Will Cain Country - The Inside Story Of How Speaker Johnson United The Republicans

Episode Date: October 27, 2023

Story #1: Will responds to viewer and listener feedback. Story #2: How the GOP finally settled on a Speaker. A conversation with Congressman Alex Mooney (R-WV). Story #3: Your best bets of the week and who will win the World Series with FOX Sports Betting Analyst Chris "The Bear" Fallica.   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

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. Viewer and listener feedback. on the squirrel hunt, taking off time from work for sports, and deep dives on Israel and Hamas. Two, how the GOP arrived at House Speaker Mike Johnson, a conversation with Congressman Alex Mooney.

Three, your best bets of the week with the bear, including the World Series. It's the Will Cain podcast on Fox News podcast. What's up and welcome to the weekend? to Friday. As always, I hope you will download rate and review this podcast wherever you get your audio entertainment at Apple, Spotify, or a Fox News podcast. You can watch the Will Kane podcast on YouTube and follow me on X at Will Kane. I've heard from all of you. You have a lot to say about sacrifices made for your fandom of sports, about hunting squirrels,

about learning. deeply about the history of the Middle East. We'll walk through that and then get you to Bear's best bets and the process behind eliminating four different House speakers before arriving at Congressman Mike Johnson. Story number one. Fenton Groff emails in from Ventnor City, New Jersey. Hey Will, another tremendous podcast. You have a gift for storytelling. However, I would not eat barbecue squirrel even after 10 days strung out on Captain Pollard's ill-fated whaler, the Essex. The squirrels here in southern New Jersey will jump right in your car window if you have food. By the way, Fenton love stories about stranded and ill-fated whaling vessels, including

the Essex. I go deep dive rabbit hole on that once every nine months. I love the story of the whaler stranded out in the tiny islands out in the Pacific and how they survive, I'm always drawn to shipwrecked and stranded stories. I can't tell you what the allure is. It's like not just the edge of survival, because to me it's different than being stranded in the mountains. There's something so lonely and mysterious about either floating on that vast Pacific Ocean or being stranded on some tiny island and scratching out survival, drawn to stories like the Essex. Fenton continues, believe it or not, check it out. Southern New Jersey is home of the daunted Jersey devil. He still haunts the pine barons here to this day. I know you can fit like seven

New Jersey's inside of the Republic of Texas, but Southern New Jersey is home of the rarest form of pygmy pines in the world. These pines average nine foot high and stretch as far as the eye can see in Wharton State Forest, which statistically is larger than Yosemite National Park. And yes, here in Southern New Jersey and just 20 miles northwest of Atlantic City. Of course, Fenton, I know about the pine barons. I watch the Sopranos. Fenton goes on. I mention it because we have a huge area where locals fish hunt and go four-wheeling.

I used camp and fish in this area, and I remember the same story you told, getting my Jeep Comanche four-by-four stuck awesome. Jeep Comanchee. I needed three trucks and a tow winch to get me out. My truck was stuck so badly that while we were pulling it out, the vehicle moved vertically before horizontally. Been there. Awesome. The takeaway for me was it's about spending time with the boys. Getting dirty, muddy, and flirting with disaster. We didn't catch any fish or game, but my friend had some deer jerky, which was awesome. I'm so happy for your rangers. I'll be rooting for them tonight. Big game seven. My Phillies are losing right now in game six. but I cannot see them winning two in Philly. He's talking about the Diamondbacks. Of course, since that time, we know that the Rangers won game seven and the Phillies lost game seven. So sadly, Fenton will not be able to look forward to a Rangers versus Phillies

World Series. God bless and keep up the great podcasts. Thank you so much, Mr. Fenton, Groff. Matthew Raymond emails in, Will. It was fun to hear your accent become more pronounced. during the recap on the Squirrel Camp Adventure. Lawyer Will took a backseat to Country Will for that segment. It was a fun listen, and those outdoor adventures are always worth it.

Respectfully, Matt, Fairbanks, Alaska. I dare say, Matt, you probably know something about the outdoors up there in Alaska. And I think that my accent is very malleable. Once I'm back home for a while, and by the way, I challenge South Carolina. I challenge Georgia. the East Texas accent as thick as it gets, not as refined and syrupy as South Carolina, but as strong as any in the nation. And I was surrounded by East Texans, and I think I adopt it very easily.

And this is from someone under the name Polaris on Instagram. Have another drink. For somebody who shoots a tiny animal who is a danger to no one and laughs about it, there's something wrong with this person. Why do I think of the war in the Mideast? Well, Polaris, if you draw a parallel between me shooting squirrels and war in the mid-east, I don't know that we're ever going to find a middle ground to meet. I'm not sure.

There was some negative feedback to the idea of hunting squirrels primarily on Instagram, and I don't know if that's because there's a general aversion to hunting. per se, or if it's an aversion to hunting the tiny squirrel. But the squirrel in the woods is not the squirrel in your backyard. I've made a joke several times on that squirrel hunt that. Why don't we just stay home with BB guns and shoot squirrels off my fence line as they run around my backyard? I'd see more.

I'd harvest more than I will in the woods of East Texas. But look, hunting is something that I think at this point in my life. I am comfortable saying is you do not get it unless you are an active participant in hunting. People that say, oh, the deer doesn't, you know, have a gun, give the deer a gun, give the bear a gun, and let's make it an even fight. A, don't understand the nature of man in our food chain. You can gussy it up. You can dress it up and feed lots and slaughterhouses and frozen prepackaging and a grocery store, but you're doing the same thing, arguably more inhumanely than going out into the

wild and finding an animal who is armed with all of his wits, not in a stockyard, chalkful of hormones, led into a mass slaughter. And I have no problem with that, because as the highest animal on the food chain pyramid, it is part of our nature, like every other animal's nature, to survive. And by going out into the wild and arming the game with the full arsenal of their senses and ability to survive, I would suggest, is the truest of humane efforts to source your protein. I mean, a wild squirrel is not the same thing as a backyard squirrel. They're hard.

