Will Cain Country - Thomas Massie LOST… But Did He Just Launch A 2028 Run? (ft. Rep. Brandon Gill)

Episode Date: May 20, 2026

As primaries across the nation kick into high gear, one of President Donald Trump’s biggest Republican opponents has lost a critical election; and he might not be last to suffer that fate. Congressman Brandon Gill (R-TX) joins Will to unpack what brought Congressman Thomas Massie’s 14-year tenure to an end, before weighing in on President Trump’s last minute endorsement of Attorney General Ken Paxton in the race for Texas senate.Plus, Will and The Crew discuss the potential of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as a Supreme Court Justice, the Late Show’s steady decline as Colbert's stewardship comes to an end, and their own personal struggles (and successes) with maintaining a healthy weight.Subscribe to ‘Will Cain Country’ on YouTube here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch Will Cain Country!⁠⁠⁠Follow ‘Will Cain Country’ on X (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), Instagram (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), TikTok (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), and Facebook (⁠⁠⁠@WillCainNews)Follow Will on X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WillCain⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Behind every F-35 jet is a Canadian company, horizontal tails built in Winnipeg, engine sensors from Ottawa, and stealth composite panels crafted in Loonenburg to name just a few. Thanks to thousands of skilled Canadian workers, the F-35 aircraft is delivering unmatched capabilities for 20 allied nations around the world, and will generate more than $15.5 billion in industrial value for Canada. This ad is sponsored by the F-35 partner team, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and RTX. Learn more at www.f35.com slash Canada.

Massey, Paxton, Dooley, Politics, midterms, primaries, and fraud. It's one of the biggest stars in Congress. Congressman Branding Guild. It is Wilcane Country. Streaming live with the Wilcane Country YouTube channel, the Wilcane Facebook page. Here for you to follow at Spotify or on Apple. Politics, results, tumbling in, new names, new potential, new shakeup in Washington, D.C. Yesterday, President Donald Trump endorsed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for Senate, over-incumbent Senator John Corny.

Meanwhile, in Georgia, former head football coach at the University of Tennessee, son of former head football coach at the University of Georgia. Derek Dooley has earned himself a spot in a runoff for the Senate seat challenging John Ossoff in Georgia. And finally, in Kentucky, Congressman Thomas Massey, who has made himself the... Libertarian face of resistance against President Donald Trump lost his primary battle against Ed Gowleron, former Navy SEAL, taking Thomas Massey off the map when it comes to elected office, to politics. President Donald Trump made Thomas Massey one of his cause du jours. He campaigned. He spoke out. He fought. in the same way Thomas Massey fought against President Trump. He fought against Thomas Massey.

And now Thomas Massey is no more in the race to retain his seat in Congress. We're going to break all this down momentarily with Texas Congressman Brandon Gill, who is leading up a task force on fraud as part of the House Oversight Committee and has made himself quite the up-and-coming star by speaking bluntly and truthfully when it comes to culture, immigration, and assimilation. And we're joined now by Texas Congressman Brandon Gill. Congressman, good to see you again. Yeah, thanks for happening, me, well. Let's run through a few of these political races together, if you wouldn't mind, and just give me what you think has happened.

Let's start with the one that is probably at the top of the news cycle, not as Thomas Massey losing his primary, obviously standing against President Donald Trump. contingent at large in Congress and ultimately earning the ire of President Trump. He's out. He lost, Ed Gowleron. That's right. And, you know, I think my views on this race are quite similar to what the vice president has expressed, which is to say that there are a lot of areas where I agree with Thomas Massey on, especially on fiscal issues. But the reality is that, especially whenever you have a tight majority right now, politics is a team sport. And for us to be able to get legislation across the finish line.

To be able to do the things that we ran on last cycle, there are times whenever you need every Republican to stick together. For instance, whenever we pass the one big beautiful bill, you know, the working families tax cut that had tax cuts, border security, defunding half of the Green New Deal, welfare reform. You know, I think that's one where he wasn't with us on that.

And that was a key, I think a really key time for Republicans. So listen, you can, there are times whenever you can speak the party. But at the end of the day, there are times whenever we've got to stick together. And, you know, I think he wasn't with us on some key, key issues when we needed him. Congress Massey, I would never rob him of the complete characterization that he is a principled man. He has certain beliefs and he holds firmly to those beliefs. It does seem to be, though, Congressman Gill, that he falls into the same trap that a lot of

people fall into, whether or not they are characterized as never Trump or libertarian. And there doesn't seem to be a moderate ground. There doesn't seem to be any breaks on the train. Once you kind of cast your position as somehow an opposition to Donald Trump, you keep going and you're in opposition with everything when it comes to President Trump. And that seems to be what happened with Congressman Massey. I do think he is a principled person, and I agree with you on some issues I share agreement. But he just kept going. He had no breaks. It was in the end indistinguishable from a Democrat. I mean, you can't vote against the Republican Party over and over and over again on key

issues whenever we need him and then expect the party to be behind you. You know, there comes a point in politics whenever it's shirts and skins. It's the reds versus the blues. And that's just how this works. So if you want your party to support you, which includes the majority of, you know, the American people, then you've got to actually be with them when it counts. And he wasn't any, you know, at the end of the day, we need people in office, I think in Congress who are willing to fight for the president, too. We need people who recognize that the mandate that we were given is one that is the Trump agenda, that is deportations, that is cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. We need everybody

on board with that. And if you're a Republican and you're not going to be on board with the Trump agenda, then you're probably not going to be here very long. I mean, the, the, President Trump, and we saw this last night, it's something we've always known, is the most powerful political force in modern American history, if not all of American history. And we need Republicans who are going to stick with him. You know, I understand that you're speaking a reality. But that reality is going to strike a lot of people as, well, quite honestly, something that they hate about politics. And that is the idea that it is shirts and skins, that it is partisan, that it is a team sport. I think that if you ask most Americans what they would say they want from someone is somebody that votes their conscience,

who isn't nakedly partisan, who's willing to stand on a vote that they believe is right and accurate. Are you and I here both making the argument against the very thing that we think we hear from a lot of Americans? Well, I think a lot of Americans would like to see that. And you can start with the Democrat Party, whenever the Republicans put forward common sense pieces of legislation, whether it's on border security or getting men out of women's rights. restrooms, 100% of Democrats will vote against us, whether that's in their political interests or whether those bills are popular or not. You see the same opposition from Democrats, for instance, with the Save America Act, a bill that would stop illegal aliens from voting in American elections.

