Will Cain Country - Joey Jones & Rep. Nancy Mace: “Credible Threat” On Trump Was Known According To Senate Report

Episode Date: September 25, 2024

Story #1: Why do Americans hide their true feelings from pollsters? Plus, the incompetence of the Secret Service in the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump with the Author of ‘Unbroken Bonds Of Battle’ & FOX News Contributor, Johnny Joey Jones. Story #2: Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R-SC) joins the show to discuss the raunchy allegations that a CNN commentator called her a racist on air and sent scandalous text messages just minutes later. Story #3: Will dives down his latest rabbit hole: The history of drug crime through the lens of the movie American Gangster. 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, America's secret opinions. What do they tell a pollster versus what do they actually think, plus the incompetence of the United States Secret Service? We break it down with Fox News contributor, Joey Jones. Two, he called her a racist. on national television and moments later texted her that they looked good together as a couple. Michael Eric Dyson's text to Congresswoman Nancy Mace with Congresswoman Nancy Mace. Three, Will's Rabbit Hole. Where is My Mind?

The Golden Triangle, heroin, Marseille, American Gangster. It is the Will Cain show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel. On the Fox News Facebook page, always available to subscribe by jumping over to YouTube, watching us, jumping into the comments section, subscribing on YouTube to the Will Cain show. We'll be here every day with you live 12 o'clock Eastern time. You're listening on radio, some dozen markets across the country. subscribe on Apple or Spotify and watch the Will Cain Show, listen to the Will Cain Show at your leisure. Part of my leisure last night I was working out and decided I'm just going to put it on something

that I can kind of wash over me in the background. So, you know, in the old days, we just put it on cable and see what is ever playing on TNT. Now you can flip over to Netflix and say, what grabs my attention? Unfortunately, for me, some half a dozen times in my life, I would say, American, Gangster, starring Denzel Washington, grabbed my attention. And I go through the same process every time. I watch the movie. I'm entertained. And then as a marker of a quality piece of entertainment for me, how much time do I spend on the internet reading and falling down into the rabbit hole after I watched American Gangster? Probably not a mark of a good parent, but I let my 13-year-old son watch. And as we're talking, he's interested. And I'm telling him, I'm teaching him, I'm teaching

him about the American mafia, the five families of New York. I'm teaching him about, you know, various aspects of way the movie intersects with history. And at the end of the movie, he says to me, why can't we learn about this in history in eighth grade? I said, well, hey, you know, A, this isn't that important. You knowing about Harlem drug dealers making a quarter of a billion isn't integral to American history, but it's a window into a rabbit hole that is fascinating. From there, you learn about, well, Italian organized crime. From there, you learn about opium production and heroin importing into the United States. And from there, you can learn about not just geopolitics, like the fall of China to the Chinese

communist government and what that meant, for example, for opium production in the world, but the role of the United States CIA in allowing drugs under the banner of anti-communism to flow into the streets of America. I'm going to take you into that. That's what I've fallen down the rabbit hole of over the past 12 hours. I'm going to share it with you today here on the Will Kane show. But the news of the day includes the Secret Service report from the United States Senate that shows the level of incompetence that led to an assassination attempt of Donald Trump.

And as well, a question about why the second assassin, letter is there, including a bounty, even if it's an unfulfilled, impossible bounty, but a bounty when we didn't get to see, for example, the manifesto of the trans shooter in Nashville, Tennessee. What explains the hypocrisy? Let's break all that down. Plus America's secret opinions now in story number one. He is the author of Unbroken Bonds of Battle. He's also a Fox News contributor he's also my friend and it is joey jones joining us now on the wheel can show what's up man hey man thanks for having me on this is fun i think i'm having some technical difficulty i don't hear joe so i need to bring in the willish and let me know do you hear joey is this something

from my end or his justin are you guys working on this okay it is it is a problem not just with my audio it's a problem for the show and they are working on it as we speak to bring Joey's audio into the show. Here's where I will jump off and I think Joey can hear me. I could see it from his facial expressions so he can pay attention but this is where I want to jump off

and I find fascinating. America's secret opinions. Now Axios has an article out that says how people feel versus what they will tell pollsters. I must give you one little taste. When it comes to the border

When it comes to the border, and should the United States government shut down the southern border, 52% of respondents say publicly that it should, but only 33 respondents say that in private. I've got that up on the studios here of the Will Kane show, and you can see the difference between what people say in private versus what people say in public. There's a whole host of other issues to walk through. But looking at this issue and what people say in public versus private, when it comes to the border is something that I find absolutely fascinating. It leads me to other questions.

What else do people hide about the way that they feel? Let's bring now back in if we can, if we've got all technical difficulties worked out. Joey Jones, into, okay, there we go. There's that wonderful laugh. We've now got Joey. What's up, man? Yeah. Hey, man.

Listen, I love this topic, and let me explain you while. From a curveball a little bit, I did this veterans program, developed this veterans program here in Georgia at Camp Southern Ground, and we used strengths. finder and enneagram, these personality assessments. But they would ask you questions like, do you prefer sleeping 10 hours a day or being up by 6 a.m.? Kind of things that weren't quite equivalent to one another. It wasn't black and white either or. And they're always really, really difficult to answer because there's what you think initially. And then there's what you want to think. Like, I want to be the guy that gets up at 6 a.m. I find that to be virtuous. I find

it to be ethical and moral and the right thing to do. But it's in my human nature, maybe to sleep later or to not sleep as long. That's just one example. And I think that feeds into when people respond to this. I also think it feeds heavily into the Trump effect, this idea that he always gets more votes than he polls. Because you may want to say, ah, the kind of person Trump is isn't what I support for whatever reason. I'm not saying it's how I feel people may want to. But that voice inside of them that tells them what their priorities are says yeah but he's probably the best guy for the job and i think that's why people answer it's not so much they're being dishonest as much as they're wrestling with what honest voice they want to listen to in that moment or or show

and display what is an anagram i hear you say when you're in the military they gave a strength finder and i think the word you used was anneagram what is that in well you know my my accent is probably screwing it up. It's Eniogram is what it's called. I prefer Eniogram. Strengths finder kind of put you on this scale or it's a category similar to like, you know, like when people post on their social media, I'm an introverted extrovert. There's INFJ or Strings finder is more similar to that. And Eniogram is like a will of personality. And it shows you in this will of personality what tendencies you have. Like you might be a care bear. It might be your tendency to care for others and let empathy show through or you might be a planner you might and they use different like caricatures to