I saw seven. We got one. One does not feed one person, much less a camp full of dudes. It's not easy. No hunting really is unless you're high-fenced and fed. And then you could argue that's not hunting. That's shooting. I'm talking about hunting.

And unless you do that, like guns, unless you understand guns, I hate making this argument because it's an ad hominem argument, but I don't think you have a position to opinionate on guns, quickly on guns. There was a horrific mass shooting in Maine. It looks like 18 dead by a shooter. They went to two different locations and injured something like 30 while killing 18. and there will immediately be a there already has been calls from President Joe Biden to institute an assault weapon ban. Now, I'm not going to have time to do it here today, but what I would offer you up is to go back into the archives of the Will Cain podcast.

In the same way that we've done a deep dive on Israel and Hamas, we have taken the time to discuss and debate great education about guns, what is or what is not definable about a quote unquote assault weapon what would various incremental changes like magazine limits actually accomplish may 27th the root of mass shootings how to fix our culture it's on youtube it's in the archives of the will cane podcast i promise you i think you will find it worthwhile back to your emails Hey Will, being a 50-plus-year Pittsburgh Pirates fan, I would, without hesitation, take time off of work to see my Bucco's play if they ever return to the World Series. I would expect no less from you.

Go Texas Rangers. Love listening to your insights and life stories. That's from Ezra Geist. This is in response to whether or not I should take off work to enjoy the Texas Rangers on Friday night and Saturday night. just a few short hours before Fox and Friends. Over on X, you guys have answered that question with the following. Christine, well, you really can't call in sick because they're going to know that you're not sick, but maybe Brian Kill Me could fill in you for one of those days.

Brian probably works enough. Angie Riley, yes, Will, we forgive you, take the boys and enjoy. Regina Strawn, it's okay. Life is too short. Joseph Labeeds says, Will, you can do both work and be at the game. Fox has always done right with the Super Bowl with cross-promotion

let Abby handle it from Arizona. Kennebrew, I say you host from your home in Allen, Texas. John Cannon, nope, suck it up, Buttercup. And then David, the veteran, says it's never too late to be a man and stay up and do the sports

and still make it to work on time. You should try being a soldier sometime. It'll be okay. You're young. In the end, David the vet, not just because you've challenged my masculinity, but because I do eventually have to show up to work, I am going to pull the all-nighter, both Friday and Saturday night. I mean, not an all-nighter. Into the game to the call time for Fox and Friends. I'm going to put two nights together of roughly four to five hours of sleep. and then Mike

Manugian says I have to challenge one detail of the number of championships you've had throughout your lifetime the Dallas Stars won the Stanley Cup in 1999 and had four more appearances you're right I stand corrected

and I should never have forgotten the Dallas Stars who have provided great amount of enjoyment to my three Rangers World Series three Dallas Cowboys Super Bowls two Texas Longhorns national championship appearances and two Dallas Mavericks NBA championship appearances.

I should have always remembered as well, the Dallas stars. And then Aaron Mays, you have been on fire lately with the podcasts. I've been listening for close to a year now, recommended by my father, and I love the balance of culture, politics, and sports. But since the breakout in Israel, you have moved to the next level. The Cliff's Notes version of the history of Israel and the Middle East has been enlightening to say the least. I look forward to the mornings.

I can tune in on my way to work and feel like I have a slightly better understanding of what is happening. I would love to dive deeper, but I'm not sure where to look or who to trust. It would be great if you would recommend some trusted books or historians that us curious listeners could look into. Thank you and keep up the great work, your neighbor to the northeast, Arkansas, Aaron Maines. Well, Aaron, I've mentioned it several times when we've done the deep dive on part one and part two of the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But Daryl Cooper, under the handle Martyr Made, has a podcast called Fear and Loathing in New Jerusalem. I've had several people, friends, text me, and email me, appreciating our history deep dives on this issue and who've already started to look into fear and loathing in New Jerusalem. It is incredible.

I've said it. I've tried to give it plenty of credit. I've also told you that there are some that will scream anti-Semite and that there are others who will scream. Zionist. This is the case when you want to truly understand an issue. You've got to put aside those that would scream to deprive you of understanding. As you'll see as we arrive at part three of our history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, understanding will not always provide you a clean, simple, or satisfactory conclusion. But it will help you understand how you arrived at that conclusion. And I think Daryl Cooper does a great job if you have the time, make sure you save

a couple of hours every week for the Will Kane podcast, but if you have the time to give something 30 hours, Cooper on his substack, the Martyr Made substack, also has a list of books out that he's read in support of his 30-hour podcast series. You have to pay for that substack, I believe it's $5 a month, but you will find there a list, a long list, of books that will supplement whatever it is you hear, here on the Wilcane podcast, there on the Martyr-made podcast, as you want to learn more about the Middle East in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We'll be right back with more of the Will Kane podcast.

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 podcast. 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. Story number two. What a week in Congress. Congressman Jamal Bowman has pled guilty to intentionally pulling a fire alarm. If you'll remember, he told you it was a panic.

It was accident in order to disrupt a vote on. the house floor now more extended videos come out he walks up to the door and he pulls down two signs that say if you pull the fire alarm wait 30 seconds the alarm will go off or if you push the door wait 30 seconds the alarm will go off he knew full well what he was doing he wasn't panicked he wasn't rushing he wasn't neglecting to give it full attention oh it had his full attention bowman takes those signs off throws him down on the ground and then calmly walks over and pulls the fire alarm. Here's my big takeaway. And in some way, some of you may go, yeah, something we already knew, Will. Bowman looked straight into your face and pure lied.

He lied to you. Oh, it's such an accident. Watch the video. This wasn't an accident. This wasn't a panic move. Whatever motivated him disrupt the vote, whatever was his intention, what I'm focused on is his intention of lying. When someone looks you directly in the eyes, this is how I feel about this and lies to you, I just feel like there's no greater act of disrespect. I think so little of you, either your intellect or your worthiness, that I won't even attempt to approximate the truth. I will fabricate something because you, Rube, will buy my lie or you're not worthy of the truth.