Every Democrat will oppose that legislation. So I'd love to see them put country over politics and work with Republicans so that we can get good bills to move forward. You know, we saw that with the working families tax cut. This is a phenomenal piece of legislation. Sure, there are things you can criticize about it, like you can criticize anything, any bill that we pass. We didn't get any Democrat support for that. And whenever you don't get any Democrat support for it, you need Republicans to be on board. So is it a little bit fight fire with fire? If they're going to play partisan teamsmanship, then Republicans are going to need to play partisan teamsmanship? Yeah, I certainly think that that's a big part of it. I mean, if you actually, I mean,

ask yourself, what do you want Congress to get done? Do you want Congress to secure the border? Do you want Congress to get boys out of girls' sports? And I think the answer for most Americans is yes, and if you want those things, then you need Republicans who are going to be on board whenever legislation related to those issues comes before Congress. And if they're not, then they're kind of useless. Then you need to get a new Republican. And that occasionally happens, unfortunately. But whenever you're in a political scenario where Democrats hate the president, you need Republicans who are willing to punch back politically. Yeah, I think I think I would characterize my position on this as I want you to vote your conscience and I want you to have independent thought.

I also don't want you to let perfect to be the enemy of the good. And ultimately, you have to win, meaning you're going to have to have the votes in order. You have to win elections and then you're going to have to win votes in order to get something passed. something will often be a compromise and it will be more good than it is perfect. And threading that needle seems to be the art of politics. And Massey had left behind the art and only managed to accomplish perhaps stage one of that calculus and politics. That's right. I mean, I can look at probably just about any, any bill that I voted on in the House and tell you something in it that I disagree with. That happens with any piece of legislation. And remember,

If you look at the Republican side, most of, most good bills are going to be done on party lines because Democrats aren't going to join us. We've got an ideologically diverse Republican conference from sort of the libertarians to the neoconservatives to the paleo conservatives and the Reaganite fusionists and everybody in between. So to coalesce all of those different sort of ideological factions, it is quite difficult and it's going to mean you don't get 100% of what you want, most likely, in most bills. But at the end of the day, our job is to win. We have a majority in the house, and if you want to win, you gotta play as a team. And that doesn't mean that you can't speak out. I certainly speak out frequently

about things that I disagree with, but it does mean that whenever everything is on the table, you've got a bat for your own team. And the reality is also, I would say, if you're a member of Congress, You're not a pundit. You're not an influencer. Your job isn't to be put out sort of a level of philosophical purity that cannot be legislatively backed up.

I would rather make incremental gains than move backwards and let the left win. And if those are the two options, then let's play as a team. I would love it if we could move legislation massive way, way further to the right. I mean, that is where I am ideologically. But if my choices are moving to the left or moving incrementally to the right, I'm going to take the ladder every single time. Interesting and excellent answer on incrementalism versus as well people in politics who believe their job is to be a pundit or an influencer. You described the ideological spectrum of the right within the Republican conference. Where would you say you land yourself in that, as you've literally listed off those brands?

If I had to guess, it might be a fun game. If I had to guess, would you describe yourself as a paleo-conservative? I think there are certain portions of the paleo-conservative worldview that I identify really strongly with. Ultimately, I do think you need a little bit of fusionism in the Reaganite mold. For instance, I think that the, I think that from a paleo-conservative standpoint, I think that they're typically tend to be right on immigration. I think we need a strong border. And I do think that we need a more restrictive legal immigration system that takes into account America's cultural fabric and the idea that we need to preserve that. At the same time, I think that there are certain economic principles where I'm very much of the sort of the free market mold where I think that,

generally speaking, a smaller government with a less robust regulatory state is going to be more beneficial for the American people. And I tend to believe in a more sort of realistic and rational or restrained foreign policy. So that takes from different portions of different ideological strains. But I would say very much, especially on immigration, I'm in line with a lot of paleo-conservatives. Let's take a quick break. But continue this conversation with one of the rising stars of the Republican Party. I want to ask him about President Trump's endorsement of Ken Paxton, Congressman Brandon Gill, when we come back on Will Kane Country. Welcome back to Will Kane Country.

We're still hanging out with Congressman Brandon Gill of Texas. As you kind of described that recipe, which I think I totally get, and I would suggest that I share many of those same influences. Who would you describe? Who would you point to as people, therefore, that illustrate or share that same view of politics as you? I mean, would you say that is the vice president of the United States, J.D. Vance? Would you say prior to him, at least in part, historically, that's Pat Buchanan? Who would you say are the best examples that illustrate what you just described? Yeah, I would say that, you know, if you want to trace sort of the

ideological development, Buchanan had many of those, many of those traits. I think that, that President Trump really coalesced those together in a unique and compelling way in 2016, though. What he was able to do is if you go back to 2015, for instance, you know, a Republican Party that ideologically was in some place quite different than where we're at right now. And I think we've moved in the correct direction, the right direction, and that's because of President Trump. And I don't say that lightly. Take immigration. The sort of status quo, even on the Republican side, prior to President Trump,

Trump was that building a wall is racist. You know, we heard all kinds of kind of stupid aphorisms about how America doesn't build walls, we build bridges, you know, therefore we should have an, essentially we should have an open border, what it meant. And President Trump just took a sledgehammer to that and said, no, we are a sovereign country. We're going to have a wall on our border. We're going to determine who comes into our country, and they're going to come into our country

in our terms. So I think President Trump really captured the immigration portion. Similarly, I think that he is on the foreign policy side, I mean, he was one of the first people to say, to be skeptical of the Iraq war, which was sort of made him persona non grata when he first hit the political scene

for some time on the Republican side. I mean, he really was a powerful force. And I think that's why, you know, there's a lot of reasons to love President Trump, but the direction that he's moved our party, I think on both, especially on immigration, but also on foreign policy, has been extraordinarily compelling and really matches the sort of framework that I think I laid out. What about President Trump's approach to economics?