represent these things so you get these numbers one through nine say you answer 100 questions you might have you know 25 of them put you in category nine 22 of them in category three 20 of them in category seven and then the rest drop down to like single digits so you know these top three represent your personality most they're all self-discovery tools meant for you to understand how and why you act and that's how we use them with veterans but i think in like to overlay it on to this it's psychology we we have competing voices in our head we have the convictions of our religion the convictions of our parents the convictions of our innermost tendencies that sometimes may be good or bad and i think it's just more complicated than do you trust the government i'm super attracted to

that idea i've never done one of these i've never done a strength finder or a personality test i'm just curious, this is a complete aside, but do you find that successful? You know, I remember, Joey, I used to work, I did some work with National Review over a decade ago, and some of the writers at National Review were English, and they used to do testing in England when you were in school, and then they would track you, meaning they would put you on certain tracks for certain careers. They'd say, you're best suited to go into the trades or to do a blue collar job, or you're better suited to be an accounting. Now, we can all say you shouldn't be limiting or specializing children at too young of an age, but there is something interesting about finding what you're well

suited to and then pursuing that path. So I'm just curious, like, did you find a lot of success with that when it comes to veterans? Yeah, I think a lot of people misunderstand how to use it. Number one, it's not about identifying something that needs to be fixed or changed. It's about understanding what you naturally excel in and what you naturally tend to do. Like, for example, I'm a woo. I'm a wins others over. Well, that makes a lot of sense when you think about what I do for a living. But there are times when that's not really helpful. There are times when I need to stand up for what I believe in. There are times when I need to be very technical and not just try to get the room on my side. So it helps me be honest with myself. If I'm about to address a board meeting

for the nonprofit I'm on, it's not about winning everybody over. It's about listening to what they have to say and maybe even challenging my own point of view in that moment. So it's more about self-awareness than self-correction. It's not, hey, listen, you don't read it and say, okay, well, I need to fix this, fix this and fix this. And it's not always, I need to lean into this, this, and this. It's about knowing what your personality leans to, what you gravitate to, so that you can assess a situation you're going into and say, you know what, I need to be cognizant of that. I need to be aware of that. And I think it's been very helpful for those that follow on. Taking the assessment means nothing. It's learning what to do with it that

helps people. And I think it has helped a lot of people. And there are a bunch of them out there. There's more than one ways to do one thing. There are a lot of these assessments, but they all try to get down to helping you understand what you are as far as the way you think and what you tend to do. Well, I would like to take one of these tests partially out of curiosity, but also partially out of, to see if it meshes with my self-conception. I try to think of myself as a self-aware person. And so, yeah, and I think because if I strive for self-awareness, I'd like to think I'm accurately self-diagnosing whoever I am, analyzing whoever I am. But I would like to see if it meshes with my self-conception. And that brings us back to this topic, to your point. You know, Axios

asked people all of these different questions. And I'll give the audience some more examples of the way people answered in public versus the way they answered in private. Here's an example, some of the questions. In general, I trust the government to tell me the truth. Twenty-two percent would say yes to that question in public. Only four percent would say yes to that in private. In general, I trust the media to tell me the truth. 24 percent said yes in public. Seven percent said yes in private. So on both of these bigger distrust and they're actually displaying, and I think we believe there's a great amount of trust even being displayed, and it's greater than we even hear about. We live in mostly a fair society. 37% agreed with that statement publicly, but only 7% privately. And then there's

the specific issues like I brought up with the U.S.-Mexico border. 52% support closing the border publicly, but only 33% support closing the border privately. I find these issues fascinating, Joey, and it makes me wonder, you know, what people really think. To that point, one more I want to share. Getting a college degree is not worth it. That's a conversation you and I have had on air, off air, Joey. And when we have that conversation, 29% agree with that statement. It's not worth it to get a college degree. But only 3% drops all the way to 3 agree with that in private. And so they make choices privately that don't comport with what they're saying publicly. And I think when it comes to college, we all know that to be true, including the hypocritical

version of will. Like, I am very skeptical of college. Will I most likely send my kids to college? Yes, I most likely will do so. So I'd probably fall under this same public, private choice, according to Axios. Yeah, I think college is a great example. I thought the government trust question was a great example, too. Look at it this way.

Ask the question this way. Do I believe my son needs a college education to be successful in life? Probably not. Do I think my son needs a college degree to be successful in life? Probably. And I think that's the way people wrestle with these things. In conversation, it's easy to say, yeah, man, they're just taking advantage of us. They're still in our money, and they might indoctrinate our kids.

But when we start thinking about, you know, kind of that use it or lose it moment in life, like this is, no matter who's looking, this is a decision we have to make? It's like, is the risk of taking my kids out of college, is that greater than them being indoctrinated while they're in it? And we start to look at it from this other side. And I think we do that with a lot of things. Trusting the government's a great example. Because do we truly trust the government, say the JFK conspiracy, the 9-11, the 9-11?

conspiracy, the moon landing conspiracy. It's super convenient to just say that's conspiracy. Those things aren't real because the story that's out there is easy to consume. JFK was a hero and was killed by a crazy man. We landed on the moon and beat the Russians. We didn't let 9-11 happen because we were complacent or because there were bad actors within our own government. Like no way, because now we've got to challenge everything to happen for the last 24 years. Now, I'm not saying if one of those are more legitimate conspiracies than the other, but these are things that we've been told to believe in the story we've been told makes a lot of sense and feels good and creates patriotism.

So outwardly, it's easy to sign on. Yeah, I kind of trust the government. I want to trust the government. But when it really comes down to it, do I really trust the government? Maybe there's nothing on the line. And I can just be honest. Man, you could convince me any of those conspiracy theories are real. if not already proven for some of them.

And so I think that there's a difference between what we want to believe and what we really believe. And we struggle with that ourselves. Again, I don't think people are being dishonest. I think it's a struggle. I think it's hard to arrive to a conclusion on some of these. And obviously through this poll, you can see a tendency in one direction or the other.

