Will Cain Country - Starbucks Workers' Strikes Prove Woke Culture Is Eating Itself (ft. Senator James Lankford & Julian Epstein)

Episode Date: May 14, 2025

Story #1: Senator James Lankford (R-OK) joins Will to discuss if taxes and spending will actually be cut in the "Big, Beautiful Bill." Story #2: Will breaks down the power and resilience of legacy brands as popular corporations like Starbucks feel pushback from customers and then their own woke employees.  Story #3: The mainstream media finally reports on former President Joe Biden's health issues including the possibility of him needing a wheelchair and forgetting important figures' names. Plus, just how much influence do foreign governments have over America as we learn more about Qatar's funding of our institutions? A conversation with Former Chief Counsel For The House Judiciary Committee, Julian Epstein. 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

For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for $5.5 plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. One, taxes, immigration, the big, beautiful bill with Oklahoma Senator James Langford. Two, the Starbucks kids are on protest because they don't want to have to wear a uniform. They don't want to have to wear a black t-shirt. But it highlights something to me, the power, the resilience of legacy brands,

from Disney to sports radio to Starbucks. Three, Joe Biden might have needed a wheelchair. He forgotten couldn't recognize George Clooney. Couldn't remember the names of people like James. Sullivan. And yet here today is the media telling us, oh my gosh, we're just discovering how bad it was under Joe Biden. Plus, how much money has Qatar poured into the United States? Facebook page. Jump into the comments section. Set yourself a reminder so you're here with us every day, right around lunch. If you comment onto the show, we bring you into the show.

You're a member of our audience, not drive-by viewers, but a member of the Wilicia. If you're listening on radio, we hope you will subscribe to us on Apple or Spotify. Leave us a five-star review if, of course, you think it's so well deserved. And also find yourself here as a member of the Wollisha. Tenfold Pat is back from vacation. I've got two a days, Dan, in the house, the crew back together here today. I can't get off of my high. I'm riding on a Cooper flag high, which has sent me really watching, listening to a whole host of media. I'm just consuming the new era, plant the flag in Dallas.

But it has to be thinking about something like legacy media, legacy brands, the power, say of Disney or Starbucks. That's put to the test right now. You got to see some of these videos, hear some of this sound from the kids, the kids at Starbucks. You're going to really, you're going to really enjoy this one, I think. Stick around here. Plus, the new reporting original sin. Jake Tapper has the temerity on CNN to now report and write a book on the failings of Joe Biden, his physical infirmities, his brain rot. And yet they covered up for it they covered up for it breaking news the media covers how they covered up the problems with joe biden i've fallen down the rabbit hole of various subjects over the last couple of days one of which

is while donald trump travels around the middle east somebody brought this up to me they brought this up to me in a party two weeks ago and today it's reported by the free press how much money Qatar, Qatar, Qatar, Qatar, puts into the United States of America, college, politics, soft power. But I did then want to know, well, if politicians had to wear, you know, suits like NASCAR badges,

what other countries would be on the jacket? How much money from Israel? How much money from China? How much money from Saudi Arabia? We're going to dive into that. Coming up here in just a moment on the Will Kane show. But let's get started with story number one. Senator James Langford of Oklahoma joins us now on the Wilkins show.

What's up, Senator? Will, good to hear from you. Glad to talk to you. I think let's start with, it's a hard thing to cover, Senator. It's like jumping into the kitchen, looking at the ingredients, the pot mixing up, not even knowing what the meal's going to look like at the end. But that's sort of the story when it comes to the big, beautiful bill. Whatever's going to happen with the extension of tax cuts.

spending, because you're sitting there over on the Senate side, you're kind of in the bullpen waiting as the House and the Ways and Means Committee is working on this. But that hasn't stopped some of your colleagues from talking about this. By the way, here's Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. He had this to say about the process and what looks like it's coming together. So there's nothing now to justify this abnormal level of government spending. Pathetically, Congress is having a hard time agreeing on a reduction of even $1.5 trillion from that 10-year amount. That's a 1.68% cut a little more than a rounding error. My guess is that much of that minuscule decrease will be backloaded at the end of 10 years for which Congress is now budgeting. Increasing the probability

of those savings will never be realized. Now, we are seeing stuff. He's seen stuff. Ways and means is coming back some stuff. But again, as you sit in the bullpen waiting for that thing to be passed to the Senate, what are you thought, what are your thoughts on the big, beautiful bill? Yeah, we actually started working on this a year ago, trying to be able to play out what of the different options if Republicans had the White House and the Senate, not the House, and all the different options. And our best case scenario is if we had House, Senate, White House, which is what we have. So the Senate has been actively working on this as the House has been as well for months and months and months trying to be able to brainstorm. We know two things

are going to come out of this. We're going to reduce spending dramatically, and we're going to actually stabilize tax policy and try to stabilize it for as far out on the horizon as we can. But then you're right. Everything else in the ingredients is all up in the air to try to figure out. Our biggest challenges Ron Johnson has mentioned, as I've said over and over again as well, we're $2 trillion in overspending per year. This is talking about cutting $2 trillion in a decade. So that means $200 billion this year in a $2 trillion deficit. We got a long way to go to still get us back to balance. So we've got a lot to still reduce. As folks are freaking out in saying, oh my gosh, we're talking about reducing spending. Everybody's all for reducing spending when

it's a theory, but everybody then says, oh, but not my thing, not this thing, not this thing. At the end of the day, we can't keep overspending $2 trillion a year. We've got to find a way to get back to balance. Let's dig into both of those elements you talked about. First of all, tax policy. Stabilizing it is the word that you use, extending it. I read in Politico this morning, the current proposal for tax rate decreases or the extension of decrease would somehow come back um they're thinking it's coming back better than even expected meaning it's not going to cost as much it's always hard to think tax cuts cost but i guess it's into the government coffers so they said something like middle class earners would receive something like a 14 15% decrease

people making over a million it's like 8.6% decrease and the argument in political was that a lot republicans were saying well since that came in better than we thought we can take a more serious to look at salt reductions, that state and local tax deductions that largely benefit places in the Northeast with high state taxes or California. I see you shaking your head already. So talk to me about taxes for a minute. Yeah, first thing is first on. We don't want the rates to go up. When everybody's talking about how much it's going to cut tax rates one or the other, what they're really looking at as saying it's scheduled to go up on every single tax bracket in January. That's the calendar changes January 1. Every single rate goes up. Every small business,

