Will Cain Country - Why Democrats Push 'Bloodbath' Lie To Stop Trump

Episode Date: March 18, 2024

Story #1: Bloodbath gate. The hoax that has taken over the media and hopes to take over your mind and vote. Story #2: Charging teenagers for something that should be dealt with by the parents. Story #3: An F for the Dallas Cowboys in Free Agency and for the future of their football team. Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail] Subscribe to The Will Cain Show on YouTube here: Watch The Will Cain Show! Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

One, Bloodbath, Gate, the hoax that has taken over the media and hopes to take over your mind and your vote. Two, charging teenagers, seventh graders, for a crime for what is admittedly very, very, very. vile speech with our lunch break panel today here on the will cane show and three the dallas cowboys f in free agency and perhaps an f for the future of the franchise it is the will cane show streaming live at fox news dot com and on the fox news youtube channel the fox news facebook page and always on demand wherever you get your audio entertainment listen on podcast at apple spotify or or at Fox News Podcast. Just go hit subscribe, and the latest episodes of the Will Kane Show will show up in your stream.

If you like watching it on video, head on over to Will Kane Show on YouTube. It's in the description right under this live stream, and you can hit subscribe to catch past exclusive interviews, YouTube shorts, and new content from the Will Kane Show. Just subscribe at YouTube Will Kane Show. I'm back from Spring Break. It's been a nice little getaway last week to the Caribbean. I went down to Turks and Caicos with the in-laws, with the family, a bunch of teenage boys, and had a good time. As is always the case, the most fun part for me is competition.

Vacation for me is competition. When we go away in the summer, I love playing pickleball. I love playing golf. I'm horrific. I think I lost seven balls into the sands and waters of Turks and Kekos through the first three holes playing golf. But I like getting after it. I like competing.

I like the endorphins flowing. I like spike ball. That's what we did down there on the beach. Me taking on all the teenagers and talking trash. They were terrible. I was the champion of spike ball. But I did come away with a couple of takeaways I wanted to share with you. First of all, it's gorgeous, as so many of you know, whoever's been to the Caribbean.

I mean, the turquoise waters, the sand beaches, it's gorgeous. But, you know, I wanted to tie this in an observation I had over spring break to something that was going on in the news cycle. And something that I'm increasingly believing is not just the case of xenophobia, but an accurate observation of the world. And that is, it's almost, almost, always better in America. I love traveling abroad because I'm driven by exploration and curiosity. I like going to Spain or Italy or I've never been to South America because I would like to just see and learn about different places and different people and different history. I always fall down the rabbit hole, you know, using Wikipedia to learn the history of wherever I'm going.

and I love that part of an exotic vacation. You know, I spent some time trying to figure out the history of Turks and Caicos, which is pretty fascinating. 87% of the population of those islands is black, almost all of it obviously tied to the slave trade. Before 1,500, it was populated by the Teno Indians, almost all of which were eradicated by disease with the arrival of the Europeans. And what was the slave trade? Why was their economy on these islands that are low-south? slung desertish, if not beautiful. They were harvesting salt. And I love figuring out, you know, the history of an area and why it has any element of significance. I inevitably fell down the

rabbit hole of piracy. I love the idea of pirates marauding around the Caribbean, pulling into various coves, building pirate caves. We spent most of it, me and my 12-year-old searching for a rumored pirate cave down the cliffs. But what I will say is most of the most of the of the Caribbean is luxury surrounded by poverty. I'm not saying every place, and I'm not the most well-traveled, but I think most beach locations around the world have developed into luxury surrounded by poverty. At the same time I was there was the news event of the chaos and destruction, yet again, of Haiti. A gang leader named Barbecue has taken over Haiti. It's descended into violence and rumors of cannibalism on the streets of Port of Prince.

And the local newspaper in Turks and Caicos, which comes out weekly, the local newspaper was warning against an influx of Haitians onto that in other islands across the Caribbean. And what would they do? How would they enforce their borders? Oh, yes. Open conversation. Nobody yelling about xenophobia. Nobody's saying, oh, my God, how dare you talk about Haiti as though it's an asshole country. You'll remember Donald Trump once talked about the kind of people flood. into our country from Venezuela or from Haiti or from various third world countries around the world and describe them as asshole countries that made, that required that everyone, not just in mainstream media, but in comedy, to once again paint Donald Trump as a racist or a xenophone. But no one ever really took the time to ask, is he accurate? Is he right? If not blunt,

if not crude, is he not correct? It is, the truth that the history of Haiti is one of pure instability, closer resembling chaos, rampant violence. And as a result, you have an island community with an incredibly low standard of living, a culture that has not flourished in progress. And when refugees or criminals are either let free to immigrate or seek refuge in a greater country, it's not inaccurate to say these people are coming to our country from one that is significantly below our cultural, technological, societal standard of living, what Donald Trump would describe as an asshole. Now, the people of Turks and Caicos, the people of the Dominican Republic, the people

of various islands across the Caribbean, they certainly are talking about, you can't build a wall, except they have done that in Dominican Republic, you police the seas, you make sure there aren't boats coming over. Barbecue and other gang leaders have unleashed thousands of criminals from the prisons in Haiti. It's one of the first things they did. They stormed the Bastille. They stormed the prison and flooded the streets with criminals. How long until those criminals, or refugees are in boats, headed to Turks and Caicos, are head. headed east over to the Dominican Republic, are headed to the shores of Florida. Once you travel exotically outside of this country, you see that everything that is common sense,

but domestically described as racers is emophobic, is actually the human condition not just of tribalism or nation state building, but on protecting a way of life, a standard of living. And you saw that. I saw that last week on spring break. And so what I would tell you is, while most beach locations across the world are luxury surrounded by poverty, I'm a bit of a homer when it comes to Hawaii. It's simply better, safer, cleaner, better infrastructure when it is in America. We have built something here worth preserving. We have built something here worth growing.

