Will Cain Country - Sloppy John: Is Fetterman Fit For The Senate?

Episode Date: September 22, 2023

Story #1: We cannot pretend like we know that Russel Brand is innocent or guilty. Story #2: Why are you allowed to dress like a slob on the floor of the United States Senate? Story #3: Which NFL teams are actually good and which are pretenders?   Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail]   Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

One, we cannot pretend that we know Russell Brand is innocent. We can also not pretend that we know that Russell Brand is guilty. Two, why are you allowed to dress like a slob in the United States Senate? 3. At this point, who do we know is good in the NFL? It's the Will Kane podcast on Fox News podcast. What's up? And welcome to the weekend. Welcome to Friday. As always, I hope you will download rate and review, hopefully a five-star review, the Will Kane podcast. Wherever you get your audio entertainment at Apple, Spotify, or at Fox News podcast, you can watch the Will Cane show on Rumble or on YouTube and follow me on X at Will Kane.

Coming up in the next couple of days, in the next couple of episodes, I'm going to update you on my trip to Maui. It was absolutely inspiring. In the next couple of days, and on Fox and Friends Weekend, I'm going to tell you about an incredible airlift on a 747 donated by the Las Vegas Sands to ship supplies to Maui. I'm going to update you with stories of people who've received grants. from the wonderful go-fund me help the people of Maui. And I'm going to have an emotional conversation

with a man who was in the fires, fought the fires, held a young girl in his arms before she was lost. And what he has to say, what he wanted to say, he was very adamant in telling me how he wanted to address conspiracy theories about lasers, about cops blocking people into town. He wants to share what he knows as the truth in Maui. But first, story number one,

we cannot pretend that we know Russell Brand is innocent, nor can we convict Russell Brand. But that seems to be the two camps that have divided on the allegations against comedian, digital star, actor, Russell Brand. In an explosive report on the Sunday Times of London, they detailed at least four allegations against Russell Brand of sexual assault, including at least one allegation of rape.

I've read the article. It is well reported. These are allegations that cannot be taken lightly, not dismissed, not brushed away. Some of these include a woman who claims she was raped by Russell Brann and has text messages between the two following the incident where he's very apologetic. She also went to the hospital and had a rape kit performed. These are usually the types of things that lead to solid allegations. There are others where Russell Brown reportedly had a relationship with a 16-year-old girl when he was, 30. In that report, there are words that we've all become familiar, like grooming.

There are also legitimate questions, as there always are difficult questions in these allegations about why nothing was said before now. Why was this story hidden for so long? Why would these victims not come forward? I can't pretend to have the answer to those questions. I think everybody goes to their own situation and their own individual way. But I know that I don't think that anyone responsible, anyone who is interested in the truth, can come to a conclusion on either Brand's innocence or his guilt. You have to have the facts. You've got to pursue the truth.

You can't simply run with your preferred conclusion. But that's exactly what happens so many times. It's what happens before we even hear the stories. You know, there was an amazing incident this week where the Washington Post apparently has been putting together a long story on Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy. He has a festival in Brooklyn this week, Pizza Fest, where after years of helping small businesses in pizza shops through the COVID pandemic, raising something like $50 million to give to small businesses, he's put together a festival of pizza. He does his famous pizza reviews on the internet. internet, one bite, everyone knows the rules. Well, some of his sponsors on this pizza fest apparently started getting emails from a Washington

Post reporter. And in those emails, it said things like this. What do you have to say, as a sponsor of this event, about Dave Portnoy's history of misogynistic and racist comments? Portnoy saw these emails and did something interesting. He called the Washington Post reporter, and he recorded the conversation. He told her, at the outset, I'm recording this conversation. He then presses her on these emails.

He says, it sounds to me like you've already had your mind made up. It sounds to me like you've already written your story. It sounds to me like you already have your conclusion. You are approaching my sponsors, not to ask them a question about me or my relationship to their small business, but you are approaching them with a conclusion that I'm misogynistic and racist. You have already an idea, a theory. You have a story about Dave Portman. She says, no, no, no, I'm still in the initial reporting phases.

We're definitely planned to talk to you. But what interesting thing she says in this phone call? You can watch it. It's online. She says, well, sometimes we just say provocative things in an email to try to get someone to respond. So I might say in the email, hey, this is Dave Portnoy, misogynist. What do you have to say? Because if I didn't, well, maybe they wouldn't respond to my email.