their rates go up, all those things. The child tax credit gets cut in half. All those things just happen next year with a calendar change on it. First thing first, we're trying to make sure that doesn't happen. We have stable rates on it, that we don't have this giant tax increase on every Americans. And then we start talking about the state and local taxes, the salt tax, as everyone talks about as well. This is dominantly important to those in the very highest bracket, quite frankly, and it's a big deal to states like New York and California, Illinois that have really, really high state taxes that they want to be able to say, we have high state taxes, so I should be able to write that off and have my state in Oklahoma. I have taxpayers in Oklahoma pay more federal tax

so that taxpayers in New York can pay less. I don't think that's the way to go. Let's just try to keep it consistent on. If you're unfortunate enough to live in a high state tax, you can do what a lot of other New Yorkers have done, and that has moved to Florida and to try to get out of a high tax state. Well, I did that. I got to be honest, when I lived in New York, I sure likes the salt deduction um but i kid it now i live in texas again um it has an impact my life and when you put it the way you did it's like why should they get a reduction in taxes because their states are inefficiently managed proportionally forcing up oklahomans and texans and floridians to pay more um i want to put a pin in that because i think it ties into this really quickly now on spending cuts it's just

today here at four o'clock on the fox news channel i'll have congressman chip Roy, I know he really wants to see spending reductions. A lot of people do. You're right. It's like everybody wants it in theory. And then nobody wants to, everybody's worried about Medicaid cuts. Everybody's worried about whatever affects their state. So the reality is, and I think you're going to appreciate the reality of compromise in a moment when we talk about immigration. But the reality is you got different kinds of Republicans. So what do you do? Right. You need them all. So what are you going to do with New York Republicans or whoever it may be, they're like, you can't cut Medicaid. You can't cut. I mean, we have to cut to your point theoretically and academically, but how you do it politically.

Yeah, and that is the challenge. It's funny. I have folks in Oklahoma that will catch me and say, just do what we need to do. We all know what needs to be done. I'm like, that's great, except for I've got New York, Republicans, California, Republicans, Illinois Republicans, that they're looking at this from a different perspective on it. They're definitely Republicans. We're in a majority in the House because that they are there. They also bring a perspective from their state. Welcome to the United States of America where we all get together. We have to make decisions on what affects everybody. We run our tax policy in Oklahoma for state taxes as we want to be able to run it. But on federal taxes, we've got to all come to agreement on how this is

actually going to be done. So it is important that we sit down with everybody and figure it out. And that's just part of the challenge of it. But it's actually we're the greatest nation in the world. We can solve these problems. We'll figure it out. I need to get some New York. Republicans on. you talk about spending cuts like so where where do they come from if you're if you're so opposed yeah there's by the way they found a bunch of them like on medicaid the medicaid they're adding a work requirement to it which is something we're for as well to say for able-bodied individual with no kids you should be working that that's requirements already there if you're going to get food stamps you've got to be working you for an able-bodied individual without kids but that's not true for

medicaid that's a 400 billion dollar savings and it's not kicking people off medicaid it's actually saying when you get a job, you get an employer provided health care. Now you've got health care provided by your employer, not by your next door neighbor as a taxpayer. That's a better way to do it. It helps them get better insurance. It helps the federal deficit spending as well. Well, on that note as well, I don't understand the Medicaid reimbursement from the federal government, like what the meaning this little tax credit workaround, and that's benefited a lot of southern red states where they make this deal with the hospitals. You jack up the prices. We'll charge you an extra tax. That allows us to inflate our ask back to the federal government.

And it's zeroed out between the hospital and the state, but guess who pays more, the federal taxpayers? And a lot of red states get to benefit. A lot of red states benefit. But hey, that doesn't seem right to the federal taxpayer. Almost every state in America takes advantage of that little loophole. It's called the provider tax and they'll put it on nursing homes. They'll put it on hospitals. They'll put it on dental plans. There's all kinds of things that states will do because states have a requirement. They pay a portion. Federal government pays a portion of Medicaid. And the states will say, well, we don't want to pay a portion. We'll make the hospitals do that and we'll give them this deal that if they'll give us a little money, we'll give it right back to them. And then we'll all get more in states like California, then use that money to be able to then give illegal immigrants Medicaid benefits through their state program. So yes. What percentage of Oklahoma? What percentage of Oklahoma is on Medicaid? You know what? I don't know the exact percentage on that one. It's probably somewhere in the 20s on that. So it's a high percentage. You got a lot of disabled. individuals that are there. You've got folks that are deep in poverty that are in that percentage.

So there's a lot of folks that are there. That is their safety net health care. I don't mind having a safety net health care. What I do not like is having people not legally present, get access to it, or someone that should be working that's not working. They're just getting benefits, federal benefits. Work is not punishment. Work is actually purpose. And so if we just give people benefits and they're not working, we're literally telling them you don't have a purpose when they do. They need to get up and do what God's called them to be able to do and what he's gifted them to do. Go to work, go actually benefit all society, and we don't have to carry you in that. I appreciate you saying you didn't know. I really sincerely do. I believe that

Tennessee or maybe it's Kentucky, between the two neighboring states, one of them's 20%, one of them's like 35%. There's some states where 40% of the population is on Medicaid, and that shows a real expansion of that program beyond its intentions you'd have to think. Senator, I've had your colleague, your fellow Oklahoma on several times. I know he's from eastern Oklahoma. He's a member of the Cherokee tribe. I like to give him a hard time about things. I met you once in Oklahoma.

Where are you from? I'm from Oklahoma City. Ride the middle. Okay. Big City, Oklahoma. And what do you... Oklahoma City Thunder are going to head to the finals soon in the NBA. Oh, here we go.

You guys are really good, really good. I think this thunder could be good for a long time to come. By the way, how, I mean, have you always been, are you a sports fan? I know you're, you come from a religious background, I mean, aren't you a minister as well? You always been a sports fan? I'm a college football fan more than I'm anything else on it, but I definitely enjoy the thunder as well. They've been a great team for a long time and had some great players on it, but my number one sport is always college football. And, and which are you a poke or you?