Meanwhile, Republicans in the House have gone through a process with four separate nominees after replacing Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House. They eventually land at Congressman Mike Johnson. Now, Speaker, Mike Johnson. I had Congressman Alex Mooney of West Virginia right here on the program to talk about central bank digital currencies, the movement, the push across the globe, away from cash towards a digital currency, monitored and controlled and regulated by a central bank. What are the risks? What is the fate of money and our future?

Plus the process of arriving at a House speaker. Here is Congressman Alex Mooney of West Virginia. So great to have you here on the Will Kane podcast. You know, I want to start our conversation today with something that I think Americans have become at least conversationally familiar, but probably not in full consideration. and that is central bank digital currencies, the movement not just towards a digital currency, but one that is administered and regulated and controlled by the United States government. And you've pushed back. You've pushed back on CBDCs. Tell us about that fight against digital currency. Well, Congress has never authorized President Biden to create this internet digital

currency. Those exist in the private market, and people are free to do that. But it's not a rule of Congress, what the government should do is actually back the U.S. dollar with something like gold. I actually have a bill to go back to the gold standard. But we've, the federal government in the 1970s under Nixon, detached our dollar from anything solid, like gold or silver or anything, and it's just full faith and credit United States of America. So now you have digital currency, which is basically the same thing, full faith and credit of the digital currency, no different than the dollar. So if my colleagues in Congress and the president were serious about maybe making the dollar the main currency, they could retie it to the gold. But they refuse to do that.

And they play all sorts of games with the U.S. dollar, with the interest rates and spending and infusion of cash and $33 trillion in debt were borrowing like crazy. Our government has been very irresponsible with the U.S. dollar, which has frankly created, I think, a very strong market for the digital currency. People view that as more reliable, more trustworthy, more free of regulations, more free of government control and spying, frankly. So the government sees competition, a very successful competition in the private market, and of course they want to shut it down or co-opt it. That's what this is all about, and I have a legislation to stop them from doing that. So, you know, when it comes to the gold standard, first of all, I don't think

you're going to find a great amount of disagreement. I think there's many interesting conversations to have, but, you know, something that has stood the test of time over thousands of years as a human store of value like gold, it's a way to reestablish real value instead of just the printing press of the federal government. But I don't know, not only do I feel like the government, your colleagues have moved beyond the gold standard, but in many ways the American public has as well. Before we move back to CBDCs, I mean, is there any real appetite? Is that a winnable fight for you to reestablish the gold standard? Well, that's what my bill does. But it doesn't, but it doesn't have to be the gold standard. I'm putting up the mark of what really is the

ideal. But I've talked with other congressmen about it. We could go to some sort of a basket of commodities, gold, silver, other metals. It doesn't have to be just gold, but tie it to something that is stable and that stops the games from being played where the dollar is just traded and infused and made up and borrowed against. So it doesn't have to be the gold per se. I set that as the ultimate standard that we should reach for. And remember, like, President Reagan was for it. Ronald Reagan was for it. President Trump, when he ran for office, supported it. Jack Kemp was the last congressman before me to put the bill in in the late 80s. So I think it is still something worth striving for. And in my business, you never know. You put legislation in, you fight for it.

It's got a lot of support. Sometimes these things surprise you in pass. But there's other options as well. Well, you use the term full faith and credit of the United States government. That's what backs the United States dollar. And at this point, I think there's a lot of doubt. You know, if not doubt about the value or the validity of the United States economy about the ability of the United States government through the Fed to manage the United States economy. That doesn't inspire full faith and credit. So we've sort of divorced ourselves. We understand that the dollar, that's what it represents, it represents the U.S. economy or the U.S. government, our promises, our faith. What's the great leap forward with a digital

version? Like, for anyone listening, first of all, most of us have kind of moved to cash lists. And I know you referenced private digital currencies like Bitcoin, but I just want to talk about it from a practical standpoint, from someone listening, like most of us are pretty cashless, I think, for most of our transactions. We're using credit cards. We're using digital debit cards when we check out. A lot of people aren't even taking cash these days, which I think is a problem. But a lot of stores won't take your cash to your point. So what's the big leap forward with it? It seems like if we're going to move cashless and we're already trading off the dollar, which is the full faith and credit of the United States, what's the great leap forward for the full faith and credit of the

United States government behind a digital currency instead of a paper currency? Well, I think the fear of the federal government doing it is, one, they'll play the same games they play with the U.S. dollar and, you know, infuse more of it into the economy and trade it and borrow it and generally just mess it up, and not to mention the security. We did pass legislation, the Anti-surveillance Act, to prevent them from doing a digital currency, but it's about control and also just the government watching you. They will see every trade. If they control the digital currency and you are using the government, federal government digital currency, they're going to know everything you do. Did you buy a gun,

for example? Do you want the federal government knowing if you bought a gun? I sure don't. Most Americans do not. Do you want the federal government knowing, you know, what your transactions are in general? No. Well, Congressman, is that a zero to 100 scale of acceleration? What I mean by that is the mechanism of the central bank digital currency and allowing the government to monitor our transactions, how different is that from where we live today? And I'm not endorsing where we live today, but I'm just trying to diagnose it. If you buy a gun through a credit card company that is regulated, doesn't the government, to some extent, have the ability to track my cell phone, whether or not I'm around the capital on January 6th, or my gun purse? purchases. I just, you know, outside of cash, guns are different because many of those are tracked and regulated anyway on purchases. But unless I'm using cash, doesn't the government have

access to all of that data anyway without a central bank digital currency? If it's a private credit card company, they're not supposed to keep that data. There's a question whether or not they do, and I don't know to the extent, I'm not sure anyone really knows the extent to which the government has data on these private transactions. which those banks are complicit with the federal government and willingly giving over that information. Yeah, I mean, we have the crime, the Anti-Terrorist Act, where any transaction over $10,000 is supposed to be cleared through the Department of Homeland Security, and banks spent a lot of time complying with that number, which is a lot lower due to interest rates.