Well, speaking of assassination attempts, the Senate has come out with a report into the Secret Service when it comes to the first assassinations. attempt of Donald Trump. What they found, among other things, was it was very, very poor communication between the Secret Service and local law enforcement. Before the would-be assassin got his shots off, local law enforcement was seen running toward the building with their guns drawn, giving what they're saying was ample time for Secret Service to respond, including at least a two-minute notice that there was a person of suspicion.

on the rooftop of the AGR building, ARG building. What more, the drone operator tasked with surveilling the grounds that day in Butler, Pennsylvania, had only three months experience on the drone. And he apparently, he or she apparently, that morning called tech support, like an 800 number for, I guess, the drone manufacturer on how exactly they should be operating the drone. I remember a conversation you and I had early on during the story, Joey, and I don't want to betray, what you may have said off camera, so I'm going to put it to you in a way that you're free to share.

But what this paints is a picture, not of conspiracy necessarily, but of rampant incompetence, and that our vision and maybe even our expectations of the Secret Service don't fit reality. No, absolutely. I was credentialed to work with the Secret Service coming out of EOD Bond Tech School. The Secret Service pulls all of their, EOD support from active duty military. So when you graduate EOD school, you get a budget to go by

a black suit and a blue or gray suit. You get a budget, you get a government credit card, you get a government passport, and you get secret service credentials. And it's called a VIPSA, VIP special assignment. So when a principal like the president or vice president or even now, like a candidate or a foreign dignitary, it's UN week up in New York, when someone who rates secret service protection is going somewhere, they call it. call in all types of assets and resources from different departments to come in and do specific jobs. Maybe, you know, bomb techs are the ones that I know best, but they have to coordinate with local law enforcement for medevacs, stuff like that as well. And the reason why I put that

is I have a lot of people in my inner circle that have either been Secret Service, worked with Secret Service multiple times, have a good assessment of where the Secret Service is. And I think quite simply what happened in Butler was as obvious as complacency, mismanagement, and just bad tactics and execution. Why it's allowed to be that way, I think, is the interesting story. I think if you take a step back and look at it, the Secret Service is designed in this way to be almost autonomous to the principal, the president. And it makes sense.

You don't want a commanding general in the Marine Corps to have as much influence over the people protecting the president as the president does. Think Julius Caesar. You don't want that opportunity for there to be two bosses, and one of them is who you're protecting. There's too much opportunity there. So you want this elite force that serves the president and the president only. But in doing so, the Secret Service has no measure of accountability on are they trained

correctly? Are they operating correctly? Are they getting the best of the newest technology? There is no outside influence to make sure the Secret Service has those capabilities and has honed them. So in living on an island, you exist on an island, you don't get what everyone on the mainland gets, or maybe you don't get it as accurately or as well, and I think that's been a big problem for a little while.

I mean, the Secret Service was owned by the Department of Treasury, and it moved over to Homeland Security. It kind of doesn't have parents. It's like a step kid. And I think that's all been a part of this. And then you add on top of that the fact that as our country has become polarized, so has anyone that can be presidentially appointed. So when you go from Obama to Trump and Trump to Biden, a change in leadership.

also means a change in leadership politically at the top of the Secret Service. And to some degree, you'd expect that because if you're going to be the president, you want the person in charge of protecting you to be someone you trust. But this idea that even they can't be void of politics in a sense that you've got to replace the person in charge where you're losing all that experience and tenure and tactical operational skill set every time you do that. And so I think this is just the thing where, It just, you know, you sit back as an American citizen and you go, how in the world could this happen?

And I sit here as someone who's trained in these things and say, how in the world did it not happen before now? So I think that's such a fascinating answer. And I know intuitively it's going to be so unsatisfactory to so many people because incompetence is boring. Conspiracy is interesting. And I look today and, you know, this is. is not covered at all by CNN. I can't say what the New York Times has on their headlines today, but a Senate report on an assassination attempt is something that's almost exclusively the province of Fox News. CNN focused on the war in Israel. And I can't remember what else is leading

their stories this morning, but it's certainly not the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. And, you know, even for you and me today, I'm like, it's just not, it's not interesting to talk about rampant incompetence, but you always have to put it back into this context as well. If that incompetence had led to a successful assassination of Trump, we are talking about a fracture in the history of America. Like, we're to fork in the roads, and we can go one way or we can go another by literally not even the depth of a full inch. Whatever that missed, his skull, you know, uh, grazed his ear. That one inch, might have saved America.

I mean, had it killed Donald Trump, I don't know what path we'd be on on that fork in the road. I don't either. And I think that feeds into this, this idea that we're so divided and they're so little trust, not just between the people and the government,

but between each other. And I think social media is probably the biggest culprit there, not just how it's been weaponized, but just how we have intuitively used it. That it is tough. It's hard to believe in. For example, what makes the Secret Service effective?

Maybe it's because for decades we've just believed they were. What makes a piece of paper with a president printed on it worth money? Because we believe it is. That's the only thing that makes a dollar bill worth anything is we believe it is, so it is. And we trust that. And that's a big problem. It's a big problem all over this country, but it's a big problem in communities too. When you quit trusting that people will follow the rules, there are no rules.

I mean, we talk about crime and things like that around the country. Well, that exists in our small little town. You know, when you quit respecting the speed limits, when you quit respecting the common decency of how to treat someone. And I feel like that feeds into all of this. We just, we have such a lack of trust that we are a powder keg, about to explode. And people can be inspired and informed in malicious ways more quickly now than ever before. How does a 20-year-old do that?

because a 20-year-old has better skills at getting information off the internet than a 55-year-old that's been tactically trained to do that. And that's an important key to this. And that's something that I believe our ability to connect and get to information has far exceeded our ability to process and condition for it. Well, speaking of inspiration, I'm curious what you think of this. So the second assassin would be assassin of Donald Trump. Ryan Routh's letter was released by the FBI.

And in that letter, he says in there, it's the letter he left with a neighbor on the presumption that he is either dead or arrested and therefore failed in his attempted assassination of Donald Trump. And he says in there, I'm offering $150,000 for anyone that takes up the charge. Now, I mean, he's in jail. He's not ready to pay any bounty.