Oh, yeah, boys. I mean, all my OU, all my OU staff and the folks that are around my states, half my state's OU, half my state's OSU, but my daughter went to OSU, my money went to OSU, so I'm definitely a cowboy. Okay. Okay. All right. Good. Good. Yeah, I'm happy to get to know you a little bit more and share who you are with our audience as well. I was with a bunch of Oklahomans, honestly, about about the attorney general of Oklahoma. We talked a lot about some of the problems in Oklahoma when it comes to the legalization of marijuana, what it's done to. that state, how it's invited, you know, in the cartels and the Chinese syndicates as well. His warning was, do not legalize marijuana. No, it's awful. It absolutely has destroyed our farming. It's destroyed our water base. It's destroyed our electricity and our rural areas. The illegal crime has come in, the human trafficking that's coming in. Chinese immigrants that are coming in to be able to work

these grow houses that are illegal grow houses, bringing in Chinese prostitution at the same time. It has absolutely been awful. And for all the folks that said, hey, if we leave, legalize it. We can tax it. It's all going to work great. Let me just say what's happened in our state with just the crime. And the other thing is, they said, well, kids can't get access to it. Oklahoma, the year before we legalized marijuana was 43rd in the country in youth marijuana use. Now we're third in the country in youth marijuana use. Just eight years. So yes, you get a free access to marijuana for folks all over that ends up getting the dramatic rise in youth marijuana use as well. we can we can fight about marijuana use among adults we there is no argument that marijuana use among

children does hurt their development does impair them long term on it there is no question about that every study that's been done so yeah it's a big problem i want to dig i want to do that i want to do dig into what's happened to oklahoma that's fascinating stats i know you have to go i do have to ask you just one last question before you go i hinted at compromise a moment ago how do you you know you took a lot of heat for your bipartisan uh immigration bill um We're looking at, what was it, roughly a year ago, ish. And the president didn't want to do anything. And the president said, by the way, the president's, the current president said during

a state of union, turns out we didn't need a bill. We needed a new president. You've seen border crossings plummet and so forth. I know you were living in a different moment in time at that point. Do you look back on that proposal at that time and still think it was needed? It was needed. Here's the difference on it. A year and a half ago when I was working on that bill, we had a million more people.

illegally crossing the country. If we could have passed that bill, we could have blocked those million people from illegally crossing. Now we're going to pay until billions of dollars to try to move those folks out. And so I wanted to be able to stop that group. I also had no idea who was going to be president next. Obviously, I hoped it was Trump. I was very supportive of President Trump being elected, but you can never guess that a year out what's going to actually happen. And my goal was to shut down illegal immigration to be able to come no matter who's president. And the other thing was we changed a lot of the authorities in that. bill. Right now all these cases that are caught up in the court where the court's jumping in

on President Trump saying you can't do that, you can't do that. Those things would have not been true if we'd have passed this bill because we handed additional enforcement authorities to whoever the president is to be able to make sure the court wasn't going to be able to stop them from stopping illegal immigration. I want to be able to promote legal immigration and bring to a zero to a stop all illegal immigration. So I was going to try to get as much as I could get done at the time that I was actually living in. I know it's hard to be able to look back and say, we elect a new president. We're done.

I don't know who's president five years from now and what they're going to do on the border. But I want to put in law so no matter who is president, we keep that border closed. I appreciate that answer. I think it's worthy of a deeper conversation, but I think your answer is honest and it was a different time with that an uncertain future. I appreciate all of this conversation. We hope to see more of you, Senator Langford. Thank you so much for hanging out with this. I know you have a tight out here.

You probably have some official business for the United States. So we appreciate you spending time with us. Yep, running the vote on the Senate floor right now. Thanks, Will. Thanks, Will. Thank you, Senator James Langford of Oklahoma here on the Will Cain show. Over on YouTube, the folks having their say, here is what bottom line Caroline has to say.

We appreciate your, bottom line Caroline, starting to see you on a regular basis here on the Wilcane show, officially a Williscia. Here we go. Bottom line, Caroline commented about yesterday. conversation about the protesters outside New Jersey, outside of the detention facility, singing now, not protesting, not rioting, not being arrested, but rather singing. Singing is sort of the way of the day when it's not violence. It's theatrics, and that's what's happening at Starbucks.

So Arizona on YouTube says quit Starbucks a couple of years ago. Pretty disgusting who they hire now. Sixth Rings Ninja says they can keep their bitter. brew, it's overpriced swill. Patricia Berry says, never liked Starbucks. The price alone was enough to deter me. Jerry Daughtry, also frequent commenter, member of the Wallitia, the world runs on Duncan. And then finally, Susan Wing, Langford needs to vote with President Trump and MAGA. All right, you see people hinting there about Starbucks. So what's going on?

Well, you've got to hear. You've got to see what's happening at Starbucks. But it does lead to a deeper observation and thought I've been having about the power, say, of Disney. The power, say, of Bud Light, the power of Starbucks, the power of legacy. Next on the Will Cain Show. but some stories are left unfinished. Somebody knows. Real cases, real people. Listen and follow now at foxtruecrime.com.

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 $6.5 million. Visit go.combe forward slash TX flood relief to support relief and rebuilding efforts. Ridiculousness at Starbucks. It's the Will Cain Show streaming live at Fox News.com. Fox News, YouTube, Fox News, Facebook.

Subscribe at Apple or on Spotify. All right, let's roll the tape, fellas. Tinfoil Pap, two days down. Let's enjoy a little bit of these Starbucks protest. Here's the scene. The scene. Starbucks new CEO recognizing three straight quarters of decline in revenues. wants to reform the path of Starbucks.

Once a place where you had to wear a uniform to work and vagrants did not hang out in the bathroom, he wants to clean up Starbucks and make everybody working there wear a black t-shirt. 2016 Starbucks relaxed its rules, said, you can wear jeans, can wear a t-shirt. Now they want you to wear dark jeans, khakis. Black t-shirt.

And this, according to these, protesters, the baristas, this is oppression. Here is a bit of that protest. This is not a legal action that Starbucks is taken by unilaterally deciding what the dress code is going to be, and then creating this so-called feedback session, where the dress code's already created, and we're just expected to let off some steam and still accept it, lying down. This isn't a big break.

Go away. partner feel manipulated by all of you all who are also continuing to push this agenda on us. That is some of the protesters inside of a Starbucks. They fulfill every stereotype. Every single one. There's clearly gender fluidity and non-binaryness going on. And I don't know what's happening with the party hats. Why do they all have on the little pointy party hats?

What does that have to do? Maybe they think they're unicorns now? I don't know. That's a bit. That looks like it was what we're doing. here we're doing like a furry thing but a magical furry thing little tails and little hats that look like unicorns then they put on a sidewalk fashion show i guess modeling what they'd rather wear than black t-shirts it raining just makes it worse this is for anybody listening on radio or on

Apple or Spotify, honestly indistinguishable from a pride parade. It is something going on here with a goofy little sidewalk fashion show walk, which they're all dressed granted differently. There's nothing uniform, including their genders. And it's, I guess, about the oppression of having to wearing a black t-shirt. Now, we should put some context on this, 1% right now. 1% of Starbucks baristas are currently participating in this protest. They want to unionize, which they're trying to unionize this shop.