Well, if that's the truth, and she certainly painted to Portnoy as some type of, you know, standard reporting technique. It's just further evidence on the rot, the malignant, cancerous rot of the industry of journalism, one totally uninterested in truth. Just advocacy, and the advocacy in most cases seems to be, in many cases now, tear down anyone who is not within the vein, the mainstream, the center lane of the highway on acceptability. I can tell you for a fact that that is the case. that is the way it works in media. There are certain people it's okay to attack and there's certain people that are off limits to attack. When I was more exclusively talking about sports

and I was with ESPN, I know that, for example, I was someone who it's okay to attack. It's not okay to celebrate. Bobby Burak, who has appeared on this program and just a month or two ago, was on the Will Kane show talking about this. He said, look, I worked at the big,

lead. You were allowed, in fact, you were encouraged to write negative things about Will Kane, Clay Travis, or Jason Whitlock, but you weren't allowed to offer even honest criticism of someone like Bomani Jones. It was frowned upon by your editor. It was frowned upon in the virtual newsroom. I know for a fact that it's okay to attack people that fall outside that vein of acceptability. and acceptability is defined by, yes, your political views, whether or not increasingly you chirp the chorus of the group think. You know this is the case with Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan, through COVID, had uncomfortable conversations, told the truth.

And of course, he was painted as a conspiracy theorist. They manipulated his image on CNN, making him look jaundiced when he said he got COVID. He's open. He's okay to attack. And it is true that Russell Brand, since having a career as a radio host and a comedian as a Hollywood actor has reinvented himself as sort of a iconoclast, a outside the box thinker, someone who is definitely beyond the realm of acceptability. Russell Brand on his Rumble show will talk about things like anti-establish. he will talk about things that are called and considered conspiracy and there's really no one that's more open to attack than someone who was once accepted within the group who has betrayed

the ideology now i don't think that russell brand probably would describe himself as a conservative i don't i think i know he would not describe himself as a conservative populist maybe i don't know independent sure and for that that is no doubt that Russell Brand is okay to attack. That doesn't make this story true. That doesn't make these allegations against him false. It doesn't suggest for us whether or not he is innocent or whether or not he is guilty. But it does make you think, why is this all coming now at this time for Russell Brown. What kind of reporters got what kind of idea to chase what kind of story? Again, it doesn't mean these women out there that have these allegations are liars.

But it does make you wonder where this all began. You know, there's another example I think it's fascinating right now. Randy Weingarten, who's the head of the Teachers Union, one of the big teachers unions here in the United States. She tweeted out something. She said the following. Texas has fired a teacher for reading the diary of Anne Frank in a classroom. Viral. Explosion. Boom. Thousands. Likes, retweets. And the reverberations of that, I don't know if you've experienced them in your personal life. I certainly have because I have a lot of friends that live in Florida. And they're not exactly big fans of Ron DeSantis. They'll say things like, oh, he's a racist, or he wants

to cancel black history, can't teach black history, or he's antisemitic and he's taking these Jewish books out of the school library. Almost in every case, those are just lies. They're untrue. There's more to the story. There's a reason one particular book or one particular story or one particular passage has been said, this isn't appropriate for our classroom. But, of course, you never hear about any of that. You just hear the reverberations, the echoes of the tweet, the rumor, the indictment. Ron DeSantis is an anti-Semitic.

Ron DeSantis is a racist. Ron DeSantis is banning books. That's what Randy Weingarten would have you believe is happening in Texas right here. The teacher has been fired for reading the Diary of Anne Frank. But here's the truth. And X is getting increasingly good at their community notes of forcing the truth. What happened in Texas is a teacher was fired for reading a book entitled the Anne Frank Diary. It's a graphic novel, a representation, or a graphic depiction, a graphic adaptation of the diary of Anne Frank.

And in that version, there are depictions of molest. in the graphic adaptation of the Diary Van Frank. And not only that, the teacher asked the students to write and discuss on that chapter or on that section involving the molestation. Now, we can have a conversation about whether or not that was part of the original version of the Diary of Van Frank, whether or not her father took it out later,

we can have a conversation about whether, but we should be having a conversation, about whether or not that's appropriate to focus on molestation in a classroom. Well, what are classrooms? They're communities, right? Like, what is a school district? It's a community. In your community, you should be able to decide what is and what is not appropriate for your children.