He's, I think it's fair to say, more economically interventionist than the way the Republican party was prior to him. He's taking government positions in various companies and industries that he hopes to bring back to America. He's used tariffs as a tool to manipulate economics in addition to foreign policy. But I think it's fair to say that President Trump is somewhat different than perhaps Ronald Reagan was on economics and the way the Republican Party was before President Trump. Yeah, I mean, President, and I think that he's moved us in many ways in the right direction on economics as well. I mean, remember Reagan, Reagan supported tariffs at times.

You know, what President Trump recognized with economic policy was that he is a capitalist through and through, of course. But he recognized that there are certain times whenever unrestricted globalism, which means free trade, can have negative consequences for the American people. If trading, for instance, with our number one geopolitical adversary China, which we've done since the early 2000s. In fact, we aided China's geopolitical rise by mass trading with them in the process gutting our own manufacturing pace. I think President Trump was one of the first people who recognized that that has deleterious consequences for small businesses in the United States. And maybe there are times when it makes sense to implement rational tariffs, both out of geopolitical necessity, but also out of a desire to see domestic businesses flourish. And that was very, I mean, very much contrary to sort of standard Republican orthodox. And I think the president's been proven correct on that.

Now, I think he's been clear that what we don't want to live in a sort of an autarkic world where the United States doesn't trade at all with anybody. But he does want to use trade as a lever, both to help grow America's manufacturing base and to pursue our own geopolitical ends. And I think that's something most Americans agree with. I certainly do. Back to politics, President Trump yesterday made a big endorsement in both of our home state of Texas. He endorsed Ken Paxton over John Cornyn for Senate.

It is something you did in the weeks leading up to this primary runoff next week. You also backed Ken Paxton. Why? Well, I think at the end of the day, you need somebody who's going to go up against the Democrats, who's going to rally the Republican base. And especially in a midterm cycle, whenever you don't have President Trump on the ballot. And our goal is to nationalize this election, but President Trump's name will not be on the ballot. We need somebody who can rally the Republican Basin. Ken Paxton certainly does. And the reality is

that John Cornyn does not. On top of that, I have some severe ideological differences with Senator Cornyn, particularly his long support for amnesty. Supported an amnesty bill in 2003, supported one in 2018. He has said recently in the past couple months that one of his priorities, if he did get reelected, would be amnesty for DACA recipients. And that's simply, especially after the last election cycle, not something that I can get behind. I know Ken Paxton, by contrast, is going to be a fighter for conservatives. He's been a phenomenal attorney general in Texas. And he's somebody who's going to take the fight to the left. He's actually going to stand up for Texas values.

What is the political future for you? What do you want to do? Stay in Congress? Right now I'm chair of the task force on defending constitutional rights and exposing institutional abuse and that's where my focus is, is doing the best job I possibly can in the role that I'm at right now. We've got a ton of exciting things coming, whether it's investigations into Medicaid fraud in Ohio, DEI. We've got several other things that we're going to be announcing soon.

We're doing investigations into some birth tourism companies as well. So that's where my focus is. and we've got a ton of work to do right now. Hold on. I just want to slow that down and digest what you had to say. I know that you are looking into fraud. I know that you're looking into Ohio. Last week we had Luke Rosiak on from the Daily Wire

talking about some of the Somali fraud in Ohio. You said you're also going to be looking into birth tourism companies. That's right. Presumably this has something to do, at least in part, with Chinese birth tourism. So would you please repeat for me what it is you guys will be looking into? Sure. So we had just announced this task force last week, so this is very fresh. But last week, we sent out letters requesting documents and information from four different birth tourism companies that are operating in California, Texas, and Florida. One of them, by the way, the

DBA, the name of the business is called Have My Baby in Miami. So these are businesses that are facilitating birth tourism, which is a form, by the way, of immigration fraud, putting aside the issues that you might have with birthright citizenship. And we're going to be getting answers from these companies. How exactly are they defrauding our immigration system? And what does that mean for the American people and for the meaning of American citizenship? Well, please stay in touch with us, Congressman Gil, about what you uncover. I do think you know we are one of the homes of that conversation, and that is something

very important to the future of America. It is part of the recipe that is destroying this country. It's not the entirety, but every single piece of this needs to be analyzed and investigated, and I hope you'll keep us up to date on that. We certainly will. We've got a lot coming. All right, Congressman Brandon Gill of the great state of Texas. Always good to talk to you.

Thanks for the time today, Congressman. Thanks for having me. All right. There you goes. Congressman Brandon Gill of Texas. I'm beginning to get concerned that Congressman Gill's star is rising at such a rate that he might represent serious problems for my potential gubernatorial run in Texas. Congressman Gill is going somewhere.

Now, I don't know that he's going to Austin or he is going into higher office at Washington, D.C., but I feel very confident in saying the American people need Congressman Gill in some form of leadership. He is rapidly becoming ideologically, in my mind, the best we have to offer in Washington, D.C. and if the work that he can do, and that work that he's working on and talking about us with right there is important work. If that's where we need Congressman Gild, then great. Do that work in Washington, D.C. You know, for that matter, if Congressman Gill needs to be in the Senate, then we need to figure out if that's where his future lies. Well, he's very young.

Think about it. And I'm going to be honest, and this isn't, I'm not being Machiavellian. That's what I was going to say, Patrick. Look, I'm not being Machiavellian. I'm just telling you the way that I see this. I do believe that Senator Ted Cruz would make a great Supreme Court justice. I truly do. I do not think that's where his ambitions lie.

I do, yes, absolutely. Senator Cruz is brilliant. He's brilliant legally. I do think that Senator Cruz has some weaknesses politically. I do think that that's where his ambitions lie in the world of politics and that he sees himself. Look, Senator Cruz is going to run for president in 2028. Okay, so put his name in there along with J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio. I don't think that is a likely outcome for Senator Cruz.

I think that he would make an excellent, excellent Supreme Court justice. I thought about that. So much so that I wish his ambitions. Again, not Machiavellian, like not trying to get him out of the Senate. So much so that I wish his ambitions later. Because I think the impact you can have as Supreme Court justice is it's not for four years, it's not for eight years, it's for decades. And your thoughts, your rationale, your logic is crystallized and memorialized for decades.

And what more, I know that the average American doesn't believe this, but the Supreme Court justices have great, great influence over a generation of people and how they end up thinking, namely attorneys. I wasn't going to talk about this in today's show, but I planned to talk about this. talk about it a little more in depth later on the Will Kane show, but I stumbled across this graph that is terrifying. And it shows what's going on with law school. Okay. Law school is like a lot of other higher education, maybe even worse. I was talking to somebody recently said they wanted to go into psychology. I'm like, do you realize that psychology is probably the most furthest left industry in America, like psychologists. We're not talking about psychiatrists.

Yeah, I mean, there's legitimate questions about the future of psychology. But psychologists are like 95% lives and far left lips. And you could ask yourself, why is that? Yeah, is it the nature of the actual, quote unquote science? Is it a self-selection mechanism, the kind of people that go into it? is it something they're taught in school? But this is what law school looks like over time. According to, it's some polling group, Mueller, Bonica, Chilton, Rosemma, and Sin.

Sounds official. Yeah, what? They can hang out a shingle. Start practicing civil defense law. The Legal Academy, 1990 to 2023, law school leans left hard. It shows both professors and students from 1990 through 2026. And in 1990, 60% of students would have been described as left, 70% of professors. Today, 95% of professors and 95% of students left, hard left.

And I'm here to tell. And the person that was speaking on this in my ex-alogram said, you do not understand the level of existential risk this is to America. And I totally agree. Because law school is a place that has outsized influence on America. more so than even college. Because what you're training people to do in law is be judges. You're wondering why people are getting out of jail and parole and this and that, and Austin and Washington, D.C., look back to law school.

They're training people to be attorneys. They're training people to be prosecutors. They're training people to be Supreme Court justices. A lot of politicians. That has a long, and politicians. And that has a long-tail impact on America. So my point is, to just take this full circle before we discuss it, Senator Cruz could have a massive influence at the United States Supreme Court.

His opinions would be read by law students. He may be mocked by professors, he may be reviled, but they would be read. You only that happened to me at the University of Texas. You don't think that professors try to poke holes in Scalia or Thomas, and yet there I was reading it firsthand for myself, and it had a massive, massive impact on me. And it made you conservative. And I do think that absolutely, absolutely, that study of law, the Constitution, and the legal rationale logic of justice made me conservative.

And I do think that Senator Cruz could have a massive impact at the United States Supreme Court. What I'm getting out there is, I don't know, maybe Senator Gill. Go ahead, tinful, Pat. You just said I was everything I was going to say. Wow. It's pretty much it. Mine meld.

Yeah. We're on the same link. Boom. Same algorithm. I think I shared that chart with you, too. So, yeah. It's got, I mean, we really need to really think about the law system in America a little bit because, I mean, it's got a lot of power. over what we do and the fact that so many people lean left, I mean, like, it can, it's a big issue.

And the fact that there's so much thrown around online now that is just not true or just completely false information changes that completely. So people have this weird notions of what law and what our country is. And there's no conjoined consensus about it anymore. I'm talking about like, you know, we talked about yesterday with court reform and stuff like that. Like, there are states out there that go and they reform, you know, they do tort reforms and prices go down because of, you know, insurance claims and all these kind of things. And it's like it's really impacting a lot of how our country works. We've talked about it yesterday with MSNBC's Katie Turr, believing that somehow thinking God's preeminent or above the Declaration of Independence is Christian nationalism when, in fact, it is the foundation of America.

It is the nature of the document, the Declaration of Independence. coming up Colbert killed late night by being a partisan hack on Wilcane Country. Welcome back to Will Cain Country. Meanwhile, Stephen Colbert is set to sign off of The Late Show. This is the New York Post opinion section. Stephen Colbert embodies Hollywood's partisan self-destruction. I've seen it described that The Late Show is an iconic television program. Some of the people I followed had fun with that and pointed to the ratings decline and the rise of Greg Gutfeld.

That is true. But that does not negate the fact that the late show truly was iconic. And was is the important word. Was is the operative thinking piece of this headline. Because there was a time that the Tonight Show, the late show, all had outsized influence. they all mattered. And I would argue not exclusively because of the personalities chosen to lead those institutions. There are other influences at play in the decline of influence of late-night television.

But in no small part, personalities like Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel have made that entire genre worthless. And I truly mean worthless. I'm going to try to be a little more. stuff where is it worthless it is close to worthless like what is the definition of worthless worthless means you offer nothing you have no worth well the colbert late night the late show with stephen colbert all reports indicate lost 40 million dollars a year sheded something like is it 75 percent of its viewership over his tenure i mean that is not value that is not worth no so is it worth less? Well, there's probably a few partisans out there that enjoyed it. So, no, worth something,

but worth very little and nothing close to the cost of that programming. Can you imagine the number of producers and writers and bosses and sets and production value? Do you know what we could have done with that show? And the salary. And the salary. Before we get into what you get out of it, Patrick, what do I get out of it? What was Colbert making? Let me guess. With Colbert making $20 million a year, maybe not quite 20, right? $15 to $20 million year? $18,000 per episode. Crazy.

To destroy the value that we just described. To destroy it. That's crazy. There's another factor, though. Thus comes the destroyer. The clip culture. That is another factor that destroyed that type of show, like SNL, too, because we don't need comedy shows like that.

Kind of. Not really. I think it is a big factor, but just say. I think you just had a streamline. No, I think Dan's right. You can't have this. I think there's other things. Bloaded behemothed behemoth of a show like they used to run in the 90s or something like that. You have to streamline it.

That's why Gutfeld does so well. They still have writers. They just don't have a whole, you know, they have 20 writers. The infrastructure around Gutfeld is meniscus. by comparison to what they have over to the late show or the tonight show. Minuscule. And you're right about that. You're both right.

But I don't, I don't, they could have done that very same show for cheaper. Hell, they could have destroyed their audience for almost nothing. You didn't have to even pay to destroy your audience the way that you did. But. We'll do it for free. The clip culture thing has an impact, damn, but I believe in a way that's a little reflective of being in an online bubble. Look, cord cutting matters. Clip culture matters.

But there is still, and people love to do this, and it is true. Those things are happening. There is still millions upon millions. And just for the record, true millions is a lot of numbers. And the reason I said true millions, I choose my words carefully. What I mean by that is, like, you see these numbers always like, are you aware of how many people watch so-and-so show on X? No, they don't. Okay? No, they don't. So, you know, before you know it, like, they're suggesting to me that 370 million people watch this episode of whoever on X. I'm like, there's like 330 million people in America. I mean, how are you even getting these numbers? They're absurd at this point.

So, so online numbers. Online numbers, I don't really put honestly any credence in. No. None. Because you could juice those. It doesn't mean there's not an audience. There is an audience. That's not the point I'm getting at. But everybody's in my business and everybody that's invested in digital media is sort of a dishonest broker on this because they want to always brag about their inflated numbers. But the numbers, it's like, this is the definition of Fugazi to me.

It's like a total Fugazi, you know, like a Fugazi, a Wazi, a Wazi, it's a woozy. It's it's nonsense It's nonsense It's not real With the accent You do that really well The Texas It's

It's a great scene by the way It's an incredible scene You got to pump those numbers up Those are rookie numbers Oh You can pull off Those I think clip culture, Dan, is destroying something else that has been on my mind lately,

and I watched a game last night. Patrick will probably even criticize me for watching it. I watched the NBA Eastern Conference Final Games last night. I watched that incredible comeback by the New York Knicks. Yeah, what a comeback. I fell sick of the way. I didn't even enjoy that, Dan. You did?

I didn't even enjoy it. They went on a 44 to 11 run to erase a 22-point lead by the Cavs. That's a choke. And chokes aren't fun to watch. Like, I'm sorry, they're not fun to watch. And I really had no vested interest in the outcome of that game. But I can only imagine how bad that hurt for Cavs fans. Like that had to hurt so bad.

Like losing LeBron. But clip culture is destroying the NBA. That I'm comfortable saying. Clip culture is destroying the NBA. Oh, that's how I truly believe, having been someone in sports media and having sports debates and listening to the online rebuttals of my sports debates that most people consume the NBA through highlight clips and not on SportsCenter.

Like on Instagram, on TikTok, I believe that that is destroying the NBA. Well, what? Was it in sports center? Clips? I mean, I watch Sports Center in the morning now, again. It's like, it's so many different things. It's W.W.E. It's softball.

It's, you know, it's barely the main sports anymore. Yeah, but Patrick, it being on demand, you still would have had to tune in for SportsCenter, right? And even with SportsCenter, you guys are a little younger than me. Do you realize what we did? We would watch SportsCenter and then watch it again. Yeah. And then sometimes watch it again.

Now, it would not be the same episode. Sometimes it would be the same episode. They'd literally rerun it two times in a row. They'd just swap out anchors and do it again. And you'd watch it. Do you know why you did so? A, lack of options. B, because it left you with a feeling.

of unsatisfied, not in a bad way, in a good way. You know that saying, always leave them wanting more. SportsCenter always left you wanting more. You wanted a little more about each game. You wanted a little more commentary. You wanted one new highlight. You wanted something. You don't have that.

You get it satisfied real quick online when you're getting, you know, clip culture of NBA. But did it stop people watching the games? Now, that doesn't mean you don't stay on. You stay on. You stay on because you're a dick. but you're not staying on because you need it. Yeah, absolutely. People have these opinions online about basketball and they've never watched a game or they watch one or two games a season. LeBron better than Michael. I believe that with every ounce of my being, every ounce of my being.

I can talk to every high school kid right now and they have an opinion of LeBron versus Jordan and they've never seen Jordan play a game. Not one. They didn't go to YouTube. They didn't watch an old game. They've never seen anything. Nothing. But they have an opinion. You're absolutely right. But the second thing, the reason the late show is dying instead of clip culture is what I mentioned there was SportsCenter. It's the options problem. Like, in the day, you would watch those late shows because it was the entertainment at the end of the day. And now, man, I got so many options.

I can watch the second season of your friends and neighbors. I could watch Project Hail Mary. I could watch whatever I want. It's all there. Anytime I want. Why do I need a third-rate comic doing Democrat partisan talking points to entertain me at the end of the day. They all, you know what Colbert did?

Colbert looked at the success of John Stewart and himself, by the way, on Comedy Central, a cable channel, and success is relative. So those guys never actually had that big of an audience over there. It's relative, right? It was big for cable, not compared to Fox, big for comedy, and therefore they were it's like being a big fish in a small pond. Then they took the big fish and they put him in the big pond. He did the same thing he did in the small pond,

and it didn't work because you've got to get a big audience. You can't get the small pond audience. And Colbert did that. A, he wasn't as big a star as I thought he was because he was getting 300,000 people over on Comedy Central. I feel like sports keeps learning this over and over, by the way, as well. Just because you get 300,000 people on Comedy Central doesn't make you a real star.

Now, well, grant that John Stewart had real influence. He had real influence. Still does. You know that it's funny, because Kimmel came from Comedy Central, too, with The Man Show and Winnestein's funny. Like, all these guys. Look, to be honest, I worked at ESPN. I was there. I know what a highly rated show was at ESPN, meaning like the numbers, okay, that will get you big money and get you called a star.

Those numbers are a minute fraction of what I do every day right now. out Fox. A minute fraction. Like like, like maybe a little more than a little more than a tenth. That's crazy. What I do at Fox. Right? I would have thought it was

opposite. Like bubble guffies was out doing first take some days. Yeah. Now I will say PTI is a legit success. They're a hit and that is a success. And it's one of the least talked about shows. You know what I mean?

Like first take gets a ton of talk. But PTI will do six, seven hundred thousand people. They'll legit do six, seven hundred thousand people on a, on a regular basis. They'll get close to a million, which once again is of less than half of what we do every day. But they, and they get virtually not talked about at all. But, and probably don't make near what some other people make over there. I don't know how I got on this road.

Being a star on cable is not the same thing as being a star like Johnny Carson. Not the same thing. But you're a star in line, though. And then, and then everybody's like, well, when are you going to get to the real issue? And then you become a partisan hack. And yeah, of course. Of course. Of course.

And a not funny partisan hack. And that is, I believe this headline. Headline is correct. It's the partisan self-destruction of a mainstream institution. So I never saw Carson, but he was completely just out of politics. Like he would talk about the stories of the day, obviously, but he never showed a partisan bone in his body on anything or, you know, Leno and all those guys. He'd make fun of politicians.

Right. He'd make fun of politicians. But both sides and then... But there's a way... There's a way to do that. Everybody knows... You guys want to know something interesting, and I'm just doing my favorite thing now. I'm just talking.

Let it all out. What's your favorite thing, Will? talking. I saw a clip on Instagram this morning that I found fascinating. I'm going to send it to you guys. Billy Bush. Have we had Billy Bush on this show? We should book Billy Bush.

Billy Bush has his own. Yeah, I want Billy Bush. Billy Bush access Hollywood. Of course, Billy Bush famously access Hollywood tapes with Donald Trump. Billy Bush now has a podcast, right? Billy Bush was talking on this Instagram clip on his podcast about Al Roker. And it caught my attention. And what he was talking about was honestly how awful of a human being is Al Roker.

And I was like, whoa, jolly, oh, Al Roker? You know? And there was something in me that feels like, oh, I've heard something about that. But that wouldn't the end of it. Billy played a clip. It's a behind-the-scenes clip. I don't know how he had it. He played a behind-the-scenes clip.

It's from the Sochi Olympics. where Billy is sitting down to do Access Hollywood. I have no idea what led up to this moment. Al Roker walks up behind Billy Bush and starts yelling at him. You're fragile ego. I will squash you like a bug. Now the weird thing, yeah, dude.

Now the weird thing's going on is the entire camera crew around them is laughing. They're all laughing. Like, oh, is this a joke? And you're watching it. You're like, is this like a bit they do with each other? is Al being like funny and then they go back to Billy Bush's podcast

and he's like no one knew what to do he's like because he does this thing and yet you can feel it when you're the recipient of it that it's meant to be mean but he's pulling he's trying to pull it off as though he's funny and then one of his producers like you guys jumps in on the podcast and goes

I was there that day I was running the camera and I was one of the guys laughing and we were all laughing and then he's and then he's like what that clip doesn't show is we stopped laughing because we're all like, this is weird, what's going on? And Al kept going. And so, you know, Bush is going on about like,

Roker, like doing this thing that you think, is he trying to be funny? Is you trying to have personality? But it feels super mean. It feels super tart and personal. Here's how I got on to this. That's Colbert, dude. Like, it's not meant as a real joke.

Yeah. You see what I'm saying? That's true. Johnny Carson would make... I 100% believe that Johnny Carson would have made fun of Donald Trump. But he wouldn't have done it from a place of I hate Donald Trump. Like, this guy should not be present. Donald Trump is...

Donald Trump is ripe for comedy. The argument is never you can't make fun of Donald Trump. Right? But it's too easy to see through what's going on. Colbert is that guy you're hanging out with. You know which one of them is. You know my three types of guys. You know which one it is.

It's the Rick where you're like, you're not actually doing the thing you say you're doing. I can feel, and I think everyone around us can feel what you're doing. And that's Colbert. Carson just would have been funny about Trump. I don't think he would have been off limits whatsoever. Joe Biden's age would not have been off limit. Trump would have bought into it. In no world would Johnny Carson have.

In no world would Johnny Carson have. sang with a bunch of syringes about getting your COVID shot in no world. Right. Right. They think that they had a platform that it needs to be a PSA platform to save America, quote unquote, from the big bad boogeyman. That's kind of what's Colbert like. I'm a big fan of Gary Shanling's Delary Sanders show, which kind of like poked fun at late night. And I think it's one of the best television shows of all time. If you go back, like I just rewatched it recently, he was definitely. completely nonpartisan. Like every, like he would hammer Democrats, Republicans, and it was like that was kind of, that's how late night was in the 90s.

And the much, you know, it's much different today. I also think that the fact that you can get Brad Pitt on a podcast now played a major role because that there's no exclusivity to seeing the big stars. That's actually very true. And the fact that there are no real big stars that outside those aging ones. Right. They probably have their own podcasts anyways Yeah

Yeah To be fair Has Brad Pitt only been on one podcast? Has he been on Dax Shepard and that's it? Yeah Has he been on multiple podcasts? I think it's just the one. Okay

I just saw him on property brothers But your point still stands Yeah, but yeah But they don't need promotion as much Your point still stands I just think Brad Pitt Brad Pitt is an example of somebody who's still hanging on to the concept

of a movie star You know what I mean? That's true. Like will not dilute Will not dilute himself Tom Cruise too Yeah Very few

left still buy into that late 80s, early 90s vision of a movie start. Less is more. Let's take a quick break, but continue this conversation on the other side. It's Will Kane Country. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. All right. Patrick wanted to do this topic, so we'll let him take the lead. But NFL influencer Annie Agar.

I don't know if you're familiar with Annie Agar, but I'm not, to be honest, I'm not that familiar with Annie Agar. But she has hit my algorithm before. I'm not 100% sure what she does, but you can explain to us, Patrick. The headline reads, NFL influencer Annie Agar pushes back on Ozimpic accusations after latest pictures go viral. What are those pictures? Super skinny. Annie Agar. Yeah, she's skinny. Yeah. Yep, you can see it in her face. Much, much skinnier. So, Patrick, why is this a story? So if you see, if you saw the last five years, I feel like it's like the last five years. I feel like

the last five years. She's done a lot of viral videos. It's not really my style of content, but she'll wear different jerseys and like talk to herself and from the different points of view of NFL teams. And you just pulled the Hughes meme. Anyway, and they go viral and it's like people really like her and enjoy her content. But this picture really jumped out to people because she looks significantly different than she does in her regular, regular videos. And that makes people automatically assume that she's on O-ZMPIC. And all the comments in this post are about OZMPIC to the point where she had to respond. Very negative comments, by the way.

Yeah, very negative comments. A lot of men commenting, like, that's terrible that she's on OZMPIC and blah, blah, stuff that people have no business saying, and it's ridiculous. But anyways. Yeah. Did I give it to you? You'd always check it. This water didn't crack.

And I just got handed a water and it didn't crack when you open the lid. So now I'm looking like, has this been drank before? Has this been tampered with? You're being poisoned? Hmm.

Right. Coming for the king. Oh, Scott's going to give me a new one. Part of me wants to drink it and part of me started thinking about what could be in the water and I started thinking like if you let your mind go there

the secret to this stuff is don't think about it that's what HeggSets would do. It's fine and I want to do that but if it enters your mind a little bit like what happened to that water then you start picturing the absolute worst oh look let me see that water again Scott pass that to me look someone has touched it

look at the difference in volume wow yeah what Scott trying to do look at that what are you trying to do me Scott? Come on, man. Let's clip that. So we try to take out the future governor of Texas. Yeah.

No, Brandon Gill's long gone. Okay. Here's what I'd say about this. She's getting pushed back about a Zimpic. Yeah. What did she say? She said she just walks on a treadmill every day with an incline and stop eating sugar. Just the diet, essentially.

Diet and exercise. No example. Like you, Dan. No alcohol. Pathetic. Exactly like what I've done. Which has been a journey. We just learned Dan has cut out alcohol.

He's running at a big calorie deficit. He's taking in 1,800 calories a day, which by the way, that is not easy to do. It's hard. 1,800. He's also intermittent fasting. He's getting those 1,800 calories in a 7-hour period every day. That's it. Only easing those 7 hours.

He is walking. and what else besides walking? Just light lifting for now. I'm going to start heavy lifting in a couple weeks. I have a whole plan. Okay. Dan has dropped 45 pounds in 60 days. 60 days, 40.

Scott King's giving you a round. Okay. Stand up, Dan. Let's see. Stand up. Got to get a good look here at what 45 pound loss looks like. Yeah. What about that loose shirt?

I can't tell any of it. You're wearing black top, black pants and a loose shirt. Literally would have no idea. Can't tell at all. You're trying to get back on American Idol. That's what it is. See, looking stronger.

Yeah, skinny Dan when he was on American Idol. Yes. I'm getting down to it. Yeah, I'm going to get back there. It's been a journey. It's a pain in the butt, but no, Zempic. Just hard work and willpower. That's it.

And people are accusing you of GLP once? Yeah, all the time. People are like, no way. You did that with GLP 1 at OZempic. like you're lying you're not working hard i'm like shut up ask my wife she she'd see the struggle i got through so my argument is i think that the stigma is coming off the g lp ones and people are going to be like yeah i lost it with gop ones i think you're headed there pretty quick but i guess for someone like you dan that feels like stolen valor yeah it feels like no do you understand how hard

this has been for me diet exercise do you understand how many times i've you understand how many times i've had to say no to myself every day. Yes. It's insane. So do you, because you're doing it this way, do you look at someone who is doing a GLP1 and think what? It depends on the person. If it's like someone who's not really that heavy and they just want to lose an extra 10, I'm like, just cut your calories for a month and work out.

Like, you don't need it. But if someone's very heavy, then, yeah, I think they should. But, yeah, I think people use it sometimes as just a quick, fix when they can do it other way. Yeah. Yeah, and I think they're going to be more shameless about it because I think enough people are going to be doing it. And peptides? It's just a thing. Reda, all that stuff. Yeah, I don't know. It's going on all. We've done, we did an hour, we did an hour on peptides and I still don't know. Yeah. I still don't know. Reda is all the rave with the young guys who are cutting and building. Reda?

Yeah, Reda pep. It's a, it's a form of, it's a GLP3, I think, something like that. Hmm. But yeah, it's hard. Oh, congratulations, man. That's really impressive. Still a lot of work to do. You're trying to get 60? You're trying to get to 60 pounds off?

Yeah, I'm just going to keep it going until I, uh, I don't think, I don't think you would believe me if I told you how much I weighed 60 days ago. What do you mean? I don't think. Well, you've lost 45. Yep. I'd see. Were you at 325? 250?

No. Patrick's closer. 255. Really? It was 307. Damn. Get out of here. Yeah.

You were three bills? I did because I lifted for a very long time, so I do have some muscle under there. So I weigh, I don't carry it like a 300-pound person. But yeah, it was 307. No, you don't. How tall are you? 6-2, a little over. But I lifted for a long time.

And you wear drapey clothes. You always have. You wear flannels and drapey clothes. Not for long. I didn't notice. No. Yeah, but so from. From 307 to 267 or a little more.

Yeah, whatever it is. Wow, man. Yeah. Wow. And do you have a target number? I want to get down to 230, really. 2.30? So another like 30 pounds.

Yeah. Do you know what's wild about that, Dan? Like, just I'm, this is not personal to you or me. It's just kind of human physiology or whatever. I'm 6'2 as well. roughly, right? I don't know that I could ever get to 230. I'm sure I could.