They're calling themselves a union. It was covered this morning by CNBC's Squawk Box. It's on Bloomberg. And it shows some pretty fascinating places of where woke culture will take you. Incoherence and cannibalization. Starbucks, of course, someone who is inculcated, cultivated, that kind of wokeness. and now here it is attacking its host. You know, this woke thing, I want to talk about for a minute.

So I was listening to Sports Talk Radio in Dallas, Texas yesterday. Mavericks get the number one lotto ball. Get to take Cooper Flagg. I need information. I want to start listening to people talk about this. So by the way, I went to a lot of well-known places that one would go to listen to. I tried Rosillo, I tried Simmons, I tried places that you know are going to talk about this kind of thing,

kind of giving evidence to, you build a brand and people come to expect something from that brand and, you know, they look for you to comment. But it's not just on media and commentary. It's on business as well. You want a cold beer and people still reach for a bud light. They do. Yesterday I wanted to reach for local sports talk radio.

And one of the things I heard them talking about yesterday was woke mom. But they were doing it in a sarcastic fashion. Now, this particular radio station has dominated, quote, unquote, cool in not just Dallas sports media, but in honestly national sports media in that they were a pioneer from the 1990s. It's like this station in Dallas and WFA in two totally stylistically different offerings, but to pioneers in sports media. What I'm getting at is they were sarcastically going on and on about

woke mob's fault this is the woke mobs fault get christie gnome on this and they're all chuckling and laughing each other and i just kind of listened and i listened and i was like what are they doing like sarcastically making fun of the idea that there are people concerned or blaming some problems in society on the woke mob and it occurred to me two things it would be like listening to two people mock cancer oh he's sick oh cancer he's got cancer it's like cancer's a real thing why are you mocking this and the societal deterioration of woke culture has eroded almost every aspect of America now luckily we're on a vibe shift upswing but that doesn't undercut the reality of what was and to some extent still is

afflicting America. And cloaking sarcasm suggests you have no idea how people feel, what people have experienced, what your audience thinks, or any semblance at this point of reality.

Academic thinkers, thought leaders, yes, of course, politicians, moms at the school board, kids in 11th grade trust me kids in 11th grade all know and have experienced and lived amidst the woke mob

and because of a couple of 55 year old has-beens think it's still a source for derision and sarcasm really lets me know you're trapped in 2007 hey Keith Oberman he ain't a thing on MSNBC no matter how many camera shifts he did 15 years ago Hey, George W. Bush isn't president anymore, and it's not sarcastically cool to talk about the war in Iraq. You're not in because you're left.

In fact, you're out because you think it's still 2007. Your 55-year-old has-beens completely out of touch with society, your audience, and the vibe shift shift of America. and yet here we live today and you think it's a source of sarcasm I got an idea for the next bit cancer what a thing stupid cancer

that being said I listened power of legacy dominating for decades and it takes a long time for that to deteriorate you and I can be mad about Disney right legitimately can you honestly say you don't watch any disney movies ever or if they come out

with a sequel to a franchise you've been a part of your entire life and your daughter says i want to watch you don't patronize disney i would love to see an update on bud light sales i really would have they rebounded medello went to number one for a while also owned by anheuser bush but where's bud light today i saw roll tide willie who i love on instagram and he does his beer taste test i don't if you guys have ever seen that roll tide willie big alabama fan and he'll taste beers take a you a swaller and if he likes he'll keep drinking if not he'll spit it out and he just handed him a bud light chad his partner and before he can even get through his spiel trying it willie throws the beer against a tree and says don't drink bud light and it made me think that's okay it's still

it's still there is it or bud light sales back because efforting the power of legacy let me know when you have that two days i can hear you and see you typing away on the latest on bud light sales um i just think that what i've realized as i think about this is there we know this in business there's such a thing called goodwill and goodwill once earned is extremely valuable because goodwill can extend for decades. But it's also why you don't toy with goodwill, because once you burn it up, you do not get it back. Okay? It's incredibly resistant. But by the same token of having earned it, you can lose it. I mean, I still listened. We still watch Disney. Some of us, I'm sure, have gone back to drinking Bud Light. I was never a Bud Light guy in the first place, so it wasn't

that hard for me. I was more of a Miller Light guy. Cours Light. What do you see on Bud Light 2 days? All right, so we got some numbers. As of the first quarter of 2025, Bud Light continues to face challenges in the U.S. market. Anheuser-Busch-InBev reported a 6.1% decline in U.S. sales volume and a 5.1% drop in revenue compared to the same period last year, which marks the eighth consecutive quarter of declining sales for the company. Wow. Guess it hasn't bounced back. I guess it does show goodwill earned.

can be goodwill lost. And that takes us full circle. Go ahead, two a days. I was just going to say, but things like Bud Light and Disney and things like that, it seems like it's thrown in your face. And people are just like, well, don't watch Disney. Don't drink Bud Light. Don't do those things. You don't have to. Don't watch our show. Whatever you want to do. But when it starts to come into your real life, you were saying, it's very, very different. Well, and that's where we find ourselves today with Starbucks. It's only 1% of baristas, and it is a CEO trying to put the company back on the right path. And you have to respect that because I do think you have some leash.

You have some leash. Like you can make mistakes when you're that big, when you're that powerful, when you have a brand, when you have that legacy. But you do have to get it back on the right path. Budlott has tried, by the way, with Kid Rock. They've tried with UFC. They've tried with Shane Gillis. Military.

Doesn't look like it's worked yet. But in military. but you have some leash to get back on the right path, but you have to get on the right path, whether you're not you're a sports media, radio station, or company, whether or not your Disney, or whether or not you're Starbucks.

If politicians had to wear patches on their jackets, like at NASCAR, how many of those patches would reflect? Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China. Let's get into that. And plus, the breaking news, from the mainstream media, that Joe Biden's senility

was covered up by the mainstream media. Next in the Will Cain Show. This is Jimmy Phala, inviting you to join me for Fox Across America, where we'll discuss every single one of the Democrats' dumb ideas. Just kidding. It's only a three-hour show. Listen live at noon Eastern or get the podcast at Fox Across America. across America.com. This is 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. to now suggest, hey, you know what, there was a cover-up of Joe Biden. It is the Will Kane Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page. Hit subscribe, please, at Apple or on Spotify. Lawyer, former Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, Julian Epstein joins us now on the Will Kane Show. What's up, Julian?

