey Chestnut made out well. I mean, where in the world is he going to get a seven-figure endorsement? I think Nathan's is absolutely right. They opened the pathway for a new champ. If anything, I don't know. I mean, this really could hurt Joey Chestnut because you kind of bud lighted it a little bit.

Like, your whole thing is hot dogs, and now you go with fake hot dogs. I don't know. I don't know who's going to end up winning in this thing. Or does Nathan's... Are you outraged to Joey? I'm not... Are you mad at... Like, my producer, Tinfoil Pat has called him un-American, and I can only imagine the opinion of Rachel Campos Duffy.

Are you mad at Joey for doing an endorsement with Impossible Foods? I mean, I think it's stupid. I think impossible foods are ridiculous. I don't want fake meat. I don't, I can't connect with it, but pretty hard to argue with a guy leveraging his success to do a seven-figure check on beyond. I mean, it's not a communist thing. It's like a stupid vegan thing.

So if he, but he's got to be comfortable with the fact that he's probably turning off his base. I don't know, but who is Joey Chestnut's base? I mean, really, let's be honest about that. Does he really have a massive fan base? Maybe he does that I'm not aware of. And he is betraying hot dogs. I don't know. My tank is empty.

I've only got so much outrage to offer. I'm sorry. It's one of my great failings. It's not a bottomless pit. I can't be mad. I just can't. It may be stupid to your point. And you're a big hot dog guy.

You're a big hot dog guy. I've seen you reach for the hot dog over the hamburger, which I consider a Cardinal sin. But 10 minutes on the clock, 10 minutes. Have you done this? Ten minutes on the clock, how many hot dogs could eat? You got to take down the bun, too. We've done it on Fox and Friends on one minute, and I think I did, like, six or something.

Ten minutes, maybe... Did you do the bun on Fox and Friends? Yeah, yeah, we try to do the dip, try to do the dip in the bun. That's so hard. 10 minutes, maybe, probably 10, I don't know, 12. It's not... I think I was on that show. ...more difficult than people think.

I think I opted out. I think I mailed that one in. This is a thing I never want to win in life. I don't want to do it. I never want to win this. I don't. I'll eat on camera. I'm not Brian Kilmead,

but I don't want to eat as fast as humanly possible. I'm not even on camera. In any, in any, I just don't want to do it. I don't want to do this. Were you, wait, hold on, were you already on the show? I'm pretty sure you were.

We had a moment where there was a fast eating contest, kind of a, to get that. And we did a hot dog in there, but maybe you did bow out. Yeah, I don't understand the appeal. I just melded in. What I'm going to try to do, me and the wife, you know, there's this nine innings, nine hot dogs, nine beers challenge.

That's a thing. I don't want to try to do it myself. We're going to try to do it between the two of us. Nine innings, nine hot dogs, nine beers. And I feel like I'll carry the line share of it, but I'll get some help. What? Oh, tag team it? Yeah, tag team.

That's doable. I don't want to do that either. That feels enjoyable. I'll actually like it. I don't want to hate myself and do 9-9 by myself, but I'll do it together with somebody else. You know, I thought about you. We talked about that challenge, the producers of the Will Kane show, and I said, this is not, I'm not built for this. I don't want to drink nine beers. And it's not that I don't like have a good time. I get tired of drinking the same thing after a while. And so, like, first beer, good times. You do jump around on drinks. Second, that's what I'll do.

I make mistakes. I start jumping around because, like, three beers, I'm like, I don't want this. I'll have a vodka soda. And now I'm in, now I'm off on, now my roller coaster has left the tracks, you know? Now, yours is different. You just don't have a break. So whether or not it's a break, a B-R-A-K-E, you don't have a break. So whether or not it's beers or your gin and soda, what's a difference?

Three, 11, it's the same thing. beers easy beans it just doesn't i just wouldn't feel good the next day and i'm into feeling good the next day these days so i would never do that challenge all right you are my if i if we have a draft for professional eating uh you have to draft among your friends you're my first round draft pick let's go i'm happy that makes me proud thank you brother get him on your social media go to instagram check out the gun show and while you're there pick up pick up the war on warriors Hey, we find out today, Will, in about four hours where it is on the New York Times list, so I'll keep you posted. Well, I don't trust the New York Times bestseller list, so I don't know if it's real or not, but I can't imagine you wouldn't be number one.

I'm serious. Like, if you're not in number one, I don't trust it. I don't trust it. We'll see. Sometimes you can overwhelm them. All right, Pete Exeth. Thanks, man. You got it.