What is and what is not appropriate for their education. And that's a very legitimate question. Should we be having teachers guide discussions on molestation? Could there be anybody in the classroom that would find that not just inappropriate but uncomfortable? could there be in the classroom that might have experienced that. Is it appropriate for an eighth grade, and it was, an eighth grade classroom? That district decided the answer is no. The teacher violated those rules.

The teacher is no longer employed in that district. But the reverberations, the indictment by Randy Weingarten, and then the reverberations will be, oh my gosh, Texas is banning the diary of Anne Frank. Why should Jewish woman killed by the Nazis? Oh, they're clearly headed down an anti-Semitic path. Maybe they're even embracing Nazis in Texas. just lies, just a liar. I actually think one of the most malevolent figures in modern America

hiding behind the scenes in most people's popular understanding is Randy Weingarten. She's done more to harm the education of children in this country, I think, than almost any other single individual we can identify. Whether or not that was shutting down classrooms during COVID to make sure that teachers never had to face whatever threat might have existed, delaying education for thousands of kids in this country. Irrecoverable, by the way. making them cover their faces, masks, staying out of the classroom.

Well, what did it add up to in many districts? I know in New York, ours, the school we were at before we left. I mean, they did remote for, I think, yes, it was over a year, over a year, damage. Influenced by Randy Widengarde. But that was just the latest. Before that, she'd done everything she could to shut down charter schools. Any option for poor black kids to get out of the, the failure factories that are their neighborhood education in places like Harlem,

Randy Wine Garden, every time. Attacked, attacked, attacked, ruined the future for children's. And a liar. The point of me bringing that up is people go into these stories with an agenda. And it's not conspiratorial, nor is it jaded to say they go into it with the conclusion, a lie, and then look to back. it up with a story. Again, that does not mean that these are lies aimed at Russell Brand.

But it does look suspicious when the next reverberation, the next turn of the wheel, is the following. YouTube immediately demonetizes Russell Brand's channel, where he does some of this anti-establishment outside of the mainstream acceptable conversation on his talk show. Immediately demonetizes Russell Brand. Presumption of guilt. I'm here to say it's not appropriate to offer up a presumption or a conclusion of innocence. It is wholly inappropriate to embrace a conclusion of guilt.

YouTube immediately demonetize Russell Brand. But it gets worse. the British government sent a letter we know because we saw a copy of this to TikTok, asking TikTok to update their status on the monetization of Russell Brand. Now, it's not the United States of America. Nobody embraces freedom of speech like we do here in the United States of America, or at least as we have historically. It's under full-on assault here in the United States with a censorship regime aimed at doing in part exactly this. There are many ways to shut someone up, to shut someone down. One of the ways is to ruin their ability to have, to gain revenue, to support themselves behind the scenes.

We know that's happened with Twitter, X. Elon Musk has talked about it. These organizations, often in league with the government, lead ad boycotts. Elon Musk has said X's revenue, which he bought the company for, who knows if he's ever going to recover his full. funds of buying it until he turns it into the everything platform. But his revenue is depressed. Makes it hard to run his business. That's in America. And by the way, on that note of acceptability and attacking anyone that falls outside the realms of mainstream thought, it's not new. This isn't just in the internet age. It's not just digital. It's not just those who definitely

can claim the mantle of anti-establishment. This is, the history of Fox News. Fox News, the one outlet, the one that would be considered in the mainstream or a legacy media player, a corporate media player, is the one that is consistently attacked, the one inside that world, that mainstream corporate legacy media world, who doesn't tow the group think line, who has, whether or not you like it or not, whether or not you consider it even correct or false, just has an opinion or a point of view different. than every other media institution.

And it just so happens to be the one that is constantly attacked, constantly conversations about whether or not, I mean, I'm talking about in the government. Oh, what can we do about Fox News, fairness doctrine, a new thing we can do. Of course, ad boycotts, constant ad boycotts has had to deal with it. So this is not new, this idea that if you do not fall within the realm of acceptability, you will be destroyed your revenue

or in a place not like America where free speech is protected which is pretty much every other place on the globe like the UK you can get something like the British government

leaning in on a private corporation to say hey what's up with Russell Brand's modernization status you know huh you know come on TikTok this is dirty and this is what leads people to skepticism you know i truly believe and this will be a

conversation we have going forward like because i want to talk to you no one i do not like using the term conspiracy theory i don't like it well for one because most conspiracy theories are lately have been true hot run the conspiracy theorist but that doesn't mean that every theory is legitimate or true just because it's it's out there and it's crazy and it's unacceptable, doesn't in turn also make it true. And I know for a fact, as someone who has reported and been in the story very heavily, that a lot of the stuff that was said about what happened in Maui is false. I haven't addressed a lot of it head on very often.