I mean, it should be $60,000 if it was even tied to the interest rates when that was first passed. but banks spend a lot of time, you know, running that by the federal government. So that is run by them. Again, they're not supposed to keep track of it. But, you know, I don't think people have confidence that they're not keeping track of it somewhere. There's been a lot of, frankly, abuses from the CIA and FBI in this country towards people who they don't agree with their politics. So they do have a lot of access to the information. That's true.

But that's a problem. That's not a good thing. That's something, obviously, that I think Americans want to resist. not be not continue and i think it's frankly one of the reasons they went to the central bank digital currency on the private market so they could have those right have that have that confidentiality and and be able to use it you know anywhere in the world essentially and if we move to cbdc is the argument that it just gets easier for the government to track or that it's an endorsement of government tracking right yes absolutely they they i don't think there's anybody to stop them

from tracking they have to because they're they're overseeing the transaction there's no cash involved you know you mentioned cash there's no cash involved there's no private company involved that may or may not protect your privacy. At least there's a chance with a private company, they may protect your privacy to some capacity. But as the federal government's doing it, they have it all instantly, instantly. And the wokeism in the government now, even if you're transacting in energy, oil and gas, and coal, not just Second Amendment, but other things, I mean, who knows? I mean, what they're going to try to use it for. And it's just, and it's also has just not been authorized. It's not the role of federal government. This is something that's

that is private. It's not something that need to be involved with. Again, I just don't think they like the competition because they can't play the games. We've seen what they've done with our just, just our debt to keep it something, the $33 trillion in debt, the fill, faith, and credit of that dollar with that kind of debt is declining. And people are just looking for other options because it's been mismanaged by the federal government. So why in the world would we want to turn over, you know, would anybody want to turn that over to the federal government to manage it? So let's talk about that from a practicality so that we understand. You're talking with the government being able to instantaneously track a transaction. So would I presume then

I'd have an app on my phone. It would be like a federal government monetary app of some kind. Instead of using Visa or MasterCard for my point of purchase transactions, I would would just go to my phone app that is controlled by the federal government, and I'd swipe a digital currency that would deduct from my bank account? Yeah, I guess that's how it would work. I don't know what other options there would be. Yeah. Well, and that leads us to what everyone is concerned about, the movement of the government, not just to track your purchases, but then, you know, influence those purchases, and by extension, influence behavior. And everybody points to China. And there are governments.

The European Union is moving to a, and they say it's going to be a partner with cash, but a central bank digital currency. Australia is moving that way. And of course, China sort of leads the way. And China has a social credit system, which is partnered up with that digital currency. So from what I understand, if I jaywalk in China, I've broken the law, I'm subject to a fine, and that fine can almost directly come or does directly come right out of my bank account. So that's one example of influencing my behavior, but they could also do it in any other ways they see me violating government policy.

Oh, yeah. I mean, that's a whole separate thing. Once they track it, what are they going to do is the question, you know, their fines that could come out, the taxes could come out of there. And then, of course, you know, what China is doing with this social contract. And, you know, where are you, like if you drive an electric car, for example, which the government may want to promote electric cars, maybe you get a bonus, which means if you drive a traditional gas car, you're getting penalized for that because it's the behavior the government wants to push. And, you know, like I say, the wokeism, the, frankly, the environmental extremism, goes well beyond just the issue of Second Amendment rights. It goes to everything they're going to push. I mean, could go to even where you shop. You know, I don't, it's, it's scary to think of the, that there's what the limits may not be

as to what the government will do with the social contract and social engineering on the digital That's it. That's the effect of a potential effect of a central bank digital currency on a micro level, on a personal level. Let's go back to that macro level where you talked about the debt. Forgive my ignorance. So when the Fed prints money, you know, puts more, quote unquote, dollars into the economy. And thus eventually at some point, the point at which we've now arrived, inspires inflation. I don't know. Tell me, tell me if. Does the Fed actually fire up a printing press? Does it actually shove more dollars into the economy? Or do they sort of just like this, do we already have a central bank digital currency? Do they just put more zeros on the ledger and say, here's how much money is spendable out there? I'm trying to figure out the great leap forward from the macro perspective of where we are now versus what they could do with a central bank digital currency. Yeah, I mean, they don't actually physically print the dollars.

They just create it on the Internet. Right. And a lot of it is owed then to other countries. Obviously, they're barring from China and other countries that are not our allies, frankly. And for now, it's actually a little surprising to me, to be perfectly honest, that other countries still keep buying our debt that is so high and they're paying for it. I thought at some point they might stop. Eventually they will.

I mean, eventually the debt in our country could be so great that the interest rates consume all the money coming into our country. We're not careful. That's where we're going. we would default on everything. But they keep buying our debt. Other countries keep buying it. That's most of it. The games they play, gosh, it's just so many,

how they infuse it and borrow from themselves. I mean, they're doing anything to try to control the economy and infuse cash from time to time. And, of course, they adjust the entrance race as well. And it's not hard for, you know, your viewers to understand. The more money that is invented or borrowed and more spending that is done, obviously inflation rates go up. It's not hard to figure out when you put more money in the pot,

the money that's there is worth less. And that's why we have about 17% interest rate increase since President Biden took office. So for someone who's saved $100,000 in retirement, it's now worth $83,000. That's not fair. It's sort of like legally stealing money from people. And they know what they're doing when they do this. They know what they're doing when they infuse money into the economy and borrow more. They know they're devaluing the dollar that you have, that you save that you live off on. People on fixed incomes are getting hit. And they know they're doing that. And in their mind, it's transfer of wealth. And that's what they want. They want to transfer the wealth. But from the poorest to the wealthiest, because inflation hits the poorest. It's an undemocratic tax.