I will. Thanks for having me back. Always good to have you on the show. I think I do want to start with Joe Biden in the mainstream media. CNN's Jake Tapper, along with Axios' Alexios' Alex Thompson, has a new book out, revealing a lot of the details in the extent to which Joe Biden's infirmities, his abilities, were covered up. Here's a little sample. Here's a little sample from Axios, which again, one of the authors works for Axiote.

Biden's fizzled deterioration, most apparent in his halting walk, had become so severe that there were internal discussions about putting the president in a wheelchair. They couldn't do so until after the election. And really quickly, Julian, then there's this about George Clooney and whether or not Biden could even recognize George Clooney. I'll read an excerpt. You know George, the assistant told the president, gently reminding him who was in front of him. Yeah, the president said to one of the most recognizable men in the world, the host of the lucrative fundraiser. Thank you for being here. Hi, Mr. President, Clooney said.

How are you? The president replied. How was your trip? Clooney asked. It was fine, the president said. It seemed clear that the president had not recognized Clooney. It was not okay. Recalled the Hollywood VIP who had witnessed the moment.

That thing, the moment where you recognize someone you know, especially a famous person who's doing a effing fundraiser for you, it was delayed. It was uncomfortable. George Clooney, the aide clarified to the president. Oh, yeah. Hi, George, said Biden. It's, um, the funny thing about it is, Julian, it's just not surprising. We already knew all this stuff. And yet here we have the mainstream media telling us what we already knew. That's right, Will. I mean, look, this is a incredible indictment of the people around Biden who were telling the country that they were the saviors of democracy while they were gaslighting the public that the guy in charge of preserving and running our democracy wasn't capable. So it's an incredible indictment of the people around Biden. But it is a bigger

indictment of the news media that is now covering their asses by saying, hey, we were lied to and we were hoodwinked by the Biden staff. When in fact, they knew all the time that Biden was not capable for a second term. You can go back, Will, to August of 2021 during the Afghanistan debacle. And Joe Biden was interviewed by George Stephanopouls about whether his military advisors agreed with a complete pullout. And they didn't. The military advisors thought we should keep a skeletal crew inside Afghanistan to prop up the Afghanistan government and prevent Taliban takeover. And he said to George Stephanoplas in that interview, oh, all the military advisors agreed, with me, and all of those three military advisors completely denounced that or disagreed with that

in congressional testimony. So the president, as early as six months into his first term, didn't know an essential critical view of his military advisors on a critical national security issue. And then you go through the years after that, and there are just hundreds of examples of the president not being capable. I wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal in 2023 that I got a lot of arrows for saying the president is not capable for a second term. And here's the bill of particulars. Here's the receipts on why he's not. And I got, you know, nothing but daggers from the left on that. But the point about this, when Jake Tapper and Chuck Todd and all the rest say, we will lie to, no, they weren't lied to. They knew all along that Biden showed all the signs.

of not being capable, even of completing the first term, never mind the second. And they chose not to report it. And they chose not to report it not because of the lies of the White House were telling them. They chose not to report it because they're partisans. And they completely portrayed their professional responsibility to go after evidence on a big story because they were basically in the tank for the Democrats. And it's part of the reason that the public has such low regard for the mainstream media. And it's part of the reason why people are turning away to programs like this. So I think the news media now is, now they're trying to make a buck and they're engaged in all this pearl clutching about how I can't believe that they pulled this

over on us. No, you did it to yourselves. You were part of the lie. You told the lie to the news to the public, Joe Scarborough, I've never seen, I think this is the best version of the president we've ever seen. I mean, it is pathetic. I mean, it makes Pravda look like they're independent. So I, this was, this, this was, and I was saying this, you know, I was on Fox, I was on News Nation, I was writing for various different publications saying this is a massive lie that the Democrats are playing. And, you know, let's use the word collusion, the media, the mainstream news media was completely colluding with the Democrats on this. I was frankly disgusted by the whole thing.

I want to go into the two areas for a minute a little deeper that you just highlighted, the administration itself, but the media. The media is trying to run out the idea that they were duped, that the White House stonewalled it, pulled this out, covered it up, and it was, the quote you often hear is very difficult to do your job. Well, then why was it so, easy set aside fox okay set aside why was it so easy for fox to see reality why was it so easy for the american people to see reality like american people knew they knew because they have eyes and they have ears and they have common sense and they could see it so this idea that you were just stonewalled by some incredible macavelians inside of the white house that kept you from telling

the truth and oh by the way we're not doctors so we can't we can't diagnose joe biden get out of here man you've never had less investigative curiosity but what i'm curious about what i'm interested in is not the why we know the why and you nailed it it's really simple the why is is simple you didn't want don't trump to win period that's it you were against donald trump but it's the path forward i do find just an obscene level of grotesqueness and i'm not targeting this one guy individually. I mean, I do think you have to point out that Jake Tapper did this exact thing on CNN and now he writes a book. But you point out Joe Scarborough as well. There's so many of them. And I don't know how they look us all in the

face. And by way, this is just one issue because we could have the same conversation on the origins of COVID on a whole host of issues. There's like a dozen long where we could have the same conversation. I just don't know how they look us all in the eye again and tell us that we're the real truth tellers? Well, this is journalistic activism. They are no longer looking to sort of inform the American people of the debate that's going on in our civics and in our polity, and they're picking sides. And in the case of Biden and the Biden cover-up, the Wall Street Journal did an extensive report that interviewed 50 people, 50 insiders who all said they saw evidence of this and the rest of the news media ignored it they did a separate story real

quick john there's another thing to add to that real quick and that's robert her's report and then they slandered and libeled robert her you know that was the special investigator into a lot of yeah i didn't i appeared on television a lot saying that robert her's report explaining that he didn't think Biden was capable for trial was part of the mission of the independent counsel, a special counsel, to report why they wouldn't bring a prosecution if there was a legal violation. But, you know, the Wall Street Journal also had a report going back to 2021, where Biden came before the Democratic caucus in the House and was basically unable to articulate what his views were. And the folks inside the Democratic caucus knew about that. But, you know,