There he goes. Again, check out War On Warriors host Off the Rails here with me on the Will Cain show every other week off the wall and Fox and Friends on the Fox News channel. All right, coming up, a lot of your feedback today. I want to get to that, a little Q&A session with you, The Willisha, the audience of the Will Cain Show. And then, is it a violation of the First Amendment rights of Americans to ban TikTok? All that's coming up on the Will Cain Show.

You know, if you look at any poll, as we approach this 2024 press, presidential election. If you look at the list of concerns for Americans, number one is almost invariably inflation. And it's really no wonder why. I mean, in the last 18 months alone, the cost of groceries and basic necessities for a family of four has gone up $11,000 a year, as would be the case when you print money like a drunken sailor, as is in any basic economic understanding supply and demand. You increase the supply of something, you reduce the value of something. And we've increased the supply of money to the extent that your dollar has lost 24% of his purchasing power. This is all backed upon the fact that we rack up government debt and print money. Government death

the tune of a trillion dollars every hundred days. So what can you do as this decreases the power of your own purchasing power? Decreases your own family's ability to survive. Well, you can do what people have done really honestly for centuries, and that's invest in hard metals, invest in the longest store of value, invest in gold. And I've done that. And what better way to do that than the way that I've done that through our friends at Lear Capital? Lear Capital will help you through the process. All you have to do is call them. It's 800920-8388. Or go to Learwill.com, L-E-A-R-W-I-L-L-L-com. They'll help you convert your 401k or your IRA. They'll help you step into the longest door of value in human history, gold.

Trump needs to be more disciplined with his message. I had a conversation last night with someone saying he's really actually been very disciplined ever since his conviction in New York. It is the Will Kane show streaming live at Fox News.com on terrestrial radio across this great USA. And also streaming on Fox News's YouTube channel and Fox News's Facebook page. If you ever miss part of the Will Kane Show, you can go back and you can catch it on demand by subscribing at Apple or on Spotify in audio format or subscribing on YouTube in video format. And by subscribing you can also become a member of our community, hang out, leave comments, and become a part

of the Will Kane Show. And that's exactly what we intend to do here today is interact with you, the listeners, the viewers. of the Will Cain show. Timmy Pollock, PhD, says on YouTube, Hunter will plead guilty in his tax case. No, they want, no way they want all that info made public. And then Joe will pardon him. Mike in Mansfield on Twitter says, Will, if it was your son, what would you do? Well, there was an interesting conversation between Tucker Carlson and Quest Cuomo recently, and Tucker Carlson used to talk about this. Family comes first. And this was in light of many of the things that Chris Cuomo had said or done on CNN in protection of his brother, then governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo. And Carlson had

made the point. He understands. He understands wanting to protect your brother. He understands family. And I can understand family. And if it were my son, you're right. I would be interested in extending my son a pardon. But there are other things that I would not do. And that is the blatant exploitation of family, as pointed out yesterday's episode of the Will Kane show with Miranda Divine by Joe Biden. What we're talking about is putting them in positions as props, political props. It's always a struggle. How much when you have a public life do you share that is private? You heard me just now talking about the height of my sons, and even when I'm talking about it. And I try to always be real with the audience, and I'm always real with Pete Hegseth.

Then I try to tell you the conversation, the thoughts that I'm haven't even sometimes when it's private but it does cross my mind like it's not my business to talk about necessarily how tall my sons might be and I do have a moment of second guess and I don't know if it's right or not but I know I'm not in some calculated manner using them as props Joe Biden when he has sworn in his Senate and his children were still in the hospital from a bad car accident is sworn in in in the hospital room behind his children sitting in hospital beds this is political props of your family putting them in Hunter Biden's case in position to be the point man on influence peddling schemes, whether or not they're illegal or corrupt,

they were quite clearly and obviously influence peddling schemes. So I'd like to thank, Mike in Mansfield, that I, while would want to do everything possible to protect my son, even going so far as to granting him a pardon, I wouldn't have made him a political pawn, a prop throughout my career in politics. Speaking of height, Donnie Stetcher on YouTube says That's cool Hate on the short people, you guys A little more division because there just isn't enough

You two are just a couple of actors to me Well, Donnie, I don't remember saying anything about short people Or hating on short people As we were talking about what is the ideal height of men Now hear me out for a minute, Donnie I don't know how you pick up that we're actors because the one thing I'm trying to be is 100% real.