I don't think this looked like the kind of guy that had 150 grand sitting around to pay off. a bounty, but that's not the point. The point is, this letter was released. And I find that interesting, at least when you put it in the context of the limitation on the access that we've had to the manifesto of the trans shooter in Nashville, Tennessee. Now, there's a lot of reasons why that manifesto has been released, and I know this, including the victim's families have wanted it suppressed. But that's not the only reason that hasn't been seen. A judge in Tennessee said he had, he didn't want to release it because he had grave concerns about that manifesto's ability to inspire

copycats. And so what I wonder about there, and I know we're talking about a judge in Tennessee, we're talking about the FBI when it comes to Ryan Wesley Ruth, but we have a lot of power behind the scenes that exerts their opinion and influence often is the case in these things. And I'm curious why in one situation you're worried about copycats and why in another situation you're not worried about copycats when hearing the words of these shooter and would-be assassin. No, I agree completely. I don't have a good answer for that. I don't know what the American public gains from this Routh letter being released right now. You know, maybe going back to that trust issue, maybe if we had some semblance of trust, maybe if President Biden didn't pick one of the most politically charged judiciary experienced people in the country, to be the Attorney General, then maybe we would have more trust and faith in the Justice Department

and the Attorney General could come out and say, this is my assessment of a letter, but we're not going to release it because it may inspire copycats. But that's not the world we live in. I mean, why do people distrust anything we hear? I mean, what do you know about the Las Vegas shooting other than none of it adds up? None of it. Right. None of it adds up.

Nothing. None of it adds up. Everything I've ever learned personally in my experience with weapons tells me that that story is manufactured. And we may never find out the truth there. And I accept that sometimes there's just truths we don't get. The government does have a certain power and responsibility to not allow something bad to turn into something worse in the public space. I accept that in some cases, not most. And so that leads me to believe that everything I've seen up until now would tell me they're not going to release this letter. Why would they do it? And then they do. And they essentially in its entirety. And you're left scratching your head thinking, you haven't even conducted your investigation on how this happened and you're releasing

critical pieces of evidence to the public. And you're not giving us an excuse on why you're not taking to the podium and saying this is the wisdom that we enacted to release this to the public. or, you know, if they even came out and said, hey, you guys didn't trust us the last 50 times, so we're going to try something different. At least they not have an explanation and understand. We didn't get that here. And it just leaves us scratching our head and believe what it does, Will, is it just makes us not trust more. You're right about Las Vegas.

And I've never fallen down the rabbit hole. I mean, I've fallen down the rabbit hole enough to know that it doesn't add up and it's super weird and suspicious. Of course, it's like one of the biggest mass shootings in American history. But even in a very superficial leverage, Joey, it's just like, isn't that fascinating and then to compare it to the amount of media coverage it's received? Like, it's so little compared to what it was versus things that go wall to wall and what they are. At some point, I do want to try to learn more about what happened in Las Vegas. I also know how difficult that is to your point to get to any truth. It's just that story's crazy, Las Vegas.

You know, here's the deal. People ask me about aliens. And it's like, how do you believe aliens like exist? Well, I believe aliens probably exist. Some people might call them angels, you know, like what is an alien? But I don't believe our government's powerful enough to keep lips sealed for 60, 70 years. I really don't. I don't think that it's really that possible if more than a dozen people know about it. And so the reason why I say that is, you know, we watch these movies, the Washington Post papers. We learn about Watergate. We see these investigative journalists from the New York Times. and the Washington Post and different places around the country do amazing work by simply going in and talking to people, gaining some trust, getting some information, stumbling on a piece of evidence. Where are all those people when it comes to the Las Vegas shooting? Tweeting. Where are they? It's a lack of interest.

And it goes back to what we started getting famous. Do we not ask questions sometimes because the story we have is most convenient? Is it a human nature? thing, you know, is it, hey, the story we have works, so why go look for another one? I think that's a big part of it. Okay, well, that takes us back to where we started this, and we'll end where we began, back to the secret opinions. And this fits because you brought it up just a moment ago, Joey, about, you know, and I did as well, what happens in America if that assassination attempt of Donald Trump is successful? One of the things it was asked, again, according to this

Axios article, because things have gotten so far off track, Americans may have to resort to violence in order to save our country. 20% agree with that statement publicly, Joey. Only 4% agree with that statement privately. I think that's kind of fascinating. That people publicly will overstate the existential threat they believe we're sitting in today in America versus how they live their lives

or what they believe privately. We've talked about this on a serious level throughout this show. But what I want to do is ask you this. What other issues do you feel like people would have a big gap between what they say publicly and what they say privately. I'll give you an example, okay? Here's mine.

People will talk scandalously and maybe even advise people not to do something like OZMPIC. And privately, everyone's doing OZMPIC. That's one right now that I feel pretty confident would have a big public-private divide. Yeah, I think I'm trying to think, I can think of a bunch of them, but it feeds so far into this, do I want to say it out loud? You know what I mean? Like there are a lot of things that I think people, like for example, we always talk about how like comedians are living on the nice edge because historically they've said things that are offensive that usually involve stereotypes or racism or misogyny. And the world was able to consume that as humor. as making fun of this thing, not as embracing it. And I think a lot of people now at this point, 10, 15, 20 years into political correctness are struggling with, oh, my God,

I thought that joke was funny. Does that make me racist? Does that mean I am right? And people are going down this rabbit hole themselves of not really having any confidence in what their intertenancies are. And so I think that is, that element, it's a bigger basket than a specific issue.

But I think that is something people Well, how about, here's a basket, anything to do with, how about this? Okay, on that note, anything to do with sex, okay, porn, anything like that, people will say one thing publicly, and I promise you, there is going to be something else they say privately. Oh, exactly, or how they spend their money, like did you save money this month, or did you use your credit card too much this month? It's things that we indulge in that in the moment don't feel sinful or wrong in any way. But in hindsight, when we get past that moment, it's like, ah, was that really wise or was it immoral? And the truth is, no matter, you know, like as Christians,

we understand the one thing God told us is we're going to sin. We're not going to bat a thousand. I love the analogy. You only got bat 300 to get into the Hall of Fame. Like this idea that we're always going to get it right. But now we live in a world that says you're not allowed to get it wrong. I mean, look at the lieutenant governor in North Carolina and the scandal that plagues him. And that's a whole different can of worms. But a lot of people will say, oh, my God, that's terrible. And then I think that personal thing would be like, do I really care? And I think those are the types of things that people struggle with every day.