you take it, you sort of contemporize that and take a look at sort of a number of the current issues right now. Well, the media was completely all in on the catastrophizing the tariffs. Now, I didn't like the approach on tariffs. I think it should have been more focused on China from the start. But you notice that the news media and all the experts were sort of wrong about what tariffs were going to do to the economy and how bad of an impact. And the market is above when Trump entered. But nobody has gone back to look at why they got that story wrong. And inflation is inflation down take another issue that we spoke about i think last time which is immigration okay so the media and the democrats have gone all in i think they've been roped adoped by trump

on this due process question right and there is a due process question under the alien exclusion act uh because there's a habeas there's habeas comes in in that context but if trump uses the immigration nationality act which is what obama used to what export three million illegals, then the due process almost evaporates. It's very minimal. You get one hearing with an appeal process before Department of Justice employee and immigration judge who can basically make a determination as to whether you have asylum. There's very, very little due process in normal immigration procedures. But again, the media and the Democrats have gone all in on this. And I wrote a piece in the Washington Post in New York Post on Sunday saying

this is the Elmer Fudd Democrats enabled by the news media who sort of keep chasing Trump, catastrophizing what's going on, crying wolf, and then Trump is Bugs Bunny. He sort of pulls the rug out from under their feet. And what the news media's partisanship is doing is I think it is enabling sort of democratic delusions that it is okay to sort of be focusing as much as they're focusing on this due process question, when in fact, under the, the normal immigration laws, there was very, very little due process. If they brought Garcia back from El Salvador today, they could deport him tomorrow without any further due process, because he's already been adjudicated as deportable and connected to MS-13. So ultimately, the irony of all

of this will is that the media's partisanship is enabling democratic theologies. And when I say Theologies, it's sort of like this religion that the Democrats have, that anything Trump touches is bad, that what we want, and we see this in the Medicaid debate, is more and more dependency on government welfare. And then the religion of identity politics, which is this religion that there are oppressed and there are oppressors, and we are the emancipators of the oppressed. and that is how we gain prestige within our circles, whether in our narrow circles. The problem with all of this, and I call it a religion because it is blind faith in this religion, the problem with all this will is that it is just hastening the Democrats' isolation

and making them more and more relevant because the public doesn't agree with any of this. The working class voters find the idea of more government-dependent, on big welfare to be demeaning. Most black and brown voters, if you poll them, don't agree with this sort of systemic racism, oppressor-oppressed ideology. They don't like that.

Most voters want to see people, not just in a sort of knee-jerk way, oppose everything. Trump, they want to see Democrats working with Trump where it's appropriate. and then opposing him where it's appropriate. I'll give you an example. On tariffs, Democrats missed a huge opportunity to say, hey, you know, we do have unfair trade. We are being taken advantage of. But I've got a better way to deal with tariffs. I'm just going to focus on

China. I'm not going to tariff the rest of the world. And I'm going to send the signal to the other countries that if you don't, you know, if you don't come clean and play fair, this is coming your way at some point in the future. That's how I would have approached tariffs. That's a not opposing Trump, not necessarily buying into everything that is an intelligent third way to approach what he was doing. And they sort of, they sort of completely missed that opportunity because they're so blinded by this, we have to oppose maximally everything Trump. It's a really, really good answer. It really is, Julian. Like, I think you put into a better word, something that I've been trying to articulate. It is a theology. And it has run them in the Bugs Bunny,

the Elmer Fudd style into so many box canyons, dead ends, you know, where they are championing incredibly unpopular positions simply out of animus to Donald Trump. And, you know, let me give you another, let me give you another. Go ahead. Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you. No, I just wanted to give you another dimension to think about this on. So, okay, so you and I can see the Elmer Fudd bugs money, and they can read the same polls that show. their approval ratings are in the 20s or 30s. Maybe the best poll for them is in the 30s. So why is it that they can't figure out a way out of this box?

Why can't they move to the moderate center the way Bill Clinton was in the 1990s? And what I'm starting to believe, Will, is that the progressives that have overtaken the party don't really care about winning elections anymore. They're not playing to the broader electorate. What they want is to become celebrities within the small, progressive bubble that speaks for maybe 10 to 20% of American voters. It's good for their fundraising. It's good for their celebrity status. It's really a form of self-dealing because it advances their social capital.

It advances their fundraising. It's good for the NGOs to raise money. but it rests on a theology that is that is at odds with I think the empirical data and and at odds with the common sense instincts of most voters and so there's a form of self-dealing that's going on amongst the Democrats particularly controlled by the progressives that serves their interests but it does not serve the party or does not serve the country's interests and that'll be put to the test in 2028 if the party can if they will nominate somebody like aOC or if they can find some more reasonable figure. One more thing on Joe Biden. This is the

obvious question. This goes back to the administration side, not the media side. If it is so obvious and it is, the status and the condition of Joe Biden, who is running America? This is a tough answer, and it's a sad one. But I think the staff was, while they were writing scripts for Biden that the Democrats were going to save democracy. So what's a greater threat to democracy? Gaslighting the public that you have a ventriloquist residency and that the guy in charge is really in charge when they know that's a gaslight. And then they're saying, well, but we are at the same time, they're saying out of the other side of their mouth, we are the defenders of democracy. I mean, it is almost, you know, I wish Tom

for still alive. It is a bonfire of the vanities moment. It is something that is so right for satire. But it is a, it's more than a political issue. Well, it's a cultural issue. It's a cultural issue where the left has this, I think, delusion that they have such a messianic mission that the ends justify the means. And this should be disturbing to everyone, regardless of your party, regardless of whether you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. It should be disturbing and they should be held accountable and the news media should be held accountable. More of the Will Cain show right after this. Listen to the all new Brett Baer 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. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. Hey there. It's me. Kennedy. Make sure to check out my podcast. Kennedy saves the world. It is five days a week, every week. Download and listen at Fox Newspodcast.com or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Welcome back to the Will Kane Show. All right. Let's talk about Donald Trump's trip to the Middle East for a moment.

First of all, I found this particular sound from Donald Trump absolutely fascinating and speaking yesterday. Watch. Over the past eight years, Saudi Arabia has proved the critics totally wrong. Majestic skyscrapers, the towers that I see. The difference between now and eight years ago and eight years ago was very impressive. But the new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts of tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle East is defined by commerce, not chaos, where it exports technology, not terrorism, and where people of different nations, religions, and creeds are building cities together, not bombing each other out of existence. In the end, the so-called nation builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies

that they did not even understand themselves. So there's a couple of angles I want to talk about this really quickly, Julian. First, I think some of what Donald Trump is saying is aspirational and in some ways manifesting in reality, and that is, can the Gulf states, can the Middle East move into a new age of technological advancement and getting past tribal divisions and, as he mentioned, technology, not terrorism? He went on in that speech to say as well about Middle East, you've built your societies adhering to your own identity and your own traditions and not a global sense of universal ideology.