Do I hit the bull's eye every time? I don't know. I can just tell you that's where my aim is. But I just think maybe, and if I'm being real now, Donnie, that the fact that I never mentioned anything about heading on short people, that I only talked about what was the ideal height,

that you're a little sensitive about something. I don't know. Like, every time somebody talks about tall people are you have like a complex you know nobody talked about you and you being short nobody hated nobody causing a division we're not working on the tall short divide so i don't know maybe you know strike in a cord maybe you have a complex i don't know don't know don'ty a napoleon complex luke walker says truthfully this trial wasn't lawfare it was obfuscation of what other crimes has done, which are much bigger.

That's something Pete Higgseth pointed out. That it's true, that the real allegations regarding Hunter Biden are left in the rearview mirror. They're not there. This became the everything. And then finally, El Joe Mistletoe says, deleted TikTok, and that is my most successful social media app, just have a bad feeling. I think they broadcast depression brainwaves. Interesting. I'm not on TikTok. I've thought about it on multiple occasions because I know it's power. The question is, is TikTok manipulation by a foreign

adversary, the Chinese government, that should be banned in the United States? Or maybe for somebody like El Joe Mistletoe, should you have the choice? Is it part of your First Amendment rights? Well, let's talk to someone who is suing the Biden administration over their ban on TikTok. Is it a violation of the First Amendment rights of Americans? That's next on the Will Cain Show. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. Hey there, it's me, Kennedy. Make sure to check out my podcast.

Kennedy saves the world. It is five days a week, every week. Download and listen at Fox Newspodcast.com or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. This is Jimmy Phala, inviting you to join me for Fox Across America, where we'll discuss every single one of the Democrats' dumb ideas. Just kidding, it's only a three-hour show. Listen live at noon Eastern or get the podcast at Fox Across America.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. The Liberty Justice Center files a First Amendment lawsuit against the federal TikTok ban. It's on behalf of pro-liberty influencers.

It is the Will Cain Show streaming live at foxnews.com on the Fox News YouTube channel, the Fox News Facebook page, and on terrestrial radio across the USA. And it's always on demand. Just hit subscribe, Apple, Spotify, or on YouTube. One of those pro-liberty influencers is Hannah Cox. She is the president co-founder of based politics. She's on X at Hannah D. Cox, and she is part of this lawsuit to stop the ban on TikTok. Hi, Hannah. Hey, well, good to see you. Hannah, I heard you were listening to our conversation regarding the ideal conversation, the ideal height for men.

Before I get your opinion, I don't know, Hannah. Are you single? Are you 30s, late 20s? I'm actually 36. Like what? 36, wonderful. Single or married? Just got married last month.

Okay. Okay. So not far removed from the dating pool. So where you might be making some of these judgments. What's the ideal height for men? You know, I'm tall. I'm 5'7. So I think you have to take that in consideration.

My only beef with this is the really tall men always want short. girls. So there's, you know, I don't mind a guy being 5-11, 6-foot tall. That's pretty, that's three, four inches taller than me. That's, you know, ideal. I don't think you need a whole lot taller than you. It's more about the fact that there's not enough of those guys in that range for the tall girls. That's the problem. Well, the predicate for this conversation, the reason we had it is how tall my sons are on track to be. Is there, though, this is the question, Hannah, is there a height where all of a sudden you're like, no, he's too tall? Yeah, actually, I was telling your producer, off camera, my business partner, Brad, is 6'4.

And even when I'm in heels and next to him, I'm like, you were just a giant of a man. Like, he feels excessively tall to me. So I think, you know, 6364 is about my cutoff. And then other than that, I just, it's a little intimidating, you know, to have to me that much taller than you, especially when you're used to being tall. I don't like it. I want to feel like I'm on equal footing. Uh-oh. We're pushing up against that ceiling here in the cane house.

hold. All right, Hannah Cox here on the Will Cain Show. She's with a based politics, and based politics is connected to the Liberty Justice Center, who has filed this lawsuit against the federal TikTok ban, arguing it violates the First Amendment of rights of Americans. Now, make that case for me really quickly, Hannah, because the response, which I will offer up today from many, for example, on the rights. that support this ban is that you don't have a First Amendment right as a foreign entity. The Chinese corporations, bite dance, don't get the privilege of the First Amendment. So you can effectively do this to TikTok, but you're arguing their customers do and it affects their customers,

the users of TikTok. Yeah, I think it's important to remember when we talk about speech. You have a free right to speech to say what you want, but you also have a free speech to hear the speech of others. You have a free right to information. That is what is really so essential about free speech. In a democracy, in a free country, you need access to information. You need the ability to hear the thoughts of others, to share your own thoughts. And so when you look at platforms like TikTok, yes, it has a foreign owner, but there are many media companies that are foreign owners operating in our media landscape. And I would argue that they're important. Americans have a right to hear the media and what's being said in other countries. I think it's really only dictatorships

in communist countries like North Korea, where you see them interfering in that blow of information. And sometimes there's propaganda in that. I would say there's propaganda on RT. There's propaganda in the BBC. There's propaganda in our own media. People have to learn how to discern that and how to figure out what is right on their own and intercept speech that's better and makes different arguments. My company-based politics has been operating in the space for the past three years. We believe firmly that you've got to meet people where they're at, where they're consuming information. And the fact is, a lot of Americans are getting their information on TikTok, 170 million of them. And it is far from just an app where people are dancing or, you know,

showing off their latest cheerleading squad. It's actually a place where people are going to get information about their medical care, about nutrition, about their relationships. It's a self-improvement app. They're getting information on DIY. And from my company, they're getting information on free market capitalism and limited government, individual liberty. And we're reaching people on that platform that we simply wouldn't be able to. able to get in front of elsewhere. Those users are not on Facebook. They're not on Instagram. They think those are dying, kind of embarrassing, Chewgee platforms, if you will. So we have a right to be there and to spread that information. And I think the reason you see

the Biden administration pushing so hard for this, and I would caution conservatives to be very, very wary about where this is coming from, because it's often caged as a war on big tech or a war on China. But it's really a war on speech and on your ability to get information and they want to be able to control you. And the reality is what's happening on TikTok right now. It's not good for Biden. If you actually start listening to the conversations being had there, not even from just people like me who are a bit more right leaning, but from the left, they're mad at him. They're talking about war. They're talking about our economic system. They're talking about some of the policy decisions that have been happening over the past couple of years. That is what this is actually about. There is a fear there for them because there's danger in that when people are able to actually share information. The government can no longer control the narrative, as we've seen them do with even our own social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook over the past couple of years. That's the real threat, and that's why Biden is so desperate to shut this down. Well, I'm torn on this. I have thought about, at times, joining TikTok because of, well, a couple of reasons.

One, I understand its power and its reach, particularly among young users. And two, I've heard the argument made that, well, you've got to at least play on the battlefield. So if you don't go out there and share your ideas or my ideas, then all the battleground is ceded to other ideas on TikTok, and actually the amount of censorship that's happening on TikTok isn't more egregious and perhaps even less than what you're going to find on Facebook or on YouTube. So I get all that. But then there's also, well, it's not just about censorship, it's about the algorithm,

and it's about the manipulation of American minds, and that it is controlled, it is controlled, we know this by the Chinese Communist Party. And they are an adversary. And you pointed out that there's ownership of foreign media. That's true. this particular bill, and I know that words are what matters and everything, says for an adversary. Well, how do you define adversary? That's a real big, important thing. But it definitely defines TikTok and the Chinese Communist Party as an adversary. And it wouldn't be wrong, Hannah. We know that to be

true. So the question is, how much propaganda do we allow into the United States with free access to young minds? And I hear you on RT, and I believe principally in the idea of the democratization of information. You have to be able to get it all in and sort it out in your mind, and that's the only healthy way for it to work. But we didn't allow the Japanese to, like, paper over us with propaganda flyers during World War II. You know, we didn't let the Nazis take over radio stations, you know, and we're talking about literally, like the German Nazi party taken over, because we're talking about the Chinese Communist Party. So don't you think at some point the manipulation is so obvious and the damage so clear that we don't have to protect the Chinese

under the things that we are designed to protect Americans, like the First Amendment. Yeah, I think there's a fair argument. And I think if there was actually proof of there being an actual national security threat, which I don't believe has been demonstrably true whatsoever. In fact, I think it's gone the opposite direction with things like Project Texas and their operations are largely housed here and also just a number of Americans who are on their board, who are working in the company. Like, I think there could be smaller approaches that there were real concerns that would

actually probably be constitutional. This is a broad brush that they've gone after it. You know, when you talk about propaganda coming in, yes, their algorithm might pick and choose what it elevates. But again, I'm pushing free market capitalism on there. I'm pushing Bill of Rights on there. I have openly criticized China. I've talked about gain of function funding in the Wuhan lab there. So to say that, you know, it's merely propaganda.

It's American. And real quick, Hannah, do you feel like you get a fair hearing in that environment? Do you feel like your content is turned up, turned down? Like, I'll tell you, honestly, I can feel that and see that on Thanksgiving. Facebook. I can see when content is turned down. I think that our interview, the full airing of which 80 minutes with former President Donald Trump was turned down on Facebook. I think the numbers don't lie. And you can, so it's happening in other platforms. That doesn't make TikTok unique. But do you feel like your content, you know, getting to get that liberty-based message out, it gets a fair hearing on TikTok? Yeah, you know, my experience with TikTok will is very interesting. It ebbs and flows a lot more than other social media platforms. So I'll have some months where I'm just hitting gangbuster numbers over there. Nothing can fail hundreds of thousands to millions of views.

And then some months where I'm not getting as much traction. And so we don't know why their algorithm operates, how it operates or why anybody does. But I definitely think I get a fair shake there. I'll tell you it's been easier to grow a platform there than it has on any other social media platform other than maybe Twitter as far as just the number of people that you're able to get in front of and how quickly you can build an audience. And I also will say that as far as the actual video views there, I've gotten far better track. on TikTok than Instagram by far. I mean, I'm talking easily hundreds of thousands to millions of views on things like me debunking the gender pay gap, me pushing back on, you know, the pharmaceutical companies

and the kickbacks that the Fauci and his NIH and others in the government were getting from that. I mean, these are really important conversations. And so, you know, is it that every single thing is going to succeed? No content is a lot of throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. That's true on every platform. But, you know, the content that I'm seeing on TikTok, it's that of other Americans. And so is there content that is antithetical to my views and I think to the Constitution on there? Yes, but that's that's the public square.

We have to meet it where it's at and be able to debunk it and to be able to offer better ideas. And I think TikTok is as good a place to do that as any. I have not noticed any more particular censorship on TikTok or any more promotion of left-wing views than I do on our own media channels. Yeah, I'm concerned. Like even in your description, I'm like, well, how much still we let the Chinese Communist Party own and dominate the public square. But then I remember like, you know, this is the way it goes. Like Facebook dominates until it doesn't dominate. You know, Instagram dominates until it doesn't dominate. And just because bite dance, you know, and TikTok is the dominant social media platform today doesn't guarantee we'll be

in five years. And so we probably need to be really careful about passing laws to limit technology companies based upon some concern over their influence in the short term. These things, I mean, Facebook is still really powerful. Don't get me wrong. But these things are not CBS. You know, they're not able, they don't, they have no track record of half a century of dominance. Because the next guy in the garage can proverbially disrupt them. That's probably getting less accurate and less so over time.

But I wouldn't say the TikTok has been crowned and we've given everything over to the Chinese Communist Party. I think you're right. And like I said, I think if we were concerned about the same. CCP and its involvement, there were other steps that our government could have taken to protect Americans' data. You know, there's been a lot of bills put in front of them, not just from the TikTok angle, but from our own media, our own social media that we know is collecting a lot of data on us, our own government, which is collecting a lot of data on us. There's things they could do, I think, to protect Americans without this broad brush stroke sort of approach.

And I do think that the language in it is very subjective, you know, whoever the president determines to be a foreign adversary, all of a sudden the president has unilateral power to just get rid of a media source that's inconvenient for him. It's very short-sighted. And I really do think that at the end of the day, you know, freedom isn't always perfect. There's downsides. There's calculations. There's concerns. But I would rather deal with the consequences of freedom and of free speech and a free market capitalism than I would the secondary consequences of allowing the government to set this kind of precedent. And I do think that it is a very serious precedent that's being set here. It's much bigger than TikTok. You know, I have plenty of social media platforms that I

utilize if I thought that this wasn't about a bigger thing. I don't know that we'd go through these steps. But I think this is part of an overarching agenda to get control of the narrative again, to get control of new media and as a whole to limit people's free speech and ability to hear information that is not popular or convenient for those in power. Yeah. Technology companies come and go, but laws are just about forever. So how will this be applied into forever? All right, based politics on X at Hannah D. Cox. Hannah Cox will follow this lawsuit from the Liberty Justice Center over the band from TikTok. Thank you so much for being on the Will Cain Show.

Appreciate it. All right. Well, that is going to do it for us today. Make sure you hit subscribe, Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and come hang out with us every Monday through Thursday live, 12 o'clock Eastern Time on YouTube, Facebook, or Fox News.com. I'll see you again next time. Listen ad free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcasts and Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad free on the Amazon music app. 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.