And it's going to make its way into politics because it's just more profitable and lucrative of the sling mud than to discuss policy. And I think that people worry about, well, can I hold something against someone that I've indulged in or that I don't know if I even think that's wrong, but society does. And we're not talking about just porn or bad things, but just gambling or drinking, just all kinds of things that we struggle with is this socially acceptable. And what it comes back to is, you know, what are your personal convictions? And I think that we're as insecure in our personal convictions as we've ever been. I'll say this publicly. I've got Georgia at fourth in my latest outkick college football rankings. Fourth.

And I feel good about that. I feel I feel good about that. Oh, you do. I feel like Texas, Ohio, State, and Alabama belong above Georgia. When you go on the road to Kentucky and you win by point and there are calls in the game that could have changed the game that could have gone either way, you don't get to claim to top spot.

Also, it makes a whole lot more sense to have my team punching up than punching down. I want my team to feel like the pressure is on. You see what I'm saying? Now, here's, now the truth of it is... Well, at first I thought it was honesty, but now you're just spinning your team into underdog status. No, not at all. Either way, you get them to four.

No. I think Georgia has, I mean, look at Georgia's coaches as proven as any coach out there. He's won two championships back to back with a quarterback that wasn't even a star athlete that was unrecruited. He turned a one-star athlete receiver into kill. in it for the Chargers right now, getting drafted first round or first or second round, Ladd-McConkie. So the coach is proven, the money's there, the fan base is there, the process is there, and the talent's there. The difference is those things are catching up in other

places. I don't think Georgia is a step behind. I just think that this is going to be a fun year. I think that Texas is proven. I think that Alabama is getting there, and I don't think Ohio state's proven anything yet. They haven't played anybody. to prove anything yet. And Georgia is a great example when you look at their losses to Alabama that you can beat OK teams by 30 points all year long

and lose a close game to a team that can match you. So I don't put Ohio State anywhere until they actually play somebody. But in that same respect, man, Georgia, they played a Kentucky that got rolled by an otherwise mediocre team in South Carolina. But historically, they did it in 22

and they did it in 20 on the road in Lexington. So historically, they should, should come back and do really well. You went over Clemson's starting to look better. Clemson looks pretty good this year. And we'll see. You keep saying who's there, who's not there.

We'll see. Maybe Donald Trump will be there this weekend for Georgia, Alabama. I'll wait another couple weeks before we get on to you and me talking about Georgia, Texas. I'm ready for it. I'm ready for it. All right, Joey Jones. Joey Jones with us today. All right, man.

We'll see you around soon. Thank you. There you goes. That's Joey Jones. of unbroken bonds of battle, also Fox News contributor here on the Will Cane Show. Hey, speaking of things that people hide in the way they behave in private, fascinating story here, Congresswoman Nancy Mace was basically called a racist on air on CNN by a panel that included Michael, Professor Michael Eric Dyson. Isn't it interesting to note exactly what he texted her

right after the show? Congresswoman Nancy Mace next on the Will Cain Show. Jason Chaffetz from the Jason in the House podcast. Join me every Monday to dive deeper into the latest political headlines and chat with remarkable guests. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com or wherever you download podcasts. You're racist, but boy, don't we look gorgeous together? The lines from Professor Michael Eric Dyson to Congresswoman Nancy Mace. It's the Will Kane show.

streaming live at foxnews.com on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page. Hit subscribe at Apple, Spotify, or on YouTube and hang out with this every Monday through Thursday at 12 o'clock Eastern time. Jump into the comments section. We'll bring you into the Wilcane show. Coming up in just a moment,

what's on Will's mind, the rabbit hole I've fallen into that indulges the heroin trade, CIA, Harlem and American Gangster. Coming up in just a little bit here on the Wilcane show. But joining us now, Congresswoman from South Carolina, Nancy Mace, joins us on The Wilkins Show. Hey, Congresswoman, thanks for being here.

Yeah, thanks for having me, Will. So I saw your tweets about this, and it absolutely fascinated me. Now, it fascinated me first because I did see the clip on CNN. I saw a debate between you and a panel of people on CNN that included Professor Michael Eric Dyson. And he called you, I don't know if you, I don't remember if he used the words direct, but he certainly insinuated that you were racist or being racist by not pronouncing Kamala correctly. I think you were saying Kamala. And he took great exception to that.

And then the story, I feel like from that point, starts. And that's when I saw your tweets about the texts Professor Dyson sent you after the show on CNN. Right. No, that's right. And I was going to let this story die down. Obviously, like I go into the Lions and I'll go in. I'll talk to anyone who has a differing opinion, but you can't go and call me racist in public and then hit on me on private and private.

Like, that's not how this works. And this is, this guy's a married preacher and he was very ugly to me on live TV, insinuing that was racist because I couldn't say her name right, but neither can. Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, the rapper Little John, the Reverend Al Sharpton or the Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, or any number of Democrats can't say her name right either, but they never get labeled as racist. Only if you're a Republican, I guess, is the only person you get labeled as racist.

And then come to find out, people are still harassing me for it. And we had an oversight hearing last week where a Democrat brought it back up again. And I just had it. I was like, fine. I'm just going to eat and leave no crumbs. I'm going to shred this guy. I'm going to shred the left because you can't call someone racist in public

and then be all kissy-faced emoji with them in private telling them how gorgeous they are. how gorgeous I am, and begged me to take photos with you. We caught him in 4K, begging for a selfie, and I gave him one. I'm polite, I'm nice. And now he's on this apology tour to save his job and save his marriage, I suppose. He was on ABC News with those wicked women from the view. And, you know, it's the left who says, believe all women, protect all women, I guess, unless

they're Republican women, they believe them meant. I don't know. well we don't have to believe anybody because you did publish the texts so i've got them up here in the will cane show studio it's some it's some pictures of you and the professor here uh looks like they were sent from him you blacked out his number um nicely and then his text to you is don't tell anybody we look good together uh laughing face emoji kissy face emoji you responded ha ha ha and then and then he responded well your gorgeousness makes the photos so there's that um first let's just go with this i believe what he's saying well there are those who are saying

congresswoman he's just being nice to you now i mean i can give you my subjective opinion i think this is something more than just being nice i think if my wife saw these texts she wouldn't be pleased that doesn't just look like cordiality but i've also like you used to be someone that showed up on CNN and then subsequently ESPN, surrounded by people who disagree with me. And I'm used to it. I'm used to having a vigorous debate and being friendly afterwards. What I'm not used to, Congresswoman, is if you go over the line and you launch an ad homonym attack at me, and there's no bigger ad hominem attack than calling me a racist, then why are you going to be

nicey nice with me afterwards? If I'm a racist, why are you going to tell me I'm gorgeous? To me, it just reeks of performance, being a race grifter. Yeah, and it's all an act. It's political performative art is what it is. And that's my thing. I'm like, I'm good until you lie to me or until you show your hypocrisy. Like, I'm good. I like a colloquy. I like a vociferous debate. I enjoy going into the lines and making my case on policy. But what you can't do is accuse me of bigotry and racism with no foundation for it and then pretend everything's okay. And let me just hit on you or be kifty kifty with you behind the scenes on a text. Like, don't slide into my DMs, don't text me and be that way after calling me racist publicly. And I genuinely would never, I've never published text messages, right? I just, I don't like the invasion of privacy.

A lot of people have done it to me over the years. But this just crossed the line. And I'm sick of the accusations by the left. Every accusation literally is a projection. These people's policies actually hurt black and brown African Americans. Their policies hurt women. And when a Republican woman comes forward, they believe the, Democrat male aggressor here. He was inappropriate on every level, both publicly on CNN and

privately via text. And so it's just ironic that ABC News, like George Stephanopoulos, they keep choosing the side of these men who are racist, the side of men who are misogynist and who rape shame and shame Republican women for their values and their policies that are absolutely American. It's disgusting and shameful. And I don't mind shining a light on hypocrisy and lies. And that's what we did. He's on this apology tour all week this week, it looks like. I may come back to this just a moment because I have just one more lane of curiosity. But while we're kind of on this, what you just brought up when it comes to women, you have a bill, the violence against women from the Illegal Immigrants Act.

You've been looking to make sure that anyone who is an illegal immigrant who commits a sexual crime of any nature is immediately deported, which, by the way, it's like, why do we even need that? You should be deported, period, if you're here illegally, but such is the world. And you've also begun pointing out, I believe, is it Charleston County? It's the county that Charleston is in, which is in your home state there, who you've been shining a light on saying they've been releasing these criminals continuously into the local population. Right.

No, absolutely. So we had this vote last week on my bill, the violence against women by illegal aliens act. Like, who would vote against this bill? But apparently 158 Democrats voted against deporting illegals who rape our law. women, illegals who are pedophiles, illegals who are murdering and are women and girls, right? And so 158 Democrats voted against that measure last week. Their excuse was, well, it's already illegal. Well, if it's already illegal, then why are they still here? And in fact, Cason, August 23rd in my district in Charleston County, South Carolina, our sanctuary sheriff, released a guy who's a

pedophile accused of soliciting a minor, accused of paying to have sex with a child, an illegal who was here, then released back out on the street. This is happening everywhere. Every county, every town, every town, border county, border state, not on my watch. And so I'm again, once again, exposing these people for who they are. If you're going to put illegal immigrants in front of American citizens, you ought to be shown for the person you are. And that's what we're doing. We're catching our sheriff in a whole bunch of lies. And anytime somebody does this, we're going to continue to expose them in committee on the floor in our day-to-day work because I'm sick and tired and so are the American people.

And she says that she's just following policy, right? But you pointed out, but you wrote the policy. Yeah, literally. Like her excuse was, I'm just following department policy, but the department's policy was written and signed off by her. Like it's so ridiculous. We caught her in another bed of lies. Like Pete Buttigieg, Mayor Pete said yesterday, crime has gone down.

This sheriff made a claim this morning in her press conference that crime has gone down in Charleston County in South Carolina. Well, guess what? Data's a funny thing. Facts are a funny thing. Actually, crime is up. Martyrs are up. Assaults are up. Everything is up in South Carolina in her county. And so we're about to expose yet another series of lies by this sheriff. But she's like a lot of others in the country on the left who want open borders. And it's raging lunacy. These people are lunatics. And she needs to resign or be shown the door sooner rather than later because she's making Americans in South Carolina less safe. And it is true, like, you shouldn't need the violence against women from the Legal Immigrants Act

because it's already illegal. But I think the rebuttal to that is, but you've chosen not to enforce that law. So we have to enforce or create new laws and hope that you will enforce those. Because at some point, somebody has to enforce a law to protect American citizens. Yeah, that's 100%. Right. Go ahead. Go ahead.

No, that's 100% right. And another thing I was going to say is that this, that bill has been hotlined in the Senate. And so I'm expecting some Democrat senator to anonymously put the bill on hold. If that happens, we're asking senators to do unanimous consent requests in the Senate to try to get it to the president's desk to be signed into law. I want the Democrat to go on record in the Senate to be against this bill. I dare them. Right. Right.

Lastly, returning to this curiosity. So Michael Eric Dyson has responded to you. He said the ridiculous lies told by Nancy Mason, the effort. to smear my name because of her anger at being checked for her insensitive disregard for the vice president. I had no intent with her to do anything but be nice. And her white women's tears and mendacity are all the service of lies and distortions. I was wrong about one thing. She is a bigot and a racist. Was it your belief, Congresswoman? I have two questions. Was it nicey nice after that debate? Like, I've been on those sets. Like, was it immediately like

cameras are off and now we're buddy buddy again i mean that's what the pictures and the tech suggest every commercial break the guy was kissing my you know what and so that's what just the hypocrisy and all of it just isn't it's just it's so frustrating and then on top of it you know his tweet that you just cited white woman's tears i can't think of anything more racist or more sexist to say and it's just the irony here and people see through it people see it or what it is I believe. Well, he says it's him being nice. You've said today it's him hitting on you.