Like, by what I, actually, I don't know. I don't know that I could get. It would take a lot. You're scrawny. He's like 160. No, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm 180. Scronny, this son of a bitch.

I'm 180. You know what's funny. All your insecurities settle in in middle school. And those insecurities carry your entire life. Don't you believe that's true? Whatever the insecurities that set in in middle school are the ones that carry you your entire freaking life. You could be 55. And the insecurities that settled at age 14 are the ones that are with you.

And I was scrawny. In my middle school, I was... I was... Husky pears. Dance. Yeah. No, I get you. The opposite. Your mom made you buy Husky. In middle school, I legit was scrawny. And so, like, my insecurity is always, like, being skinny, right? Like, like skinny legs, skinny, whatever. And then I'll see pictures of myself every once I'm like, bro, you're not skinny.

You need to lose some weight. And then I always see, and then I'll talk to my wife. You're skinny. Or I've even asked a buddy that I work out with. I said, hey, let's play a game. I said to this, buddy, we go get coffee sometimes after we work out. I said, let's play a game. When a dude walks by that is in my, because self-awareness or like knowing what you are, that's kind of hard.

Even though we have mirrors, it's really hard to know. Imagine the world before mirrors. What you are, who you are, because this freaking mind of. yours, it's just not right. Nobody's mind is right on themselves. And so I'll say, I said to my buddy, let's play a game. I want you to point to the guy, like,'s walking in and out of here, that's most reflective of my body, you're right? And I'm a real skinny dude to walk by. I'm like, am I, am I that guy? He's like, no, you're not that guy. You know, so like, knowing your body type and your, it's really kind of hard. But when you say I'm scrawny, Patrick,

it still hits that middle school insecurity. Like you manage to poke a soft spot right there. You just right there. You got one. Oh, by the way, people are clamoring. They need to see you with your shirt off soon. I said maybe for a Friday episode, you can do it shirtless. We're going to have to charge people.

There's going to have to be behind a paywall. Oh, yeah. We'll see that. Paper view. Um, only fans. Yeah. The, uh, so I don't think I could get to 2.30 then. I just don't think I could. It would take a ton of work. I was skinny.

I think it might take the kind of work that you're having to put in to get down to it. You'd have to eat a lot. Like calorie surplus. Yeah. I'd have to eat a lot. And you'd have to lift real heavy. Like I was 165. I ran the marathon 10 years ago. I was 165. I'd never really lift. did before, and I just looked like so skinny. And then I spent like three years putting on 35 pounds of muscle. And it took so long, and it was incredibly hard. And then I started lifting and lifting more. And then you just stop and it just kind of becomes like, oh, wow. What did you weigh the last time you were in shape? That was about five years ago. I got down to 185, but I was like, I did CrossFit. So I had a lot of muscle and it was a good look. It was probably best shape I was in my life.

Dude, you fluctuate. You fluctuate. You were 185, five years ago, and you got up to 305 in five years? Yeah. How did you do that? My wife and I went through a lot over the past few years. I was taking care of a lot of different things, and I stopped taking care of myself. And one day I just realized I was like, what does that mean?

What does that mean, though? Like zero working out for five years? years, like zero? I would go through stretches where I'd lose like 15 or something like that. A lot of sedentary? Yeah, a lot of sedentary, you know, too many beers on the weekend, eating whatever I wanted, saying yes to anything I wanted for a very long time, and just kind of worrying about other things and just not saying none of myself ever, you know?

And it just catches up and you're like, wait, holy crap, how did I get to this point? And then I'm really good at, I'm really good at turning around. Yes. So, Dan, it was just yes to the pizza, yes to the dessert, yes to whatever. Because I could lose it another time. Didn't matter. Yeah, because I'll figure it out later. I'll figure it out later. Whatever. Right. But yeah, that was, you know, it's hard. But here I am. That's why I don't mind doing this because I put myself in the situation, so it's okay. You know, like I said yes for so long. I could say no to myself for, you know, six months, whatever. And it's working out. Right.

Right. I love that idea of saying no yourself. I really do. It's so interesting philosophically how that's not what we're supposed to be. We're supposed to be self-affirmation, all that stuff. And by the way, on the O Zipnik, we'll take this conversation full circle and we'll land this plane. Isn't it interesting how many of the very same people that were leaders of the body positivity movement are now the brand spokesman for GOP1. Yep. Like literally Oprah, Lizzo, Serena Williams. Not diet and exercise. Very same. Very same people, body positivity, very same people doing ads for Roe or whatever your brand. Very interesting. And getting grossly skinny.

Saying no to yourself is way, should be way more celebrated. It's so hard to say no to yourself. I fail. I'm failing as we speak. I gave up that too. Saying no to yourself. Good. Yeah.

I got to give up some things. No. The beer, having a beer and stuff like that is hard. No. No. Look, drinking a beer is like eating a loaf of bread. So like just go to alcohol that's a little, you skinny girl vodka. It's different for that for me.

It's a little more mental than just. Calrary, wise. All right. I'm just saying. People, you're looking for workarounds, Patrick.

You're looking for cheat codes. No. I'll beers again. You need to arbitrarily say no to yourself. Arbitrarily say no to yourself. To send me myself every day. About anything. It retrain your mind about everything, too, I've learned.

It's not the same thing. We're not talking about the same thing. Oh. Okay. You can do it. No. I learned from Will. I should say no to myself.

I can't do it. No. That's not what I'm talking about. You look good. No, I don't. I know that Will told me. And he starts saying, no, I don't. You're smart.

No, I'm not. You should be appreciative. No. Start saying no and that self-appreciation and respect and belief will come back. That's going to do it for us today here on Will Cain Country. I'm going to see you again tomorrow, but you'll need to follow us on Spotify or Apple so you don't miss us. We'll see you next time. Listen to ad-free with a Fox News Podcast Plus subscription on Apple Podcast,

and Amazon Prime members. You can listen to this show, Add Free, on the Amazon News. music app.