And that appealed to me. Now, that's not an endorsement of every single society's identity and values. You don't have to endorse every single value or each individual identity. But you can say that's the only path forward for any particular society. It isn't. You have to become like the United States. You have to become like the United States. You have to adopt our values.

It's just not realistic. And I think that's the second part of this where he indites those that kind of forwarded that vision for so long. I think that's right. I found that passage to be used to. you know, you used to cut a couple of different descriptions for it. I found it to be a revelation, not to get religious here, but I found it to be a revelation. I found it profoundly insightful. If you look at every Arab country will, just about every single one of them, if not every single one, is a failed nation state. There are no democracies, and the average GDP per capita in almost

all of them is about $4,000 a year. The outlier, of course, is Israel. Israel is a multicultural democracy and the average GDP in per capita, that's redundant, the GDP per capita in Israel is about 55,000, you know, make that connection between a multicultural democracy like Israel and how successful they are economically. They're the second biggest tech hub on the globe. I mean, compare those, I mean, contrasts the different models. The reason that I think this is such a pregnant moment will is because MBS in Saudi Arabia sees this. And he has articulated a vision through Saudi Vision 2030 that imagines Saudi Arabia to be a country that is more than just a petrodal state or a jihadist state, the model of Iran. And in order to do that, whether or not

they have to adopt, you know, mirror American democracy or not, they probably won't. But in order for them to do that, they do have to make a step into modernity. And modernity means integrating into the West, into Western economies and Western cultures, and to explicitly reject the bloodthirsty jihadist ideology of places like Iran. And, you know, there's this, people were saying during the Israeli conflict, well, you can't kill an ideology. You can't kill an idea. Well, B.S. You can kill an idea. Monarchies died. Communism died. Those were ideas. Naziism died. Those were ideas. As soon as the rest of the Arab world sees that the clerics of the extremist states in places like Iran have led them down a road of scapegoating one of those wonderful multicultural democracies in the world, Israel, so that they aren't held accountable for building their own economies and building their own. cultures, you could have a turning moment. And, you know, I wrote another piece in the New York Post a couple weeks ago saying that if Trump could do three important things in the mid-east, he would

be eligible for a Nobel Prize. And I would be the first one saying he ought to get it. And those three things would be, as part of the Ukraine deal, separate Russia from Iran, so you isolate Iran, squeeze the sanctions on Iranian shipments, they send 95% of their oil to China, squeeze those sanctions tighter so as to stop. They could stop the Iranian shipments by through aerial strikes tomorrow. And then getting Saudi as part of a deal that involves the mutual defense pact, which they want more than anything else, even more than the economic arrangements, they want the mutual defense back, which the Senate would have to ratify, you get, in exchange for that, you get Abraham 2.0. You could have the most massive realignment of a pro-Western power balance

in the Mideast that we've ever seen. That would be, that is in everyone's interest. Saudi wants this, the secular Arab states want this, Israel wants this, the U.S. wants this. if Trump could pull that off, I will be the first one saying he should get the Nobel Peace Prize. It's certainly a lot more than what Obama did in the region. I think he screwed up the region with the Iranian deal and this idea that we have to share the neighborhood with the Iranians. If Trump can pull this off, it's Nobel Peace Prize worthy. And it's within sight. I'm fascinated by this idea, though, and I think Trump, you call it a pregnant moment,

I think it's exactly right. I do think Trump is the right guy, and I think he has the right intentions. And that's why I used the word aspirational, because the question is, can it become reality? MBS, Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia looks like someone who wants these things as well. And I did this yesterday at 4 o'clock on the Fox News channel. Despite the growth of places like Saudi Arabia, and I don't have this. stats on UAE and Qatar, but I do know that in Saudi Arabia, wages and average income for the middle class, the average Saudi over the past 15 years has been stagnant. So they're booming,

they're growing, but it hasn't really flowed to the Saudi people. So the rap has always been the way to pacify any potential revolution of the average person in Saudi Arabia is through Wahhabism and jihadism and to keep them focused in that direction, right? Right, right. It would seem that whatever happens in Saudi Arabia and to some extent the other two communities, UAE and Qatar, they have to build an economy that benefits everybody at some point, not just these Uber wealthy skyscraper builders, you know, and Ferrari buyers. You're going to have to build an economy that shows it benefits others,

and then you can divorce it from radical Islam. 100%. I could not agree with you anymore. The reason that so many Arab countries have not, not the leaders have not been held accountable is because they can scapegoat Israel and engage in jihadist ideology as a way of escaping accountability and keeping the Arab Street at bay. The brilliance of, I think, Donald Trump's insight as a businessman, and this is where businessmen really have, I think, an edge over career politicians. You know, most – I worked with a lot of Democratic politicians. Very few of them ever had to meet a payroll. But take Ukraine as an example.

I mean, the brilliant insight that Trump had there was rather than doing Article 5 NATO protection, if American economic activity is on the ground, Russia is not going to further encroach. And the benefit of economic – I hope it's not a lawyer to get us involved. Well, okay, we can have that conversation. But turning back to the Mideast, if in fact, and I think this is Trump's vision, if in fact you can engage Saudi Arabia and integrate Saudi into the Western economy in such a way that more industries start growing.

I mean, they want to be an AI hub, they want to be a tech hub, they want to get into all kinds of different sectors. If that happens, and they are integrated into the Western economy, I think as just a matter of pure economics, the only way they do that is to move more towards a free market system. And as you move towards a free market system, as we've seen every decade since Adam Smith, you will necessarily see a rising tide lifting all boats. And that is such a better answer for the moderate Arab states rather than jihadism. And I think as soon as they see that jihadism is a dead-end street and free market integration with the West has all kinds of opportunities for greatness. That, I think, then begins to be more, more attractive throughout the region. And this is why I think the economic, I mean, I wish Trump was visiting Israel when he was on the trip.

I wish there was a little bit less of the stuff going on with Qatar, although I know Qatar plays an intermediary role. But I think the brilliance of the economic approach of Trump is that I do think it's part of a reformation of the Middle East and a transformation towards a more pro-Western, pro-Israel shift in the balance of power that will be magnificent if he can pull it off. Okay, this is the last thing on this I want to talk about. So the real question is kind of like, what is the long-term vision of these countries? We talked what we think might be MBS's vision. You brought up Qatar. UAE is in there as well. I don't think Trump is visiting Abu Dhabi or Dubai.