Didn't know how much to, but a lot of people ask me questions on social media. Still do. Hey, Will, what about the 2,000 kids? What about the blue cars? And we'll talk about that more again in upcoming episodes of the Will. podcast. But I do believe this. When you shut down information, when you attack people, when you attempt to silence, you have planted the soil, my friends. The crop will grow. And that crop will be falsehoods. It will be lies. It will be true conspiracy theories.

And so here you have the British government and YouTube acting in a manner that gives people legitimate questions about the motivations behind this story attacking Russell Brand. When you do this, I know whoever you are, and it's a thing, the censorship regime industry, I truly do believe you have also sowed the seeds of your own demise. You cannot do this. The only only the only disinfectant for lies is the sunlight of truth that's it more information more light you attempt to cover things up you attempt to shut people down you grow the exact thing you say that you want to stop but everyone knows that i'm not saying anything groundbreaking with that

so what do we take away from it you're not actually trying to reveal you're not actually trying to truth. You're trying to win with your lie, your propaganda. That action reveals exactly the nature of your own position. People in pursuit of the truth are not afraid of alternate points of view. People dedicated the truth are not afraid to engage, much less here disagreement. People that want to sell a lie need the darkness of censorship to cover up other people's points of view. So when you act like you have British government, YouTube, you will inevitably make people

believe your motivations are to sell a lie. That, for me, on this story, does not in any way for now. now mean we should arrive at the conclusion of innocence for Russell Brand. We should pursue the facts, pursue the truth. But we sure as hell cannot also accept the presumption of guilt for Russell Brand. We'll be right back with more of the Will Kane podcast. This is Jimmy Phala, inviting you to join me for Fox Across America, where we'll discuss every single one of the Democrats' dumb ideas.

Just kidding. It's only a three-hour show. Listen live at noon Eastern or get the podcast at foxacrossamerica.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. Then come back here to see how you did.

Thank you for taking the quiz. Story number two. Why are you allowed to dress like a slob in the United States Senate? Pennsylvania Senator John Federman likes to dress in basketball shorts and hoodies. He looks horrific. He looks terrible. He looks like he'd be shuffling around the hallways of an insane asylum. Or, probably not even motivated enough to get to the unemployment line on some porch stoop in western Pennsylvania.

He looks not like United States Senator. now he does look like the United States Senator because Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has altered the Senate dress code to allow John Fetterman to dress like a slob. Why does John Fetterman dress like a slob?

Why is he wearing basketball shorts and a hoodie? Why? I know it's his bit. I know it's his brand. I know he's LARPing as a blue-collar guy grew up wealthy. I know he's elected a mayor dressed in the same way. There's a

X account. Polymath. He had an interesting set of tweets on this. He said, I don't care about the Senate dress code one way or the other. But I have yet to see anyone explain why Federman can't just dress in a suit and tie. Is he refusing to do so? Is he not capable of functioning if he's not wearing casual clothes? Both of those options seem bad. Now, that has led people to go, well, you know, he did have a stroke. He has depression. It's like his wardrobe part of that? Well, if that's the case, he shouldn't be in the Senate. If you are so impaired that you can't properly even dress, why should I trust that you can, in turn, vote on the laws in this country, including potential, although we don't do it anymore, congressional acts of war, declarations of war. We haven't declared war in quite some time. That hasn't stopped us from going to war. Paul Math said the following.

I mean, I know why I think Federman can't dress in a suit and tie. I think it's because he isn't capable of it and making him do so would expose the fact that he is a human cardboard cutout who's been installed in the Senate. All the work of a senator is being done by his staff, including his Twitter handle,

and his only job is to hold an ID card that says John Federman and raise his hand when they tell him to. And he's actually not capable of doing that in a suit and tie because of how fragile he is. I don't know. I certainly think he's incapable of the job. Is he incapable of fastening the buttons on a dress shirt?

I don't know. I don't know. I think he's refusing to do so. I think he is disrespectful. Why do I think that? Because they altered the dress code for him. That means the dress code before required him to wear a suit. And he just didn't.

So they moved to him. They accommodated him. He was refusing before. The dress code moved to him. By the way, I'm fully aware that right now I'm wearing a great t-shirt talking to you on a podcast. I happen to be hosting a digital show, not showing up to the United States Senate. I think the dress code is different. I think if I were at the United States Senate, I would wear a suit and tie.

I know I'd wear a suit and tie. I think there are some things in this world that still require acceptability, respectability. A lot of people been posting pictures are like, you know, ball games. ball games from like the 1930s and 40s. Everybody in the stands, suit and tie. Airplane travel, you know, in the 60s, suit and tie. And I like that we've moved more casual in many things. Again, wearing a T-shirt right now. I like being real, being authentic. I like that movement. I also recognize, hey, I think we've gone a little far. I mean, we're down to sweats now. I mean, it was only 20 years ago, 25 years ago, that,

You know, Seinfeld was making jokes about sweatpants. You know, it just means you've given up. Wear sweatpants, you just have given up. Now, I will say sweatpants have changed. They're much more stylish, better fabric. Don't look as sloppy as they once did. Not the kind of stuff that Federman's wearing. He's still wearing what looks like those loose mesh.

Seriously, basketball shorts, I try to get my sons out of all the time. And a hoodie doesn't get... Where do you go from there? This is my point. How far have we gone? Like, what's the next? How could he be sloppier? Like, what would be the next step for him to even getting more cash?

Like, Federman comes home from a hard day at the United States Senate and puts on what? You know? What's he wear shoe-wise? Is he wearing, like, basketball shoes, too? I don't know. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised. The next step is slides, right? He's going to roll up into the Senate wearing slides.

I mean it's got to be his next step Like that's not what's after that Like a loose fitting ratty hold tank top Like that During a hot summer Because he's depressed And you get on an airplane now By the way, again, I don't want to fly

I don't want to fly in a suit and tie I don't even I've got the point where like My jeans and boots Are super uncomfortable I want to stop wearing cowboy boots on planes so I get it like I want to be comfortable we're getting more casual but you ride a plane now and it's we're hanging out and everybody's

I mean I don't even know if we're in their living room we're like in their bedroom roughly right after they got up and threw on the first thing you know when they go down to get the cup of coffee we're in that phase of public appearance I don't know I actually think that the way Fetterman is dressing isn't just symbolic. It is symbolic, but it is absolutely disqualifying. You just shouldn't, you just shouldn't be able to dress like a slob. It isn't hard. It's pretty matter of fact. I think it's pretty clean. I think it's a good rule. You shouldn't be able to dress like a slob in the United States Senate. We're going to step aside here for a moment. Stay tuned.

but some stories are left unfinished. Somebody knows. Real cases, real people. Listen and follow now at foxtruecrime.com. Story number three. At this point, two games into the season, who and what do we know about the NFL? Who's actually good in the NFL?

Three teams. I can sit here today and tell you with some level of confidence, only that three teams in the NFL are good. And one of them just took a big hit. Let's start with the AFC. I'm not confident to anyone, and the AFC is good. No one. Miami Dolphins are probably the team that everyone would say would look the best so far.

But I'm unconvinced, like, at the end of the year, two games of evidence, the Miami Dolphins would be my pick to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl. You believe in Mike McDaniel that much, that you believe that much into a Taga Viloa? I don't carry them to a Super Bowl that I can believe at this point they're that level of good in the NFL. And that's what I guess we're talking about. Like, yes, of course, the Miami Dolphins are good. But who do you believe is actually good enough to win the Super Bowl? And I can't say that about Miami.

me. I can't say that about the Kansas City Chiefs. I mean, if you've watched the Chiefs play, and this is airing coming to you on Friday morning so that we will have just seen them last night, but they got problems. The Chiefs have problems. This idea, and he is,

he's the best quarterback in the NFL, but the Mahomes doesn't need anything that you can pay him all the money and not give him anything around him. That ain't looking true. He's got problems with Travis Kelsey hurt. He's got problems at the receiving court. He's trying to throw it to Cardarius Tony, and my man can't catch.

That's a problem when you play receiver. I don't feel good about the Chiefs. And I just scroll through the AFC. Ravens? Maybe. Maybe I would feel the best about the Ravens of anyone. You can't say the Bengals. That would have been everyone's pickouts out of the Chiefs preseason.

What's wrong with Joe Burrow? Draft him in my fantasy league and it's just killing me. And so is Jamar Chase. I have Jamar Chase doing nothing in Cincinnati. The Jags? Maybe this is the year they turn the corner. Trevor Lawrence. There's no one in the AFC that inspires any kind of confidence

that they're good at the level of winning a Super Bowl. So, I told you, three teams I feel confident about. First, let's talk about the teams that are good, but weirdly good. Right now. Two games in the season. The Falcons. Ooh, Bejohn Robinson is good, isn't he? Really good.

And so is the Falcons offensive line. Still Desmond Ritter? but the Falcons are that team that we should have said ahead of the season oh who's the worst first or the out of nowhere playoff like the Falcons might be that team the only problem is there's another team in the division the Saints that are also 2 and oh but do you believe in the Saints do you believe in the Bucks I believe in Baker Mayfield they're 2 and O I think we all know the answer

the commanders 2 and oh no and how about the teams that we thought would be good that aren't the Vikings Although I think the Vikings can still turn the corner. Oh, and two. The Lions, one in one, I think they're pretty good, but I don't have the kind of confidence that I'm talking about here. Three teams that have confidence are good. Can win it all good in the NFL.

The San Francisco 49ers, probably the least of these three. Of these three, I would have the least confidence in the San Francisco 49ers. It's a question of how much do you believe in Christian McCaffrey? to cover up how little you believe in Brock Purdy. Now, there are already people that believe in Brock Purdy. I'm not one of them, even though he took out the Cowboys last year in the playoffs. Defense is still good. No longer the best defense in the NFC.

And that leads me to be in number two. I believe in the Philadelphia Eagles. They're good. And I have been slow, slow to believe in Jalen Hertz. Still have a few doubts. But Philadelphia Eagles are good on the offensive line and on the defensive line. There's football in my mind right there. There's football.

But I feel pretty confident in saying the best team in the NFL right now is the Dallas Cowboys. Oh, will you homer it? Man, I went to that game last Sunday, New York Jets. And I get it. They were starting Zach Wilson. Complete annihilation. Do not fall behind to the Dallas Cowboys. because Michael Parsons is going to become your nightmare.

And it's not just him, as to Marcus Lawrence and Doran Armstrong and Sam Williams, they get to the quarterback. And they have three levels. Good at linebacker and Leighton Van Derrash. Good. In the secondary, great safeties, Malik Hooker, Donovan Wilson, great safeties, Geron Curse. Really good at cornerback before yesterday.

Stefan Gilmore and Trayvon Diggs. I watched Trayvon Diggs in that game. Force fumbles, get interceptions. Trayvon Diggs is just a difference maker. He's a great NFL quarterback. Does he get burned every once in a while? Every once in a while. He's such a net positive.

I don't even care about hearing about that. He is flip the field, forced the turnover. Yesterday reports are that Trayvon Diggs tore his ACL in practice. that's an out-for-the-year type injury. Now, the Cowboys are pretty deep. That's another thing. They're deep. Duran Blan's a really good corner.

They'll move him from the slot to the outside. Jordan Lewis, who's been there starting slot in the past, goes back to starting at slot, and he's good. And they traded for the Dolphins' first-round-pick cornerback. Noah Igbenagini, he said with a question mark. Something like that. He hasn't been great when he was in Miami. we'll see if he can be something for Dallas.

This is a huge hit for the Cowboys defense, because you would have said that's a top threeer on the defense. Michael Parsons, DeMarcus Lawrence, Trayvon Diggs. Happy they trade for Stefan Gilmore in the offseason because now they still have, they had two lockdown corners. Now they have one, and Bland is good. It's a huge hit to the team that I believe is the best in the NFL, and one of the three that I think,

I can say with some level of confidence are good enough to win the Super Bowl. And despite losing Trayvon Diggs, still are good enough to win the Super Bowl. That's going to do it from today here on the Will Cain podcast. Check out my stories from Maui. I think you're going to find them really interesting and really good. This weekend on Fox and Friends, and we together will talk about it in upcoming episodes of the Will Cain podcast. I'll see you again next time. Listen ad free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcast.

and Amazon Prime members. You can listen to this show ad-free on the Amazon Music Act. Following Fox's initial donation to the Kerr County Flood Relief Fund, our generous viewers have answered the call to action across all Fox platforms and have helped raise $7 million.

Visit go.com. forward slash TX flood relief to support relief and rebuilding efforts.