It's a non-voted on tax. Yeah. Congressman, I want to ask you about this. You know, at the time you and I are speaking, the Republicans have nominated Congressman, Mike Johnson for House Speaker. He will go for a vote on the House floor. Do you expect him to be elected the next Speaker of the House? I actually do. And you've been through, I know, maybe surprising, right? And maybe at this point, we're not going to believe it until we see it. But I was in the meeting last night that went until 11 p.m. And not one Republican member of the House Conference voted against him yesterday. Three voted present. All three of them this morning have switched to a yes on him. So at the moment, literally every Republican

member of Congress supports him. Let me talk about ask you about why that is. What is different about Mike Johnson? Actually, I want to ask you, and I know that these are your colleagues, and I feel like so much of what we've witnessed over the last couple of weeks, which is the longest we've gone, I believe since the 1800s without a House speaker. I believe, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on this, I believe a lot of it is about personality, and it's become personal for so many, as much as it is ideological. But so then what makes Mike Johnson, and he got, by the way, President Trump's endorsement, what makes him different than, say, Tom Emmer?

Tom Emmer, who yesterday, as we're talking, did not. He withdrew after it was clear it was not going to become the next House Speaker. Yeah, it's all the above. Honestly, it's personal. As you mentioned, it's political. Someone who can make sure we maintain the majority and expand the majority. You've got to go out there and make sure you can get your folks reelected. policy, a conservative. And that's what, that's the mix you're looking for. I'm a conservative

Republican. I'm in the Freedom Caucus. There are some moderate Republicans who sadly didn't want Jim Jordan. I was a huge fan of Jim Jordan. I think Jim Jordan would have been a great speaker. I backed Jim Jordan 100%. But 20 or 25 folks, I just didn't want him. And I think it was more because he was viewed as too conservative for them. And that's sad. Was that, was that an issue of policy? Was it an issue of ideology? Or was it sort of back to the personal side? There's clearly a lot of people that were upset with the move from Congressman Matt Gates, and that would have been seen as giving him a victory if Jim Jordan became House Speaker, and they didn't want to give that victory. I'm asking you this. And they wanted to deny that victory

to Congressman Gates. Well, no, I'll just tell you what people said. So when Jim Jordan got up and he'd been voted no longer to be our nominee, so he was leaving, he said, everyone who voted against me, the 25 people who voted against him kept telling him that it was not personal. although Jim Jordan said it sure feels personal when they're not voting for you. But I'll take people at the word. It wasn't personal. I think he's viewed rightly as a conservative firebrand who's a fighter, much like Trump. And there are some who didn't want that. They didn't want the Speaker of the House to be that out front as a conservative fighter. Now, I vaguely disagree with that. I'm just telling you what I saw from them. But it wasn't personal. Everybody likes Jim Jordan. I don't know one person who hasn't personally very much in mind.

Myron, like Jim Jordan. He's super popular in this country, probably the most popular Republican member of Congress, not even a close second, in my opinion, because what he's done is judiciary chairman, being a strong leader for many years in Congress. But I think it was partially that, that he was in some people's minds too conservative. And also, you know, Steve Scalice didn't get it either. So McCarthy was removed by eight people. Then Steve Scalise, he actually withdrew, so we never did see a floor vote on that. But he, withdrew because he perceived he didn't have the support. So I think it's true that some people may have also felt, well, now we're going to, you know, put in this guy who's really

conservative when they didn't give us the guys we wanted. So it was a little bit of that back and forth. And now we're on our fifth try. So I think it's gone back. It's worth enough now. Scalise, Jordan, Emmer. Amher? Am I right? Now Johnson is the next. If you count McCarthy, McCarthy, Scalice, Jordan, Emmer. McCarthy, Scalice, Jordan, Emmer. So we're on five. I think there's been enough back and forth that everyone said okay now I'll tell you Mike Johnson I know him he was elected two years after me

he used to run the Republican Study Committee he's a conservative man so on the policy when it comes to spending and getting like things we were talking about getting spending under control and raining in the government that wants to control us and spy on us and and play games with the economy Mike Johnson's

conservative he's as conservative as Jim Jordan he is I don't think there's a much difference on policy between Mike Johnson, Jim Jordan, me, Donald Trump, and he's a conservative man. So, and most, look, most Republican members of Congress are conservative. When Mike Johnson ran the Republican Study Committee, that's the majority of Congress is in that, like 150 members out of 220 are in the Republican Study Committee, which is a conservative group. And so we wanted a conservative, and folks who are less conservative, I think, felt he was, I don't know,

low-key enough, if we, if you, you know, lack of a better word, not as abrasive, not. as out front as a Jim Jordan and thought, well, you know, he's fine. So all the New York Republicans voted for him, for example, the others who we didn't vote for Jim Jordan on the House floor, all voted for him. And I think also, like you said, it's the fifth time, right? So we can keep doing this. We've gone through four. And we're going to go through four more. And then on November 17th, we have a government shutdown because we haven't passed our spending bills like we should have. So we can't keep doing this. We all, look, we're big boys and girls. We understand we can't keep doing this. We had to pick someone.

So that's going to be my last question for you. It's like if Congressman Johnson was sort of the right guy, it seems to be the right guy to get everybody's votes, why isn't he the first guy that was nominated? But from what I hear, he's the right guy. But it also, the process required that both sides, the very conservative and the moderate Republicans, sort of try to get their maximalist position before coming to this compromise. Is that a fair characterization before finding this Goldilocks zone? Take that and combine it with exhaustion and the necessity of a House Speaker?

Yeah, we had to find someone that no one had a personal or political objection to, who was, you know, likable and conservative. And I would say, like, I guess for, you know, when McCarthy was removed, which I did not support, of course, I did not support that move, but it happened. Then the next person you look at is a majority leader. If you're sort of going in line in order, you have a majority leader who's elected as the number two guy. They had the head of their majority party. So you would look to Steve Scalice. Most of the supporters of McCarthy and the establishment, if you will, would look to Steve Scalice next.

He withdrew. So Jim Jordan, you know, got the votes in conference, but they wouldn't vote for him on the floor. So you went to the next person in line, which was Tom Emmer, who's the whip, and he withdrew yesterday. So you went through all three leaders. McCarthy, Kevin McCarthy, Steve Scalese, Tom Emmer. You went through everyone in leadership. They're out. So at this point, you had to go to someone, not in leadership, not in those leadership positions. So it was jump ball. I was actually here when this happened, gosh, eight years ago, when John Boehner stepped down to Speaker of the House. I was in the room.

Boehner resigned, said he was going to resign. McCarthy was supposed to shortly after become Speaker. He withdrew, if you may recall, he withdrew as a Speaker candidate. And we were in the same position. And we all looked around like, who's going to jump in there now? and we didn't really have a candidate. Finally, we also looked at Paul Ryan, who had been the vice presidential nominee, and everyone loved Paul Ryan.

I mean, what's not to love about Paul Ryan? He's a great man, good conservative, was very politically savvy, but he didn't want to do it. So he said no, and we spent a couple of weeks not having a speaker candidate, and then Paul Ryan finally said, yeah, I'll do it, and we put him in there. So we had someone to look at it. But there wasn't a Paul Ryan sitting around when McCarthy was removed his speaker. There wasn't someone who we all could automatically go to a sort of a now, natural person. We had to go through and look at eight people ran, different people kept

running. And look, it's a democratic process. Yeah, I don't think it's as embarrassing as everyone wants to believe. And hopefully, hopefully it's produced a, we'll see, we'll find out with the House, with the floor votes, but hopefully it's produced a House speaker that cannot only bring the Republican caucus together and govern, but in a more healthy representative way of the American people. Congressman Mooney, thanks for talking about Central Bank Digital Currencies in the House Speaker Vote with us today. I appreciate your time. Anytime.

There you go. I hope you enjoyed that conversation with Congressman Alex Mooney. We're going to step aside here for a moment. Stay tuned. Long-bendy Twizzlers candy keeps the fun going. Keep the fun going. fun going. And now, story number three.

Chris Felica is the bear. Every week he publishes a podcast. Bears' bets, Bears' best bets at Fox Sports Podcasts, taking you through some of your best gambling picks on sports for the weekend. I had Bear here on the Will Kane podcast to talk not only about college and professional football. But since it's the World Series, who does he pick? The Arizona Diamondbacks or the Texas Rangers. Here is the bear. And we're back this week with the host of Bear Betts at Fox Sports podcast. Chris Felica, great to see you again, except that right before we went on air, I asked

you about the World Series. And you said, look, anything could happen. That's kind of a sports cop out. But you weren't coping out. You literally meant, you know, in a way, I guess you're saying Diamondback sweep, Ranger sweep, go seven, literally there's this hard to be down. But if I pressed you, you're taking Arizona? I would take Arizona if you pressed me because I think what we've seen in the playoffs so far is that it's a completely random situation where, I mean, this Arizona team needed the Cubs to lose 15 to 22 down the stretch in order to make the play. They needed a dropped fly ball basically for the Cubs to lose a game that ultimately wound up being the difference.

Cubs lost four extraining games. in the final month of the year that is they win any one of those. Arizona's not even here. So you're making the argument. Milwaukee had them down three nothing twice, and then they went out and they steamroll the Dodgers and they were down three, two, and won twice in Philly. I think they do have, the biggest advantage, I think they do have, however. I know that the Montgomery's pitch great for the Rangers, and I know Valdi has been

fantastic in the playoff, but I do think that the one, two, of Galen and Merrill Kelly ultimately could be the difference and that I think their starting rotation might be a little bit deeper. If you look at Brandon Fott, he kind of was like an under the radar kind of like Dark Horse MVP of that series with the way, last night,

the way his balls were moving in games. He didn't have a great rookie season, but I think in the postseason, the way he's pitched is really given them an added starter that they might have needed. So, hey, look, I'm not, the price is just a little too high. I could not lay 175 or whatever with the range.

I think I would just have to take the underdog here. Yeah, Rangers are favored. I would have two responses. When it comes to actual baseball analysis, I think Brandon Fott is exactly where I would focus. I'm really comfortable with the Rangers starting pitchers, the top two against the Diamondbacks top two. I'm a Rangers fan, of course.

It's that third, and I have no idea what I get from Max Scherzer. No idea. In fact, if I have to pick what I get from Max Scherzer, it's not going to be great. versus it's been really good from thought. But the better non-baseball analysis that you made is actually the ones hardest for me to ignore. Like, when I was watching last night,

Phillies and Diamondbacks, I was rooting for the Diamondbacks because I just thought I think they're the easier team to beat than the Phillies as a Rangers fan. But what gives me pause is, well, but the Diamondbacks weren't supposed to be in the playoffs, weren't supposed to beat the Brewers, weren't supposed to beat the Dodgers,

weren't supposed to be the Phillies. So what's it matter if the Rangers are the better team, the Diamondbacks keep doing what they're not supposed to do. So that non-baseball analysis actually scares me for the World Series. It's so funny you say that because I had World Series futures on the Braves and the Dodgers. And here I was thinking, oh, this is great. The Diamondbacks beat Milwaukee. I didn't want to have to face Burns and Peralta. Those good. But Arizona coming in, now Dodgers will beat the Diamondbacks and didn't happen. So it reminds me a little bit too. remember the nationals a few years ago where they were just an underdog and all these

series despite having that great rotation and they just steam roll through everybody too so at some sometime that's what when baseball expanded the postseason they opened themselves up to kind of this high variance underdog type deal with best of three series best to five series get letting six teams in the playoff now and here we are where you got the the six seed in the national league versus the five seed in the american league it It'll be, look, baseball diehards, I think, are going to watch. I'll watch, of course, because I'm a baseball purist and love the sport. But if you're looking for, like, the best teams to win this, like, I think a lot of people are,

the only you kind of, the dies cast now. You've gone past the point of no return. I'll give you this. I hate the whole playoffs don't represent baseball argument. I don't like that. I'm not saying you, but what it does is it shows, I think, the value of a team, or the way to build a team to win in the playoffs. is you need one or two stud pitchers, and you need one of the best managers, quite honestly. A guy that knows how to put it together in a shorter series to win a game or two, win an inning or two

to put runs on the board. And I think that. Bruce Bochy has that. The Texas Rangers have Bruce Bochy. Leaving Evaldi in the other night, but go get them. Right. And I love seeing a manager like that still have a place in today's game and succeed because we've seen so many of these teams.

And look, there's a place for analytics and statistical analysis and all in this sport. But there's so many times where up, pulled, up, four, four innings, oh, 80, up, pulled. And Bochee, there's still a place for that kind of gut instinct, baseball, been down this road, going to take a chance here. I like, I'm, I'm sorry. It's better. These two teams, these two teams steal bases. It's better to have a human being doing something than have this sport run by computers.

Of course, it also plays into my favor. because my team's in the World Series. I want to ask you about a couple of football games really quickly. Let's start with college football. One for me that has the most outside interest, no personal investment. It remains for me the PAC 12. It's number 18, Oregon versus number 13, Utah. You know, Oregon, Washington a couple weeks ago was up there with Texas OU for me

as like the best games of the season where the loser, I don't think less of. of course, again, my team lost, so I acknowledge my bias, and I don't think less of the horns, at least when they have their starting quarterback. So, but Utah's tough. And Utah's the higher seed here. What do you think with Oregon, Utah? Yeah, I'm surprised that this line is six and a half. I think, and I'm wondering if that's kind of like maybe the market was kind of hanging on the fact that maybe Keithy would play this week, maybe Camerizing would play this week. And now that Kyle Wenningham was basically said, no, they're done for the year.

they're out. Maybe the market reaction has been like, okay, now they're definitely out. And maybe the fact that Utah just pulled the upset at SC, can they come back and beat a team like Oregon? But at home, they are a different animal. And yes, we saw the Oregon State defense in Corvallis kind of just manhandle the Utah offense. Oregon's defense is really, really good. But can it travel? We're going to get Bo Nix on the road again. What type of decisions will he make? I think Oregon's the better team. I would absolutely be on board here for taking Utah plus the points. I'm glad you said what you did, though, about Texas and about Oregon, because I came out of both of those games, the Red River game and the Oregon Washington game, thinking that if those two teams rematched in the Big 12 and the Pac-12 title game, I would really like Texas and I really would like Oregon.

Same. And I don't feel that way about Penn State, Ohio State. So, I mean, these games, I mean, they're just quality teams that play good football. But it's different. Things have changed for Texas. That's the second game I want to talk to you about. That's Texas, BYU is not good. Texas is favored by 17.5. But they don't have quenewers. And I don't know how long they won't have quenewers. I mean, it could be several weeks. And they're starting a guy Malik Murphy who, I mean, we just don't know much about Malik. All we know is what we hear from coaches and what we see in the orange and white game in the spring. And so I have no idea. I mean, hand the ball off. you know, 40 times in the game. I don't know what happens here, but I'm going to tell you as a Texas fan, 17 and a half seems like too much. Does it? See, I feel pretty good

about Blake Murphy going in there and playing quarterback. I think the coaches feel pretty good about it. I think with the running game that they have, BYU is a team. They've gone on the road. I mean, they lost my four touchdowns at TCU a couple of weeks ago, gave up over 40 points. If TCU is

doing that, you know, holding you to, I think it was 4411, I think actually was the final. I mean, if the CCU defense is able to shut you down like that, I would have to think that Texas coming off that close call last week. I mean, and there were reasons to, I mean, to kind of expect that idle week coming off of the Oklahoma loss, going against Dana, who would love to have been Houston Stadium filled with Longhorn's fans. I mean, I mean, there was reason to think that that game could be a little bit tricky. But I think, I think the result of that game along with now, maybe some people doubting, is Texas?

that good? Can Murphy do the job? Will we see Arch Manning? Which I don't think we will. All season? Do you think this season we won't see Arch Manning? I think we might see him just a little bit. But I don't think he's going to see any serious game action. I think they're going to ride Murphy for the real, for the actual competitive parts of the game. And I think maybe they get Arch's feet with a little bit at some point if the games get out of reach. But, I mean, the blessing for Texas is it happened now. with a point in the season where even if Queen's out

three or four weeks, they can survive this. As long as they get him back by the Big 12 championship game, they'll be okay. It's weird too, like there are people out there throwing it that maybe this is the last time we've seen Quinn you or maybe he'll just sit out the rest of the year. I don't think that's

going to happen. I think he will be back probably with three, four weeks stops. Well, this will be the most interesting story of the college football offseason if what you predict is true. If Malik Murphy plays well. I mean, as a Texas fan, Texas fan base, everybody's going to always want to see Arch Manning, but you can't keep both those quarterbacks. So one of them will hit the transfer portal. And it will be a question of whether or not you keep the guy who played well in place

of Quinn Ewers in this scenario, in this hypothetical, or the guy that's the all-world recruit with the famous last name. I don't know what you do. I think it has to be Murphy. And it's interesting because... It has to be Murphy? So you let Arch hit the portal? if Murphy goes out and proves over the next month or so however long he's playing that he can be the guy and lives up to the hype with the arm that arm strength that he has I think it's hard to say yeah you know we know you went out and did it and proved it against Big 12 competition but you know what

we're going to let Arch who really hasn't played and he was I think Sark and those guys would just there's going to be a competition and we're going to go to the spring and we'll see who it is but I would think they would feel really good about, I mean, they're going to get any quarterback recruit they want. I mean, yeah, maybe it's not an Arch Manning type name recruit, but they'll sign someone great to.

I don't know if Arch would transfer. I mean, he's that whatever's going on with Arch and the Manning family is different than your typical college football player. So I don't know that he would transfer, but there's only like, I think there's only one, if Arch red shirts this year successfully, I guess there'd be two years of eligibility difference between Malik and Arch. And then Malik could leave early as well.

So Arch would have his window still behind Malik, but it's just not the way it's done in college football. You transfer ASAP. It's interesting because Quinn Ewer's was kind of involved in a little bit of a situation where he left Ohio State, and then Ohio State, they had a little bit of a shorter. Then they had that, Dominic, Gereola's son, Kim Dillon Raeula, committed to Ohio State.

And he was committed for a while. And all these quarterbacks kept like, I'm not going to consider Ohio State. now and then Raola decommitted and he wanted to go into Georgia's Ohio State kind of was left naked a little bit as he was transferred which they weren't expecting. They're expecting Ralea to come in and be able to be their guy. He's not there now. I think they were kind of thinking Devin Brown could like be the guy. He's now hurt and now they're kind of left with McCord who I think he's I mean yeah he went to Notre Dame and won and made some big

throws to Marvin Harrison but I still don't feel like Ohio State trusts Kyle McCord when push comes to shove. Okay let's move to pro football probably the biggest game on everyone's radar would be the Bengals against the Niners. It's Niners minus six and a half. I don't know. Everybody, the roller coaster on Brock Purdy has ridden all the way to the top and all the way to the bottom. And the Bengals still just kind of kind of getting there. Joe Burrow kind of getting there, but definitely not who they were when they went to the Super Bowl. No. No. And the Bengals have actually seen some action. This number is down to the five and a half pretty much across the board now.

And it wasn't like pretty played, the first three quarters, he played fine, but he did have a couple of picks late. And obviously the play right before halftime, Bradison wrestled the ball away from Ward was ultimately the difference in the game. I like the 49ers here. I mean, they're kind of looking in the mirror right now and just questioning, like, Fred Warner had the quote about needing to win these grimy types of games. And I think that's going to be a challenge, their defense and the defensive line,

the linebacker core against. against an offensive line, which, quite frankly, hasn't been really good. Burrow with the week off, obviously, he continues to get healthier, but they still haven't been great. They probably should have lost to Seattle. Seattle, I think, had like six plays inside the 10-yard line in, like, the final four minutes and couldn't score. Like, if we were like buy-sell hold on the Bengals right now, I'd still be holding because I'm not sure that they're going to break through, and I'm not sure that they're going to break through, and I'm not sure they're the team that they have been in recent years.

I think defensively they have some problems. And I think certainly on the offensive line, they have some problems. And I think this might be a week where with a little bit of a public side being a trendy underdog with the Bengals, it might be a good opportunity to buy low on the 49ers coming. Look, they've lost consecutive regular season game after winning 15 straight regular season games. So they don't lose three in a row. I doubt it. So I would, you know, normally I like playing an underdog, but I'll lay the points here

with the un-in-hiner's. We should start doing that, buy sell, hold, or some bit. We're going to start doing a bit together, bear. Well, let's start right now. Cowboys. Cowboys Rams in one of the rare one o'clock windows for the Cowboys, which means I'll be watching them on an airplane. Amazing modern technology that I can do so.

It makes me sad, but it also makes me like, I can't believe I get to watch a football game on an airplane of my choice, not just the one they give me. I can stream whatever I choose. So, Cowboys. I mean, by the way, Rams, I don't even know if I can get to hold. Like, I don't, I mean, I know they're not a full-on sell, but they're not, they're definitely not a buy in my mind. So maybe they're a low hold.

I see your face. Cowboys, I actually don't know on Cowboys. I think it's a hold on Cowboys. I'm a hold on the Rams just because the rest of the NFC is so bad. And with Cup and Nakua and Stafford, they're capable of scoring points on anybody. but I'm a buy on Dallas. I actually played them last week to win the NFC East. I mean, I think if you look at the...

Really? Over Philly. Yeah, I think if you look at the Eagle schedule coming up, it's very, very difficult what they have. I mean, and now it hurts is hurt. They got the win over Miami, and you got the game in Washington where it's a rivalry game and who the heck knows what's going to happen.

But after that, you got Dallas, go to Kansas City, you got Buffalo, maybe they get some of their situation scored away by then. You got the Niners, got Dallas again, and then you got Seattle. Like that is a really difficult stretch for the Eagles. And if Hertz isn't 100%, like this is an opportunity for Dallas to maybe make up a game or two and maybe you go into December either tied or in the lead, and then you never really know what happens. Obviously Dallas's schedule tightens up at the end of the, gets a little bit tougher at the end

the year. But I think right now from a betting standpoint, you might be in a situation where you bet Dallas to win the division right now. They become maybe the favorite or co-favor and maybe you can get a little bit of price on the Eagles and maybe you play the Eagles back in December and guarantee your profit. But I'm a I like it. I'm a buy on Dallas right now. I think this is a very good team. I think defensively they are really good. And I think moving forward it's going to be a question to turn them all over. And it seems like they've been a little bit more risk averse lately and eliminating some of these tournaments. So we'll see what McCarthy and Shottie have planned for that offense.

But I'm a believer in Dallas. All right. Chris Felica, the bear. Always fun to talk to you, man. We'll come up with that. We'll come up with that. I don't know if we'll do buy sellhold, but we'll come up with that bit for next week. It's a little something every week, exactly.

All right, man. Good to see you. Thank you. There you go. I hope you enjoyed that conversation with Chris Felica. Remember, go check out the podcast. Bear Betts at Fox Sports. podcast. All right, that's going to do it for me today. I will see you again on Monday.

Listen to ad-free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcasts. And Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad-free on the Amazon Music Act. 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. you for taking the quiz.