I don't know if he's stopping in those places on this trip. But I spent some time looking at this. The free press wrote about it. I've actually been thinking about this for a couple of weeks because I had a guy bring it up to me, Julian. And that is Qatar's spending in the U.S. by category. Qatar is thoroughly integrated into many, many U.S. institutions. Here's a quick oversight.

$30 billion in business interests and investments in the U.S., $20 billion in energy plants and export facilities, $30 billion in weapon purchases, colleges and universities, getting close to $7 billion donated by Qatar, and then another $224 million in lobbying and public. relations. I had a guy recently pulled me aside and go, have you ever looked into how much money from Qatar is influencing things in the United States? Now, being someone who's like, okay, but I need to contextualize that, I looked up this morning how much foreign influence is coming from Qatar,

how much is coming from Israel, how much is coming from China, how much, I did a quick look at Saudi Arabia as well. And because I'm curious, right? I want to know, like as an American politician or American University, how much are other nations' interests and money influencing what you're doing? And China had a big, big jump in the mid-2000s, right? But it looks like it's tailed off a little bit. There was tons of Confucius centers everywhere. They've kind of been tailed off. There's less money coming in from China.

Israel does, but it's not on the scale of Qatar. That's what you realize when you start looking into this. Qatar is really, really involved in America. It is, well, when you say you look up the figures, one of the problems is, well, we don't have accurate figures. We don't have an accurate accounting. And I think Stefanik and others have made this point. We don't even know the information. But you mentioned the free press report, and they did a superb report.

So, and I think Qatar and China had 29 billion, 30 billion coming into places like educational institutions. The foundation for the defense of democracies, which is another superb group, founded by a good friend of mine, has done just incredible work on this. And they have shown that it's not just universities. It's not just think tanks, but they have law firms. This is Qatar. They have law firms on retainer. They have money heavily invested in the venture capital industries in the U.S. The amount of soft power they are waging.

And again, they have financed Qatar is simultaneously financing terrorism throughout the world. and housing Hamas. The City Journal has done a superb story on the influence of Qatar and China, particularly in universities. I think the answer to the question is, we don't know how much influence there is, but we know.

An influence for what? That takes back to the NPS thing I introduced. Influence for what from Qatar? Right. And we know that a lot of these student protests, that are pro-Hamas protests on the campuses. Yale saying we honor our martyrs, which just shows that Yale has, I think, no longer

in the ranks of a place that is really teaching critical thinking, teaching ideology more like it. We don't know how much. We know it's in the tens, probably hundreds of billions. We know a lot of it is not in America's interests. It's sort of teaching ideology. We just don't have our, we just don't have our arms wrap around it. And there are some moves now in Congress, which I completely support to make sure we

have complete transparency as a first step. And then I think we ought to be putting limits on this. I think we ought to be finding ways to put limits on it. It's perfectly constitutional to do that. And so I do you see, Julian, do you see any incoherence or red flags in Donald Trump going to these countries and soliciting and accomplishing in very? from these countries, which we celebrate, but at the same time now, we're looking at this and going, oh, it's concerning. I don't like Trump's taking of the Air Force One from Qatar, because I don't think we're hard up enough that we need to be getting such an iconic gift from a country that is housing

Hamas. I don't think we're hard enough enough enough for the $500 million. So I don't like that, particularly after all of the criticism, which I agreed with about Hunter Biden's monetizing his father's office for personal gain. I'm not saying that Trump would use the Qatar gift for personal use. He said it would go to the library after his presidency and sort of stay on the ground. But I don't like the image of that. So that I'm not crazy about. In terms of economic investment in productive areas of the economy, productive sectors, I think we want to be doing as much of that as we can in the middies because as we were just talking about, I think that's the path forward in the region. Are there concerns about the ideological infiltration of bad

players? Yes. But there are ways of controlling that. And I think we ought to be controlling that. And I think the places we had to be starting with is the universities. And politicians, knowing how much is going to lobbying? 100%. I mean, there was a Stanford study, there was a study just like two days ago of what China, what China was doing at Stanford University, where they were tracking students. And then I think the implication was they had obtained all of this personal information on the students there. And when the students sort of got hint that China might be the Chinese government might be behind this. there were implications of potential blackmail. There's a really significant story the other day. What many of our adversaries have seen, Will, is that the universities, I mean, you know,

what did Mao do in China? Where did he start in China? He started with the universities. The brainwashing, the ideological brainwashing started with the universities. And what a lot of our adversaries have seen is this is our soft point. This is the soft underbelly. universities are so hungry for cash and so willing, many of them so willing to sell out American ideals and the American credo that they will take cash from anyone and they will allow them either wittingly or unwittingly to start influencing the agenda. You've seen all of these new sort of, you know, anti-colonial study curricula startup and a lot of these elite of universities.

Well, you know, Trace, follow the money, you know, follow the money. Where's that money coming from? And you'll find a lot of the money is coming from overseas influence. And this is where we ought to be putting our foot down. And, you know, I just hope when Trump's various activities on the universities, a lot of which I support, will not just be these one-offs that you hear about, but there is a really serious case to be made that our universities have gone from the. most revered institutions of critical thinking and learning, particularly about Western civilization and how Western civilization has lifted mankind and woman kind beyond anything humanity has ever done. It's changed from that to these sort of much more left-wing ideological oppressed versus

oppressor framework that is very destructive to the American credo. And what I worry about in Trump's efforts on the educational front, is that you hear about it one day and then the news cycle moves to something the next day. This needs to be a concerted effort on the part of the Trump administration and the part of, you know, well-meaning people, people like Bill Ackman, who have been all over this, to talk about how this is inimical to Western civilization, what's going on and how if we don't do something about it, you know, bad things will come in the future. And this is something that all of us need to be taking much more seriously. What a fascinating conversation, Julian. It has been on several occasions here. So I've really appreciated having you on.

It's Julian Epstein, former Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee. Thank you so much, Julian. Thanks, Will. Thanks for having me. I really enjoy the conversations as well. All right. Take care. There you goes, Julian Epstein.

All right, big long conversation here with you today hanging out on the Will Kane show. Appreciate you staying with us. Leave us a five-star review if you think it's so well-deserved. Drop into the comments. Subscribe. Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and we'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 app. It is time to take the quiz. It's five questions in less than five minutes. We ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at thequiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz.