Will Cain Country - Joe Flacco & Hannah Cox: Getting Ready For The 2025 NFL Draft & Could $5,000 Checks Increase Birthrates?

Episode Date: April 24, 2025

Story #1: Will Cain shares new information on the embarrassing evolution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia into a sympathetic figure as the story has blown up in the faces of Democrats. Story #2: $5,000 to have a kid? Will tariffs work in the long run? Is the attack on misinformation back? A conversation with President and Co-founder of BASEDPolitics & Owner of Athens Media, Hannah Cox.  Story #3: The NFL Draft is here, better known as Christmas for Cowboys fans. Will is joined by Cleveland Browns' QB and Super Bowl XLVII MVP, Joe Flacco. 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

The new BMO ViPorter MasterCard is your ticket to more. More perks. More points. More flights. More of all the things you want in a travel rewards card. And then some. Get your ticket to more with the new BMO ViPorter MasterCard and get up to $2,400 in value in your first 13 months.

Terms and conditions apply. Visit BMO.com slash ViPorter to learn more. more of an embarrassment Hilmar Obrigo Garcia's evolution from a Maryland man Maryland father breaking news today driving a human smuggler's car his quote unquote boss and the deportation order that said

he can't be deported no not to El Salvador but to Guatemala. Timor-Breggo-Garcia blows up in the faces of Democrats. Two, $5,000 baby bump and tariffs, breaking it down with Hannah Cox. Three, the NFL draft is here. It's Christmas Day.

We're joined by Joe Flacko. It is the Will Kane Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page on demand by subscribing at Apple or on Spotify. Every Monday through Thursday, though, live right here on Fox News YouTube. Got a big show coming up for you today, including Elite NFSC, quarterback Joe Flacco of the Cleveland Browns joining us to break down the NFL draft-based politics Hannah Cox is going to join us to see what is the libertarian perspective and maybe the market perspective on Donald Trump's tariffs. House Speaker Mike Johnson told me yesterday that they would consider a $5,000 tax credit for people to have babies, expanding families. But is there

unintended consequences we need to consider in a baby bump on your taxes? We're going to get all that in just a little bit but let's get started now with story number one new york post reports today that kilmarabrego garcia when pulled over in tennessee with a truckload of eight illegal immigrants was in fact driving a car owned by a convicted human smuggler he referred to the owner of that car as his boss. This follows reporting from the Tennessee Star that he was pulled over with eight illegal immigrants who all gave the police the same address in America.

That address of Kilmar-Abrego-Garcia. He was shipping them from Texas to Maryland. Obrego-Garcia pretended not to know English during his traffic stop, but new details as reported by the New York Post today shows, in fact, that car was owned. by a human smuggler that he referred to as his boss. Reporting today, freshly from the Tennessee Star, the deportation order, and withholding order

by an immigration judge in the case of Kilmart-Breggo-Garcia has finally been released. It's been the course of narrative for quite some time. He was not to be deported. He was withheld from deportation because of gang concerns in El Salvador. It was popularly understood, in other words, reported and reported,

repeated that he could not be removed to El Salvador. He had a standing removal order, but it was placed on withhold. We presume to be El Salvador. But that deportation order has now been revealed by the Tennessee Star, and it says he is not to be removed to Guatemala, meaning his deportation to El Salvador would not violate a judge's orders. This story has become an utter embarrassment for Democrats, as they have gone all in every step of the way on scant detail. Let's unfold this exploding in the face of

Democrats in 15 steps. One, original reporting suggested that Kimmer-Breggo-Garcia was simply a Maryland father. Headlines screamed, Maryland father. That evolved over a course of a number of weeks into two, the now infamous saying, Maryland man. The point of the reporting and characterizing Kilmar-Abrego-Garcia as a Maryland man or a Maryland father was quite blatantly and obviously to make the listener, the viewer, or the reader feel like you will be deported, you American citizen. I mean, who is a Maryland father? Who is a Maryland man?

Hell, Baltimore Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson is a Maryland father. Could Lamar Jackson be next deported to El Salvador? or random middle class man living in Bethesda suburbs while his nine-year-olds ride the bike up and down the city streets commuting into work is your Maryland father is your Maryland man the headlines are meant to scare Americans that the authoritarian Donald Trump is grabbing up Maryland men and shipping them overseas to foreign countries quickly then number three the reporting showed that, in fact, Kimmer-Abrego-Garcia was not simply a Maryland man, in fact, had gang affiliations, allegations, including that of a click within MS-13.

Then reporting number four suggests that Donald Trump had violated a judge's order, a withholding order and deportation. Again, the story, as it's left within the line, between the text, the ether around the story, the aura is to suggest we have an unconstitutional rogue president defying the branches of power, scooping up Americans and shipping them to El Salvador. Five, the response is that these gang affiliations are simply allegations. No proof, no finding.

Yet we learned that two court adjudications found sufficient evidence to say that Kilmart-Obrigo-Garcia was, in fact, affiliated with MS-13-6, then we begin to see the evidence. We see the testimony in those court proceedings. We see his tattoos. Again, the trail you're led to follow is that these tattoos could be your tattoos that are very popular. Now, everybody's got a sleeve. everybody loves the Chicago Bulls but he keeps having these symbols

whether or not it's the Chicago Bulls have which I did not know was affiliated with MS-13 or the marijuana on the forefinger the smiley face on the middle finger the cross on the ring finger and the skull on the pinky finger are symbols used frequently by MS-13

according to gang experts, gang tattoo experts. But at this point, number seven, dim support is full, full-throated. It's reaching a fever pitch. Eight, it's all over the media. The outrage is incredible. In fact, Democrats have now suggested

that Kilmar-Breggo-Garcia is stand-in for a principle. He's about the rule of law. He's about the Constitution. They have to pivot that way because as number nine, we begin to learn their domestic violence allegations against Kimmer-Breggo-Garcia. His wife was fearing for her life. She made an appearance on Good Morning America with Michael Strayhan and neglected to answer questions about those domestic violence allegations, but they're in the record. At this point, number 10, Democrats have committed pot full. They're there.

Senator Chris Van Hollins making trips to El Salvador, followed by a contingent. of Democrats from all across the country, anywhere but Maryland, like Congressman Maxwell Frost from Florida. They've gone full support for Kim Arbrego-Garcia. Why? Now their answer is because it's about due process. Due process. That American ideal they've held so fully to throughout every January 6th prosecution, throughout the trials of Donald Trump, throughout the riots of 2020, every step of the way, they have been obviously faithful to the idea. of the rule of law. Never suggested that it's just to riot, embrace violence, to look Donald Trump up and throw away the key without a trial. They've never, they have no record. There's no

there's no clips we could play of various democratic politicians blatantly, blatantly suggesting the laws in the way of true justice. Lock up the authoritarian. Get rid of Donald Trump. No, they simply stand for due process. 12, then we have the evidence of human smuggling, which we covered at the top. He's pulled over in Tennessee. He's got eight illegal immigrants with him. 13. Then we start to learn about real due process.

What is due process? It's not cracker jackbox. It's not one vice fit stall. Non-citizens don't get the same process as citizens. And I brago-Garcia has appeared in multiple court proceedings. Vice President J.D. Vance just yesterday said, I don't know where this comes from. This idea he didn't get due process. He's been in the court numerous times about his status in America.

Yesterday, here he is J.D. Vance. Omar Abrago Garcia's wife has been very vocal about how she doesn't think he's getting due process. And she now also fears for her safety. Do you have a message to her specifically? Well, I don't have a message to his wife. I mean, look, I just disagree with the idea that he hasn't been offered due process. He had a couple of immigration hearings. He had a valid deportation order.

I think this idea that somehow that we couldn't deport an MS-13 gang member, and he was an MS-13 gang member, is preposterous. Preposterous. In fact, the withholding order, which we now know says it couldn't be removed to Guatemala, is superseded, according to Trump administration. But in fact, MS-13 has been designated a foreign terrorist organization with a standing removal order, which he had as accomplished through the course of due process, it superseded by MS-13 being designated a foreign terrorist organization,

allowing the President of the United States under the executive branch and immigration judges under the immigration branch to deport Kimmar-Abrego-Garcia. And then finally, 14 and 15 is the news of the day. In fact, the human smuggling cases even seem to be more obvious with details that he was tied to importing illegal immigrants and that he could, in fact, be deported to Guatemala. The narrative that an average Maryland man is at threat, the American citizen is at threat of being rolled up

by a rogue authoritarian president and shipped overseas in violation of court orders breaking the separation of powers and that all the fever-pitched fear of the last decade that Donald Trump is fulfilling their predicament, of an authoritarian blew up in their face as they assigned their fate to an MS-13 gang member alleged to have had committed domestic violence with evidence pointing to human smuggling and a standing removal order from a judge all in all in because they've been all in on the narrative for 10 years

that you should fear the authoritarian Donald Trump I would ask you if you're at home listening I would ask you, are you a member of MS-13? Are you an illegal immigrant? Have you committed acts of human smuggling? Have you committed domestic violence? Do you have a removal order from a judge? If the answer to any one of those is no, you are not akin to Kilmar-Abrego-Garcia.

But now Democrats are in league with Kilmart-Abrigo-Garge. Garcia, in league with someone who on a daily basis, new evidence suggests this is your cause, de jure, Democrats, and this has blown up in your face, an absolute embarrassment. Now, if you're listening and you're a Democrat, how did this happen? And the answer is the same that it has been for a decade. Because you picked your positions, not on principle. Don't sell me due process. your positions exclusively on opposition to Donald Trump, and you've been wedded to your

handmade tale vision of America that he would be a dictator. There'll be other stories, once again, because you are like a heroin addict, jonesing for the next narrative that fits the story you've been selling for a decade, selling it all the way into oblivion, lying and losing, losing and lying, until it blows up in your face like it has with Kilmar-a-Bergo-Garcia. Donald Trump's tariffs seem to be short-term, not doing so well. We're going to talk to a libertarian about her perspective on that, and also what about a government incentive for everyone to build families? Birth rates have absolutely plummeted, not just in America, but also in Japan and across Europe. Elon Musk says that's an absolutely

threat to civilization. Is it a rightful use of government incentive to give you a tax incentive $5,000 to have kids? We'll break it all down with Hannah Cox when we come back on the Will Cain Show. Hey, I'm Trey Gowdy host of the Trade Gowdy podcast. I hope you will join me every Tuesday and Thursday as we navigate life together and hopefully find ourselves a little bit better on the other side. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com. Listen to the all-new Brett Bear podcast featuring Common Ground, in-depth talks with lawmakers from opposite sides of the aisle, along with all your Brett Bear favorites like his all-star panel and much more. Available now at foxnewspodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Hannah Cox, who is the president and co-founder of base politics, joins us now here on the Wilcane show.

Hannah, it's good to see you while I'm saying hello to you. let me say also to the guys in the studio I'm getting my feedback coming right back at me I can hear myself and everything so hopefully I can fight through that or hear you okay Hannah as you talk I've been trying to set up this idea of the

the baby bump the tax incentive that both Donald Trump and Mike Johnson have talked about to encourage the birth rate in the United States to go up $5,000 tax incentive for people to have babies what are your thoughts? Well, I have a lot of thoughts. I'm very excited to talk to you about this. I'd like to hear yours as well. But, you know, we've seen other countries try this already. We're not the only country that's having a drop in fertility rates. And what we've seen is that these kinds of things make absolutely no difference. Governments tend to have the ability to influence the birth rate. I do think there's things that we could be doing that would have a positive impact on the birth rate. But if you look at who's having kids and who's not, it tends to be wealthier people who are choosing not to have kids. It's not really a cost.

equation. Instead, I think the problem that we have is people don't believe that they have a good future to bring kids into. I mean, whether you talk to some in the left or the right who's considering having kids, this is a concern they have. They don't know where the economy's going. Some people have climate concerns, which of course, you know, the right often mocks. But there's things we could do to address that. Trump has an amazing agenda when it comes to environmental issues, when it comes to deregulating, when it comes to investing in nuclear. It really is an agenda that could better solve climate issues than anything the left is pretending to do at this time. Those are things that he should be championing. We also could be doing a lot of

things to actually address the cost of living long term. $5,000 does not make a dent in the cost of raising a child, but doing things like fixing our health care system would, doing things like having school choice for parents so that they feel they have the ability to ensure their kids get a quality education and have the ability to build good careers. That would make a big difference. Making sure that we are creating a society that has enough wealth where jobs are giving people remote work and flexible schedule so that they can spend more time with their kids and actually enjoy their families. You know, I'm a woman who has decided a long time ago not to have kids myself. And it's frustrating hearing these conversations happen because it seems like nobody's

actually talking to the people that they want to influence. They don't actually take the time to understand what their calculations are. And so they come up with all these solutions that would just completely miss the mark. Yeah, it's interesting what you point out about. It's wealthy people are choosing not to have kids um the the we do have a problem the problem is the birth rate going down and it is a problem that like everyone wants to take that as some sort of you know obviously sometimes they can take it as a personal indictment you brought up the fact that you've chosen not to have kids you know it's not intended as such it's bad for civilization it's bad for society if you're not procreating it's also bad by extension if you're not uh creating family units

somebody pointed out to me yesterday that we don't just want people to have kids either it's not just the but rather we want family creation so if you did this like could you tie that to married people having kids would that be discriminatory to people who are not married having kids so it's pretty complicated when you think about what is our goal our goal is to have a society that procreates and replaces itself well it's also as part of that we understand to to build families to to raise those so children. So it is hard to structure that to achieve the actual goals you want. Yeah, I think two things can be true at once. First and foremost, I think that the birth rate declining is not the catastrophe that some people like Elon Musk are making it into. We have more people on earth right now than we've ever had before. If that population number declines to what it was 100 years ago, 200 years ago over a period of decades, that's not a catastrophe waiting to happen. If anything, I think, that's representative of people having better options, a better quality of life. People used to have a lot more kids because their kids would die young.

You know, there's a lot of factors that go into this. Part of the big drop in the birth rate decline actually has to do with teens, not having babysitting or the global birth rate. But the global birth rate, yes. And I think that when you talk about globally, it is a problem if that continues and it continues over a period of decades, which we haven't seen yet. But I think, again, it returns to the question of how do you create a society where people want to bring kids into it?

And that's something that we're failing to do. I think it's a bellwether. It's a sign of, like, writing on the wall of what's going wrong in the world when so many people are choosing not to have kids, you bring up the importance of people being married. I think that has a big impact on it. You know, many people I know who come from broken homes, who had divorced parents, are much more tepid about entering into marriage or having kids themselves. They haven't had a model of how to actually stay married, of how to get along with your

partner. That's something my husband and I've had to work through. He came from a divorced family. He didn't have the same relationship tools that I had when we first were dating. And so that often leads to cycles, right, where you see people who come from divorce families are more likely to get divorced themselves. And so what we're seeing right now, I think is really the end result of a lot of bad policy choices and a lot of bad social choices over a period of decades. And I don't think that we need to be working to use the government to manipulate people

into having kids when they don't want them. We don't want more kids from broken homes. We don't want more kids that people don't take care of. We already have hundreds of thousands of kids that are in foster care as we speak. So I think we have to actually get our ducks in a row and figure out how to prioritize addressing this. It's not going to be an overnight fix. You're certainly not going to just be able to pay people to have babies. In fact, if you look at other countries that have done these programs, they'll even go so far as saying no taxes if you have a certain number of kids or they'll do paid paternal leave. I mean, they've tried everything. And it doesn't actually work because you're not addressing the actual long-term issues that people see when they're

making these calculations. Our society really has to return to capitalism, I think. I think if you have a society that is producing enough wealth, you have people who are happier, you have have people who have a better quality of life. They have more time to dedicate to kids. They don't feel like that is a burden. They don't feel like they have to wonder where their next paycheck's going to come from. All of that creates security. And that also tends to lend to better relationships, right? You have less anxiety, less depression, less people who are at each other's throats because they feel like they're in fight to survive mode. And I think that that is why this is a bad thing. It's proof that our society is failing because people feel this way in such large

numbers but we can't just throw money at the problem that's kind of like democrat saying hey student loans are a huge problem they're really expensive and so therefore we're just going to make them free that doesn't actually address the root cause of what made the loans super expensive in the first place and i feel like republicans are having a similar impulse here okay you said a lot right there and uh i think a lot of it has to be unpacked so first um i think declining birth rates are a real societal problem. Even if the global birth rate is rising, you have declining birth rates

within civilizations, within societies, and that represents the decline of that particular society, that particular civilization. And I think we can look at both Japan and Europe as illustrations of this problem. Both are economies that are slow growth to no growth. the reason why those two things are tied together is that children i mean the most the most

utilitarian way to put it is it's new consumers new people new people participating in a marketplace but every new person is a new idea and so you lose the idea of innovation you use the dynamism of a society so what happens in its wake well again not in japan but in europe we see that what you have is mass migration you have refugees you have illegal immigration you have people move in and your society fundamentally changes. So it is a prescription for decline to not grow your own civilization, your own society. I am unconvinced that a $5,000 tax credit is the solution. I share that with you. But I am open to ideas. You pointed out there are countries who've said no taxes if you have kids. Well, I think that most notable example is hungry who's done that.

It's a little bit early in that experiment to say it hasn't failed yet. It hasn't succeeded yet. we don't know that's like a year or two old that that whole process so we don't know how it's it's going to work out and then finally the thing is the hard sell on well we just need a more prosperous society and then people can feel like they can afford kids is people have been having children throughout history at high rates at much lower standards of living and much poorer societies in fact most of the world's global population boom is coming from poor societies So I don't think that's directly tied, except for emotionally. Emotionally, people feel like, oh, I got to wait, I got to wait.

I got to see if I can afford it. You know, I got to see if I can do this. And I'm not sure that's the right emotional outlook for people. I look back on my life and I go, I had those same concerns. Oh, I don't know. I'm going to wait. I'm a wait so I feel more secure in my career. You know what?

It would have been fine. It would have been fine to start seven, eight years earlier. I would have had more kids. I wish I had more kids. and everybody throughout humanity has done it. So, again, I don't know that that leads me to a $5,000 tax credit, but I don't know that the answer also is just capitalism. Like capitalism or richer society leads to more kids.

Well, if you think about the past, though, people didn't have a choice about whether or not they were going to have kids. You didn't have birth control. You didn't really have anything at your disposal to family plan, essentially. And again, because a lot of kids died very young, many families did have more kids, particularly those that needed the kids to work on their farms or in their businesses. And so there were different calculations at play.

The thing I struggle with most of all in the birth rate discussion is this notion that we're at this point in society, we have this many people on earth, and therefore we must keep this many people on earth or more, or it's a catastrophe. And that just doesn't feel realistic. You have baby booms at times throughout history. You have other reasons, as I just mentioned, that people would have kids or not have kids. Again, if you get to a point where people are just having no kids and we're going to have complete population decline, then I would understand some of the hand-wringing.

think that that is a not really accurate forecast of what's happening at the moment. I think that probably we're seeing a evening out, if anything, of where we were historically and where we're at now given modern innovations. But I do think what you said is right. It's less about the dollar amount. I don't hear many people my age, and I'm in like the prime age where people are having kids talking about the dollars and sense of raising kids. It's more what you referred to, which is being at the right place in your life. And some of that has to do with being the right place in your career, I guess, so that you're financially set. But I think more of it has to be. has to do with being at a place in your career where you can take the time. That's the thing that

people really seem to stress about the most. And I get that. I have two stepkids now and I told my husband a few weeks ago. I don't know how people with two full-time nine to five jobs do this. I work at home. I can get them on and off the bus. I can take them to doctor's appointments if I need to. If the school randomly cancels for the day and says it's a digital day, they can be home with me. It's an inconvenience. But if you have working class people, I don't know, honestly, how you would afford to do that. The cost of daycare are extreme. We know that grandparents are less and less involved in helping with grandkids as they used to be. There's a lot of things breaking down in our society, and that's why I point to capitalism

when it comes to reducing costs and the actual just ability to have kids and ability to afford the services you might need to pick up the pieces and or to take a time away from your job or have a more flexible job so that you yourself can be there. But there's also a lot that needs to happen culturally. We do need to see actual community happen again. And I don't think that's just a problem with grandparents. That's what gets the most media attention. But you also have the fact that people are less involved in church.

You know, my dad's a pastor. I grew up very involved in church. My mom homeschooled all four of us while he was preaching and getting a PhD. So he was gone all the time. She could not have done that without the support of church and people and others that would pitch in and take care of us when we needed and family members as well. And I think that that's something where you see people increasingly. They're not involved in church. They're not involved in any sort of meaningful way in their communities. They don't even know their neighbors. And so the burden of having a kid feels a lot heavier in many ways for people nowadays than it did decades before. I agree. It seems really hard to try to do this with two parents on a nine to five. It's hard to figure out daycare who's going to divide responsibilities. I mean, I think we'd be ignoring the obvious as well if we didn't look and set aside whether or not you think it's a problem or I think it's a problem declining birth rates, but they are declining. And it would be almost missing the obvious to point out it correlates directly with the rise of feminism and the rise of women in the workplace. And that from 19 1950s 60s forward, that's when it declines. That's when we have two parents working. That's when it's hard to figure out how you're going to get the child care taking care of. And that's when birth rates go down. And I think it would be missing the obvious. Again, you don't have to pass moral judgment on that or not. You just sort of say, oh, these two things are probably tied together. See, the thing I have an issue with is that women almost always work. There's this like 1950s Coca-Cola ad memory that Americans have right now for that era where you really

just had some upper middle class women, perhaps, who stayed home and did their nails and cooked and cleaned and took care of their kids. I mean, most women have always had to work throughout history. I'm not sure the stats bear that out, what you just said. I also think that's a little dismissive to the idea that what homemaking was a huge job. And it still is for a lot of people. It was a huge job. I do not mean that I mean that at all. I'm saying that they have an idea of what it looked like that is simply not true. Most women had to work. It was a working class thing. Women had to go clean other people's homes. And so I'm saying the notion that a lot of Americans seem to have right now of what the 1950s looked like is really based on one social class

during that time period. And that's great. The lives of the upper middle class to wealthy probably look pretty similar now. You don't have to have two people working. But women have always had to work throughout history. And I feel like the reason I'm prickling at this is this is quickly becoming a bit of a scapegoat online where people are going after women's rights, even going so far to say we should get rid of the 19th Amendment. Women need to be forced back in the home. And what I would say to that is first and foremost, if you need basic slavery and to strip a whole class of people of their rights in order

for the population to stay alive, then maybe it should go extinct. I mean, that's ridiculous. But secondarily, I don't think that that's actually true. I think it correlated with the sexual revolution. But I think that's jumping from A to D. I think that's jumping from A to D. And that's a tendency that we have when we're online and see some

extreme arguments or think that defines the debate. I mean, you and I started this conversation with sort of the choices people make, right, the emotional and cultural choices that people make of why they would choose not to have kids, right? And so we can look at, by the way, I just don't know, Hannah, about your characterization of rewining the clock 80 years about the percentage of women in the workplace compared to today. But I think we can look at and diagnose and say two things are

connected without going all the way from A to D and saying, well, therefore, we should do away with women's rights. No, what it could do is influence the choices we make emotionally and culturally as individuals. I think that's fair, and I think that you're correct. It is the online extremes, but I do just want to point out sort of the dangers of that conversation and where I have seen it heading, and I do think where there is some seedy intentions around this entire conversation. I think increasingly, if you look at what's happening with the workforce even, more women are getting degrees than men. Women are quickly climbing the ladders.

Many of them are starting to make more than their husbands or than their male peers do. And so having a conversation about who does what in the home, who does what for child care taking is actually a really exciting development that I think a lot of men are leaning into. I was at our town center the other night and I was looking around at the number of men who were watching the kids versus women. And it was almost every single one of them. Dads have become so much more engaged in their kids' lives. They're also, especially post-COVID, starting to look for more.

more remote works, that they can be more present with their families and their kids. I think negotiations around like who bears the workload. How do we more evenly split this up? You know, is it the woman or the man who stays home? Should one parent stay home? Those are fair conversations to have as long as we're staying in the territory of people making choices and helping people identify options when they want to procreate that will make it something that's possible for them. But I just think we have to be very careful about blaming feminism for the birth rate decline. And I think that as a whole, if people are choosing not, to have kids. We don't want people who don't want kids to have kids. I mean, that is an

arguable fact to me. We don't want more kids who have abandonment or who have to grow up with drug and alcohol issues or who have abuse in the home. Like there's so many bad things that can befall a child when they have kids. So it does matter who's having kids. It does matter what conditions they're having those kids under. And I think that if there are people and most of them are women even who are saying I don't want to have kids, we have to treat that as a valid option for that person and also respect what they feel they can take on and be good at. If they don't feel like they could be a good parent, okay, then you really shouldn't be a parent and feminism giving you that option is actually a good thing.

All right, I want to move forward in the discussion. I do want to read this. The guys just send me this. It's not to fact check you is for the audience. So today, 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 57.5% of women are in the workforce. In the 1950s, you referenced a moment ago, 34%. in the 1930s, 22% and 1920% of women in the labor force. The path you went down in this conversation makes me want to go to this other conversation.

And it's one, something we plan to talk about. I do think there's a risk in kind of where I think your mind went there, but I think it's happening with a lot of people right now. And it's like, okay, this is a dangerous conversation. but it's only a dangerous conversation if you take it to its extreme and online makes it so easy and rapid for it to go to as extreme okay so for our conversation just now we have a conversation which i don't think is dangerous which i think is not only healthy but it's like stating the obvious truth that these two things are correlated a decline in birth rate women joining the workforce i think

there is undoubted evidence that those two things are connected now i'm telling you that as a fact right i'm not telling you therefore or this is horrific i'm telling you this is diagnosis and i feel like we're moving off this topic that this is happening a lot and i think it's a downside of us all having access to so much information and we have it and it's great and i love all the debates i've had that with for example um i had that conversation with douglas murray and then a rebuttal to douglas like more information is good he had his debate with dave smith on Rogan but I see this tendency of say okay here's a conversation that needs to be had okay but either nefariously or unwittingly there's just a tendency to take that and go well here's the

horrible logical extreme of your conversation when that's not there's like 10 steps between and again we don't have to stick on women you know what I mean like I don't I don't actually don't want to debate this and I don't I don't have uh I'm not I'm not interested in this right now but and as an example if there is a conversation of debate about the war that Israel is waging in Gaza it's like it quickly accelerates into anti-Semitism and can you find online evidence of it getting there

yeah you can you can you can you can you can draw the lines but we do it so much on everything that not only do we obscure all the relevant arguments in between we shut down the initial one which is important like the initial one is important because they're true right and i think this is a cost to the online information that we all rush to this like logical outcome that maybe is dangerous and then look back on the initial important conversation and go that's why that conversation was dangerous well i also think though the the argument that i made is being made and it's being made by well-known people like

matt walsh and others online very frequently and so i think what we have to do is acknowledge that in order to stay on point A. And I appreciate you saying that and clarifying that because oftentimes people do try to hide their hand in these sorts of conversations when they have a true motivation or thing that they're using this to advance. And this could pertain to Israel. It could pertain to the birth rate. It could pertain to a lot of things that are happening right now. And so I think calling out the bad actors in a subject matter is important in saying, you know, there's some extremists over here who want to take this and use this to justify X, Y, or Z. And that's horrible and bad and we condemn that, but we do want to focus on this problem. And I think in doing that,

you can then focus people back on it and make sure that everybody in the conversation is a good actor and is actually acting with the right motivations to solve the problem versus using the problem to go and attack a different population. All right, that ties into something. Nina Jankovits was part of the disinformation campaign, crackdown on disinformation under the Biden administration. She's now working with the EU, and she had this to say about the United States. Neither Washington nor the social media platforms it has captured are interested in preserving democracy. They are interested in maintaining their power and hoarding profits. And so before I describe the details of Russia's recent online influence campaigns, I would like to call upon

you to stand firm against another autocracy, the United States of America. The Trump administration is undoubtedly preparing a pressure campaign to force EU institutions to roll back regulation like the DSA, to end support for Ukraine, to stop holding Russia to account. Wow. So there she is speaking to the EU. In defense, by the way, the DSA is speech regulation in the EU. and calling America authoritarian.

Man, she is such a little tyrant. She gives me Dolores Umbridge vibes. Do you know who I'm talking about from Harry Potter? No, I'm not as plugged in on Harry Potter as maybe I should be. She's that lady to a T, and it's the most hated character in the entire series. I mean, what a complete authoritarian nightmare. And also, how does she keep failing up like this? It's crazy how they keep giving her new positions,

because I've seldomly seen somebody less likable or interesting than her. But that is dystopian. I think that the disinformation board they tried to create with her at its helm was one of the worst threats that came up during the Biden administration. I'm very, very glad that we were able to squelch that because it was going to be disastrous for free speech in America. And the Biden administration was disastrous for free speech in America as a whole. It was absolutely insane what they got away with, the censorship that they were pulling

online on social media, the actual disinformation campaigns they were running against us, the American people, the gaslighting, everything about that entire administration was a complete assault on the First Amendment. And I'm not surprised to hear her making these arguments at the EU, but I think that people need to be reminded of who was around and who was actually running the show during the past four years because it was these types of people. Biden was out to lunch and recognize just how much further they would have pushed the issue if they could have gotten away with it or even gotten another four years. While you were talking, Hannah, the audience got to see Cleveland Brown's quarterback Joe Flacko is getting set up.

He's about to join us here. I was wondering who that was. Okay. We got a nice smile there from Joe Flacco there for a moment. So we're going to go to Joe Flacko in just one moment. But I did tease this and I want to get your perspective. You're libertarian. You're very capitalist oriented, as you've mentioned in this.

I'm curious where you stand on Donald Trump's tariffs. Yeah, I obviously don't support the tariffs. I do support some of his larger goals that he's. trying to achieve with the tariffs. I wish he would focus on the special thoughts that made his first administration such as success economically. I think that the reason we have these trade deficits, the reason we're getting beat by the rest of the world right now is because we are hand-tying ourselves and preventing the American economy from truly competing. His deregulation agenda, cutting taxes, investing in nuclear. I mean, that's an existential thing on the table that we

have got to invest more in and focus on and make. And by investing, I mean, let the private sector invest in it just get out of their way, stop hand-tying them. And I think there's just so much he could do that would let American businesses and Americans themselves actually compete, actually be off to the races and run circles around the rest of these countries. But, you know, focusing on the tariffs is just something that's going to hurt the American people. Ultimately, unless they're used as a very short-term strategy as a negotiation tactic to simply come in and renegotiate, I'm not convinced that's his goal. I know some people suspect that. I really can't tell who's to say with Trump. But as a whole, I think there's just much better ways of approaching the issue

he's trying to fix than tariffs. Well, if it is his short-term goal, the lack of clarity would actually serve in that respect. I mean, you got to make somebody think it's permanent to get a good deal for it to be short-term. So we'll have to see how that all plays out. And I agree with you on deregulation, as I think the Trump administration does. I think they're embarking on a pretty aggressive deregulation of the American economy, specifically around energy. Okay, we got Joe Flacko on So Hannah Cox, sorry about the technical difficulties when we got started. I appreciate you coming in the studio. It was great to have you on the show.

Good to see, well. Okay, that's Hannah Cox of based politics. Check her out at Hannah D. Cox on X. All right, let's take a quick break because when we come back, we do have Cleveland Brown's quarterback Joe Flacco on the NFL draft. Next in the Will Kane Show. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGriffin or McGrittles

with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes iced coffee and delivery. 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. Christmas Day for football fans tonight, the first round of the NFL draft.

It's Christmas Day for players as well. Where will they spend the beginning parts of their career? The answer to that was the Baltimore Ravens for Joe Flacco. It's the Will Cain Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel on the Fox News Facebook page. Hey, hit subscribe at Apple or on Spotify. But now he is the quarterback of the Cleveland Browns. Joe Flacco joins us now on The Will Cane Show.

What's up, Joe? How are we doing? Beautiful shot. I mean, I don't know where this is. I'm down in Florida. Kids have spring break. I think this is the first time we've actually taken them somewhere. So just enjoying the sun.

Tell me, take me back, Joe. I can't remember how many years ago it is now. I'm sure you have the number right at the top of your head. Coming out of Delaware. Let me see if I can do it, Joe. Was it, I have two numbers in my head. Was it 12th or was it 15th? overall that you were taking?

18th overall. 18. Okay. Take me back. Okay, that night. Did you know where you were going to go? Had the Ravens been talking to you more than any other team? Were you on pins in the...

18 picks, by the way, what does that take? That takes like... Is that two and a half hours you're waiting? Something like that? It probably took a few hours. I don't quite remember. I had no idea where I was going. I did obviously talk to Baltimore.

They came and worked me out pre-draft. and they were one of the teams that were interested. But coming from a small school like Delaware, I had no idea where I was going to be picked. Didn't know if it was going to be 18th overall as it was or somewhere in the third or fourth round, had no real idea. All right, you had a great career of Baltimore,

so we don't even have to talk about Baltimore or Cleveland, for that matter. So I hope you don't feel like you need to be politically correct. As you were sitting there that night, did you have dreams and hopes? And if you did, I'm curious, was that influenced by A, who you were a fan of when you were a kid, B, where you wanted to live, everybody wants to live in San Diego, it seems like,

or C, you were looking at actual systems and, like, coaches and where you thought you might succeed. I wish I was smart enough to probably understand the different systems and things like that and to have an opinion. But sometimes I think when you go into things, you know, a little bit unaware of how they actually play out, you can kind of go in with an open mind and give yourself the best chance to succeed. And that's kind of how I was.

I was living a dream. I was getting ready to be picked in the NFL draft, something that I had kind of dreamt about my whole life. So where I was going wasn't really that important. And then you talked about who it was that kind of drove you to do that. And yeah, I grew up watching players, man. I never really had a favorite NFL team, but just loved watching different players, you know, not even necessarily quarterbacks, like specifically loved watching Randy Moss, like when I was in middle school and high school.

And those are the kind of the guys that motivated me to just, you know, you want to go out there and you want to be a part of NFL history and kind of do, you know, do the best you can and leave your mark. Did you play, were you always a quarterback? Or did you play receiver at some point? So, yeah, I didn't start playing organized football until I was in junior high, and I didn't play quarterback right away. I didn't start playing until I was a freshman in high school.

I knew I was going to play quarterback, but when you don't start playing until you're 12 or 13 years old, you've had guys that have played that position for the last five or six years. it's kind of hard to kind of, you know, step right onto the field and decide that you're going to play quarterback. So were you a baseball guy or something? Like, why did you know you were going to play quarterback? Grew up being a baseball guy. I always had the arm kind of, you know, in the front yard, going out to the field, working with my dad, just kind of always had it in my mind that I was going to be a quarterback. All right. Speaking of kids, so Joe,

I, um, I buy cleats right now. I don't know, man. They never last as long as I think. I feel like it could be once every six months. I have two boys that play football and soccer. Soccer is their primary sports. They're in cleats every day. And they're in that phase as well where their foot's growing so fast. And they're also at the age where it's like, I've got to have the good cleats. So it's expensive and they burn through them and I'm buying cleats at all times.

And you have a new deal that you're a part of with Caddix cleats. Tell me about Caddix. That's correct. Listen, you know, I got hooked up with these guys last year, and I feel like every offseason you're kind of finding new ways to kind of stay healthy and kind of, you know, elongate your career as much as possible. So this was another opportunity that I felt like I could take, I could actually go on the field and do the things that I was, you know,

be as safe as possible as I could be on the field and maybe get that extra advantage. And what these guys have come up with is a smart cleat that kind of takes off some of the pressure, you know, on your lower body and reduces injury and increases performance a little bit. So I just felt like, you know, every little edge you can gain is important, especially as you get a little bit older. And then when you talk about kids, I think it's also important for them because you've talked about it, the miles that they log, you know, playing these youth sports these days is just unheard of. And they're not quite at the age yet where they've developed the strength and their legs to kind of put up with that wear and tear.

So to have something like this that kind of sets you up to, you know, be as healthy as possible. And listen, we all want our kids to kind of enjoy the benefits that sports give you and do that for as long as possible and kind of learn those lessons. And, you know, whatever their talent level may be, we want them to be able to kind of live up to that and whatever level that may be. And I think something like this is going to help them stay on the field as long as possible and really, you know, have as much fun as possible as they get into their older years. I got one kid that's into every gadget.

I'm sure he's going to be all over with the Caddix when he hears about it. He's bought the, if he sees it on Instagram, currently he wants the nose thing, the magnets, which were like the thing that everybody did 20 years ago, the tape. But he doesn't want the tape. There's magnets that open up your nose. Yeah, there's a magnet. And he had to have. yeah the breathe strip yeah he had to have titanium insoles or whatever i don't know if it's titanium

whatever the insol is that makes you so much faster right now that's of course how it's sold um but he's also my kid joe have you ever heard of sever's disease it's they call it a disease whatever it's kids get it there's two things that kids get when they're growing osgood slatter which is in their knee they get this like aching throbbing pain in their knee when they grow but the one before that is in their heel and their achilles and it's called receivers, receivers, and he's had that awful. So, like, cleats and, uh, I play a huge role. Like, how are you going to make that feel better, uh, for you and how can you either rest or play through it? So what is the technology with Caddix? So their cleat, their cleat, their cleat bottom,

the actual stud on the bottom of the plate, it moves a little bit. It gives a little bit. It rotates a little bit. So when you're, you know, you want, obviously you want the traction and you want the force to go into the ground so that you can come out and perform. But what this does, it just gives that little bit of release, you know, it's good on grass and turf, but when you're on grass, you get that little natural release. When you're on turf, you don't get it quite as much. So as opposed to, you know, when you're in a regular cleat, so much energy sometimes can kind of get transferred up through that leg, but this little tiny release will kind of alleviate some of that pressure and, you know, kind of reduce the risk of Achilles and ACLs and things like

that, but also just the natural wear and tear that you get from running around in cleats every, you know, for three hours a day, every day. and we we we everything we do these days especially at the youth level is on turf and and and and and even at my level they're going more and more that direction so anything that you can do to kind of prevent those injuries from happening i think is huge and that's the beauty about these things you got to tell them to check it out they have an instagram you can go to caddx.com the beautiful thing about these is they look good like they're not just it's not just hey i'm dad here's like this here's this new cool cleat it's really safe it looks really cool it's uh you know i think it's the next thing so he should be excited about it i will tell me to check it out by the way you've partnered with the NFL alumni health uh during the draft during this we start to give away a free pair uh and the way to do that is go to NFL alumni health.org or cadix with an X C-A-D-D-I-X dot com uh you're right about turf by the way all that that give that's fascinating because we everybody's injuries the knees and everything it's it's like oh you're you get stuck in

the turf and and like you said it transfers everything up so a little give in the cleat okay you're an active player i know how this works man so you're not going to tell me anything but i'm going to ask and see if you surprise me okay you're with the browns uh everybody says Travis hunter which would be a weapon for you and be a weapon for any quarterback with the browns receiver so i'm going to ask you two things we'll see what you do with it what would you love to see from the browns Listen, oh, man, I showed up to Cleveland like two days ago, and you're asking me to, you know, my opinion on what I would want. And yeah, I'm going to run away from that question big time.

I have no idea what they're going to do. I'll be excited about it either way. You know, there's so many good guys in that locker room. And I think at the top, you have to trust what they're going to do. As a player, you realize it quickly. Like, maybe you come into the league thinking that you might have an impact on, on the top. on the day-to-day decisions. But, man, as a player, you show up, you do your work, you go on the field, you put your head down, and that's pretty much all you can do.

Wait, wait, wait, okay, I have a follow-up that I think you can't answer. I'm a big Cowboys, Sanjo. And I was listening to some guys talked about this other day. Like, will the front office, like, okay, they're talking about, will they take a receiver? We don't know if they will. But the two receivers they're talking about are Ted McMillan out of Arizona and Matthew Golden out of Texas. And they're two very different kind of receivers. One's a smaller, burner, route runner. One's a big guy, a leaper, an aerial, grab it. And the question was, would they go in and talk to DAC?

Hey, which one would be more advantageous to you? Which type receiver would you prefer? And I think every organization is different. So if I ask you about the Ravens or any of the other teams that you've been with, the answer is going to be different than the Cowboys, I would imagine. But have you had that relationship at times for, you know, maybe with Baltimore? They're like, man, we're kind of debating this. Which style works better for you, Joe?

Sure. Yeah. I mean, we've had those conversations. I mean, I've looked at guys coming out before. I've gone, you know, I think back in the day when you were probably allowed to do this, I've gone and thrown to a guy and been part of something like that. I would assume, you know, with somebody in Dax's position that they would at least ask his, you know, ask for his input a little bit. But it's not necessarily something that is, you know, you're not going to get last said. I think they're just kind of looking to bounce things off of, you know, some different

different people. And there's so many people that get their eyes on those guys. You know, as a quarterback, unless you really want to like go the long haul and spend all that time, you know, your opinion, I don't even know if you'd have, I don't even know if I'd have like the best opinion in the world, like just from watching a guy on tape. I think if you put a guy in front of me for 30 minutes, if you took me on the field with somebody and you had me go throw to them, I could give you little tidbits from that. But to watch a guy on film, I haven't done enough of that to actually be able to kind of dissect guys playing abilities to the point where I'd even be confident giving them my opinion.

And then you talk about the different types of styles that these guys have. The thing that I would say is that there's good football players and then there's guys that maybe aren't as good football players and the body style and the route and the speed and the jumping ability, I think we can get all enamored with that. But at the end of the day, the guys that end up being the best. best producers are the ones that are really, really good football players. Now, obviously, every now and then, you get a really, really good football player that 6-4 has a 40-inchvert and can run a 4-3. And, okay, that's the best of all worlds. But a lot of the times, man, you know, you have to find

ways to find the best football players and not get so enamored with all the, all the measurables. More of the Will Cain Show right after this. Fox News Audio presents Unsolved with James Batterson. Every crime tells the story, but some stories are left unfinished. Somebody knows. Real cases, real people. Listen and follow now at foxtruecrime.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 the quiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. Okay, last question. I'm not going to set myself up for failure.

You're an active quarterback. You're not going to talk about your soon-to-be colleagues. What if I ask you about the quarterbacks in this draft. But I will ask you this. Merrill Hodge was with me, longtime NFL legend, and he was talking about traits and qualities on quarterbacks. And in the end, he's like, I just want to see a guy. I don't care about his throwing session.

I don't care about what he does without pressure in his face. I want to see what he does in a messy pocket. when everything is chaotic, I want to see the decisions that he makes and the delivery and so forth. What is the one quality that you would point to to differentiate between the guys who are going to make it in the league and the guys who are not at quarterback? Wow. I think he definitely makes a good point about having pressure on you. Now, I think when you get on a good team, then most of the time you're not going to deal with that. And you know, and you're going to be able to stand back in the pocket and go through your

progressions, you know, at a normal pace and hit guys that are open. But eventually, you're going to come, you're going to get into the playoffs and you're going to face guys that are, you know, teams that are just as good as yours. And you're going to have to be able to stand in the pocket and go through your reads quick, not be able to step into your throws. And it just makes a lot of difference in the world. Usually when you're a guy coming out of the draft, you're going to go to a team that's not quite ready to win 10, 11 games.

and that means you're going to have to deal with some pressure. You're going to have to deal with some ups and downs. You're going to have to make decisions a little bit faster. You might have to throw some balls that you're not quite ready to throw, but you have to learn how to anticipate. I think being able to deal with that pressure is probably the biggest thing. And I think teams have to be patient with guys learning how to do that, especially when you realize that you're a top five pick

and you probably don't have the team set up to be the best yet. you have to give that quarterback some time to be able to get used to and learn how to play under those conditions. All right, Joe Flacco, new quarterback for the Cleveland Browns, investor and endorser of Caddix cleats. Again, check them out at Caddix.com. Joe, it's good to meet you, good to talk with you. Thanks for taking a break from your spring break there

and hang out to see on the Wilcane show. Yep, thanks. Okay, take care, Joe Flacco. All right, there we go. Before we go today, I want to do this. this really quickly. Let's go to New York. Let's go to the control room. Let's see if we can do it. We got young establishment James. We've got tinfoil pat out there. And sitting in for two days, Dan, today, we have Mike. Now, I think it's a little bit of a wild card. Are we even going to pull

this off? Because Mike's new today. How are you feeling, Mike? How's, how are you doing today? Full stressed. Here, wait. Let me put him on my mic. A little stressed He's working on it He'll work on it A lot of moving parts A lot of moving parts here You feeling all right Mike?

Yeah, we'll be fine Yeah, absolutely Okay, all right All right, a little bit A little bit of tough out of the gates But I have faith in you That we're all going to pull it together Thank you for sitting in for two of days, Dan, today

Vacationing wherever he is But that's going to do it for us today here on the Will Cain show. We will see you again next time. Tomorrow, after the first round the NFL draft, we're going to be joined by Pete Prisco for the Canaan Sports Edition. Make sure you subscribe at Apple or on Spotify so you can hang out and get a review of the first round of the NFL draft. I'll see you again next time. 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.