I think the only final and third voice we should bring into this is his wife. How does she see it? Privately and publicly. I'd really like to know how she sees it privately. Well, I understand she hit her social media accounts and or might have deleted one. So I think that speaks volumes. You know, I can't comment on his other behavior, but I think the deeper that you dig, there are some accusations from other universities where he's worked at that are problematic for him

and hopefully other people might come forward. Well, we appreciate you jumping on today to tell us about this story and the bill you're hotlining into the Senate. The violence gets women against illegal immigrants act. Thank you so much, Congresswoman Nancy Mace. Yes, sir. Thank you. All right.

All right. So new segment, Will's rabbit hole. What have I fallen into over the past 12 hours? I share with you the leaping off point, American gangster. where I ended up, the French Connection. Next on the Will Cain Show. Book Club on Monday. Gym on Tuesday.

Date night on Wednesday. Out on the town on Thursday. Quiet night in on Friday. It's good to have a routine. And it's good for your eyes too. Because with regular comprehensive eye exams at Specsavers, you'll know just how healthy they are. at specksavers.cavers.ca to book your next eye exams provided by independent optometrists.

Hey, I'm Trey Gowdy host of the Trey Gatti 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. obsessed with lately here on the Will Kane show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel on the Fox News Facebook page. Hit subscribe at Apple, Spotify, or on YouTube. You know, I've always heard, and I've heard it repeated and said that the CIA played a role in the American crack epidemic. It's like a thing that it sort of said around the rap world. And lately, I've heard some commentators on the right saying that there.

convinced the CIA played a role in the rise of gangster rap as a way to, I don't know, create a poisonous culture, which gangster rap is a poisonous culture within black America. And, you know, I never took a much, those kind of statements, I never took a much beyond surface. I never went down the rabbit hole. Yesterday, I was working out, and I thought, I want to watch something. I want to watch something that I don't have to pay close attention to, something that I've seen. and that I liked. And so sitting there on Netflix,

there was American Gangster starring Denzel Washington. And I love that movie. I've seen it like half a dozen times. I think it's incredibly entertaining. It's also based on a true story. And every time I've watched it, I've done the same thing.

I go to Wikipedia, to the internet, and I start relearning about Frank Lucas and the drug trade in Harlem in the 1970s. And I could tell you about Frank Matthews and Nikki Barnes and Frank Lucas because, well, that's how I roll. I just start learning about it. stuff like that and so i watched american gangster my 13 year old was hopping in and out at various

times during the show getting captivated and watching and then i would explain to him things in the background now this character is important because he's tied to the italian mafia and the italian mafia goes back you know to the 1920s in america and then lucky luciano and the five families so i'm having a good time explaining to him basically crime history in america which i'm always captivated by i don't know i can't explain it i love crime history i love love mafia stuff. I love Mexican drug cartel stuff. I know way more than I ever need to in my life. And that's kind of in the end how you end up. You watch American gangster, which is about Frank Lucas. And after Bumpy Johnson, the primary gangster who controlled Harlem died in the late 1960s, then it was

chaos in Harlem, in which gangster was going to rise. One of them that rose to prominence is a guy named Frank Lucas, originally from North Carolina. And Frank Lucas' deal was he wanted to, as a black gangster in Harlem, stop buying heroin and drugs from the Italian mafia and stopped being essentially just a retail outlet on the streets because he knew that he was paying X amount over price and had the product cut so down low. He wanted to go directly to the source. Now, American gangster has been challenged as not being incredibly historically accurate, but the suggestion from frank luke's an american gangster is he connects with u.s soldiers one in particular and it's true in history there is an american sergeant who became a drug exporter taking opium and heroin

from the golden triangle of the middle east that's burma laos and thailand and shipping it through american transport planes in bang Bangkok when we were at war in vietnam and shipping it back to America unadulterated, pure, directly from the source. And that's what made Frank Lucas ridiculously rich. When he was eventually busted in 1970, he had a quarter of a billion dollars in property assets and cash, which is just stunning. Do you think about the money that goes through this drug trade? But I've done that. I've learned about that. I've learned about the Golden Triangle. I've learned about all this before in the past. But what I got onto last night, as I continued to click and continue to learn more was the nuggets within the movie. So in the movie,

you know, there are dirty cops who confiscate heroin from drug dealers, book it, and then take it back out of the evidence room, cut it with cornstarch and food products, and then sell the heroin back to the dealers. And so this dirty section of the NYPD was making a ton of money and they only really found out about it because the cut heroin in the evidence locker started getting eaten by insects and they don't go eat in opium and heroin so they're eating cornstarch and whatever they were cutting it with in the evidence locker and that's how this eventually came down but in the movie it said it's tied to the french connection i'm like i want i know that was a movie with jean hackman it's one of the best people say i never watched it because it was in the early

1970s but i'm like what is the french connection so then i started learning and it's a fascinating thing to learn about. So most of the heroin, before guys like Frank Lucas started going directly to the Golden Triangle, and here's the rabbit hole I found out real quick on that, why is most of the opium come from that portion of the world, or at least certain ports in history it has? And the reason why is originally opium was farmed in China. When the Chinese communists took over China, they defeated General Shanghai Czech. His defeated army retreated into northern Burma, Laos, and Thailand. And they funded their resistance military

and took over all these farms in that area of the world that were farming opium. And now you have a military junta running that part of the world, controlling the world's opium supply and selling it to criminal gangs for export primarily, as it ends up, to America. But that's how it happens later. originally 80% of American heroin came from France

and it came from France because it was farmed in Turkey so Corsican gangs this is uh you know Italian but not the Italian American Sicilian branch of the Italian mafia Corsican gangs played the middleman role of getting opium from Turkey bringing it to Marseille France and then shipping it to United States

now here's where it gets even more fascinating. 80% of the heroin is going then through Marseille, France. Well, the allegations, and I believe that, I don't know that they're 100% confirmed, but is that the CIA was cool with this, that they allowed the Corsican gangs to control the port of Marseilles because they did not want to fall into the hands of French communists after World War II. So we turned a blind eye to the mafia's control of Marseille, France, and ultimately the export of heroin to the United States in order and under the banner of fighting communism. There's more.

One of the big Corsican gangsters would not be pursued either by the French authorities. Why? Because he was a member of the French resistance fighting the Nazis in World War II. So in sort of a indebtedness to him, he had protection from not only the CIA, but the French as well to keep this heroin flowing from Turkey to Marseille, French, to Marseille, to France, to. New York, which became the French connection. Ultimately, that supply of heroin decreased because we did deals to get Turkey to crack down on their opium farms. That's when it gets pushed into the Golden Triangle, into Southeast Asia.

Then what undercuts that market is, again, the United States government with overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan, opium is opened up in Afghanistan, and Afghanistan become, the world's leading supplier of heroin. Now the Taliban's back in charge, by the way, and they're saying that opium fields are way down in production, something like 90% in Afghanistan, and it's back to the Golden Triangle. So it's fascinating when you fall down the rabbit hole

and start learning first about just an American gangster on the streets that makes it to the Hollywood screen, to you start learning about geopolitics and the fall of China and the role of World War II and the CIA in the what we think, according to Richard Nixon and many other presidents,

the biggest scourge on American culture, drug abuse. Of course, there's other stuff here as well, like the CIA's alleged role in the Iran-Contra affair, Nicaragua, bringing drugs up through Mina, Arkansas. That's a movie starring Tom Cruise, American Made. Again, a fictionalized version, not historically accurate. But you start seeing the tradeoffs the American government is made

at various points for geopolitical goals. Most often under the banner of fighting communism that has led back to drugs flooding our street and at least some credibility in the idea that the CIA allowed the crack epidemic or I don't know anything about the rise of gangster rap. At the end of this whole experience last night, my son, he's 13, came and he goes,

why can't history be like this when we're learning in school? And I'm like, well, this is what it is. It's all this. It's stories connected to deeper stories, intertwined with other stories. I love it. And I'm fascinated by history, crime history, especially when it ties into deeper geopolitical history.

And that's where I've been for the last 12 hours. That's Will's rabbit hole. I may do this every so often because I'm not, I told the guys the Willisha back in New York, I don't, I'm, on a day-to-day basis, current events sometimes get a little repetitive and boring. So sometimes I got to dive. I got to dive deep.

And I got to reignite my curiosity. So what do you think? Should we bring it back? Yeah. Go ahead, tinfoil. Oh, you have taken a personality test before. And you took Myers-Briggs a while back. And you are an E&T.

I did on the show? Yeah. Well, not on the show. I made you take one separate. Oh, really? yeah this is what we were talking about with joey jones a personality test what's e n t p um you are an extrovert um you're pretty much like me except extroverted instead of introverted so you're crazy and you go down rabbit holes i'm crazy yeah oh i may do this tomorrow i want to visit revisit this

what is an en t p tomorrow i want to i'm fascinated by this idea but um you think we stick with this Will's rabbit hole, James? Yeah, I think I think we could ask the audience what rabbit holes do they want to hear about? Let's do it. Yeah, I've got to be careful though

because it's got to come natural. I don't go into my I don't, like you know for six hours I don't say I'm studying this. I just start, it's entertainment. I just start going and going deeper and deeper. I mean, that's what I've been on for months

as I've been reading about you know, all these Captain James Cook and the wager and all these 1700s, you know, British Navy exploration books. I didn't go into that saying I want to spend the next two months

thinking about this, but I've got to fall into it somehow. It's got to be almost accidental. That's how it works. All right, we'll keep it going then. Maybe I'll do, maybe I'll do DJing next. Who knows, Justin? Maybe I'll know everything there is to know about DJs.

Now I'm in the mood to watch American Gangster. I actually never saw it. I meant to and I just never got around to it. Now it's like 16, 17 years later. It's on Netflix. Yeah, and I think it holds up. How old are you, Justin? I am 40.

Okay, you're not that young. Yeah, so that's like in your wheelhouse. It's not like watching an old movie for you. You know what I mean? Right. Yeah, like I never seen French Connection because, yeah, I'm not really into 70s movies so much, but yeah, like that I could watch.

See, I want to watch, I want to watch French Connection, but I have a feeling if I did, it would feel really old to me. Like, I can't, it's pacing and it's cinematography, it just wouldn't hold up. So even though I read all about it and I got fascinated by it, it didn't make me want to watch French Connection. There's a year at which you can stop. I think the oldest movie that I can watch,

well, I was going to say, is the godfather. But I think Butch casting the Sundance Kid is older. And these are before my time. But like, I've seen The Sting with Redford and Paul Newman and Butch casting Sundance Kid, and those hold up, I think, as old news. But there's a line where no matter how good, a movie is, you're like, I can't go that old, right?

Absolutely, yeah, I feel the same way. Like, James, you're only 24-5, your line's probably different than ours. Like, when you watch 80s or 90s movies, do they look like, no, I can't watch this, it's way too old? I don't know, I'm a sucker for like Casablanca or High Noon. Some good, good films. Really?

Yeah, no, high noon, you got that, James, have you ever seen... It's not a traditional Western, it's more... Have you ever seen... Have you seen a fugitive, James? No. I'd be curious if the fugitive feels old to you. Like, not the first fugitive, the one with Harrison Ford. Because I remember that movie, and it was like heart-pulsing, great movie.

And I wonder if I'd feel the same if I watch it today or if it would feel old. That was, what, 93, I think? Yeah, I'll probably put it about that. Yeah. I know my kids, you know, I try to show the mini-90s movie, and they freak out. They're like, I don't want to watch Airbud. Damn. That's a 90s movie.

Hegsa said his kids. Hegsa said his kids say, I can't watch it, Dad. It has the dots. It has the dots. Meaning like it's not crystal clear 4K, you know, like the picture's not up to modern sensibility. All right. That's Will's rabbit hole.

Maybe we'll keep it up. If you do have a suggestion, you can send it to me. I am curious. Real quick, come back. Patrick, what's our email address? I never get it right. How can people email? It's Will Caneshow at Fox.com.

Okay, Will Caneshow at Fox.com? Because I may just get curious by one of your emails, and I may just fall into the rabbit hole. I think movies are usually a good jumping off point. If I see a movie that I'm like, that's really good, I want to know more, that's when I start going and going and going and going. All right, that's going to do it for us today here on the Will Cane Show. I will see you again next time.

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