We have built something here worth pride. You can go to someplace like Hawaii, and it's clean, and it's beautiful, and it's safe. And quite honestly, it's America. Maybe it's not a competition, like Spikeball. But I'm just here to tell you, not the most well-traveled person in the world. But I've seen Italy. I've seen Greece. I've seen Spain. I've seen the queen in her damn undie pants. And it's better right here in America. From bloodbaths to criminal charges for children, it's good to be back

with you here on the Will Cain Show. I've missed you. I'm ready to get into it today. We've got a lunch break panel coming up with Bobby Burrack of Outkick and others, and we will be breaking it all down. What did we miss, Aaron Rogers? What did we miss NFL Free Agency? but what is taking over the minds, and hopefully, in their estimation, your vote in America, a bloodbath. Story number one. Donald Trump gave a rally this weekend in his race for the presidency in Ohio. He took to the stage, and he talked about the EV push from Joe Biden. There's expected to be news this week where there's new regulations pushing.

the car industry further towards electrical vehicles. Part of that push, which there doesn't seem to coordinate with any consumer demand, would have a devastating effect on the American auto industry. So says Donald Trump. And when he took to that stage, he described the future. He described the auto industry and what it would look like under Joe Biden. Listen. Let me tell you something to China. If you're listening, President Xi, and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal. Those big monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now,

and you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans, and you're going to sell the cars to us. Now, we're going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you're not going to be able to sell those cars. If I get elected, now if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole...

That's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That'll be the least of it. But they're not going to sell those cars. It'll be a bloodbath for the auto industry. It'll be a bloodbath for the country. That'll be the least of it. He's talking there about Chinese imports built in Mexico

and the effect on the auto industry. I've had similar recent conversations with car dealerships and owners of car dealerships about the effect of the electrical vehicle push on what it would do to the auto industry. Either way, whether or not it's Chinese imports or the push for EVs, you are potentially looking at a bloodbath for the American auto industry. But that clip was clipped out of context. It has been splashed across the internet. Starting on Sunday and bleeding into this morning on Monday, that clip has been turned in to the following headlines.

Take a look at this, from news sources from NBC to Rolling Stone. Trump says there will be a bloodbath if he loses the election. CBS News in Ohio Rally, Trump says there will be a bloodbath if he loses the election. Rolling Stone, Trump says there will be a bloodbath, and elections will not happen if he loses in 2024. CNN, Trump warns of bloodbath for the auto industry and country if he loses the election. CNN, at least putting in the context that it includes the auto industry. Trump says some migrants are not people and warns of bloodbath if he loses. Trump was referencing people like the murderer of Lake and Riley, that they were monsters, not people.

And he was talking about the auto industry when he was referencing a bloodbath. But the media immediately ran with this as though Trump was celebrating the potential and laying the groundwork for another January 6th for political violence, that he was caused. calling for a literal bloodbath if he loses the election. Here's a great example of what was taking place across the media, and as it merged with politics, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. He's even predicting a bloodbath. What does that mean?

He's going to exact a bloodbath. There's something wrong here. How respectful I am of the American people and their goodness. But how much more do they have to see from him to understand? that this isn't what our country is about. Now this, at first blush, is insanity. It's insanity. How can someone be this stupid?

How can someone be this willfully obtuse in the words of Shawshank Redemption? How can someone be so mistaken? But First Blush is incorrect because this is not stupidity. It's not even insanity. it is purposeful manipulation, yes, obviously of a clip taken out of context, but purposeful manipulation of your mind. And the purposeful manipulation of your mind is to motivate you by fear to vote, vote, vote against Donald Trump. Now, I wanted to step back, as I always would like to do and make sure that I don't straw man, but instead I steal man the argument for anyone who saw that

clip and here's another January 6th. A steel man puts force their best argument. What is it how we can understand what they're trying to say? Is there inside of that some hidden kernel of truth? I don't intend to be Don Quixote burning down, tilting my lancet windmills, and burning down a field of straw men. I want to take down the best version of your opponent. The best I can tell is that Trump in that speech spoke, as he often does, stream of consciousness in a bit of a non-sequitur.

He's talking about the auto industry and said there will be a bud bath. And then he says, that'll be the least of it. It'll be a bloodbath for our country. He is talking about, I believe, while one could say, whoa, he expanded it on the auto industry. He didn't limit it to the auto industry. He clearly said, that'll be the least of it. He's talking about more than simply the auto industry. one could try to say, oh, he's talking about the country.

And I would say to that, yes, he does expand upon the limitation of the auto industry. But I think it reads pretty clearly that he's talking about, A, the economy at large beyond the auto industry, and there would be a bloodbath, and B, the country at large, be it our culture, our economy, our inflation, our taxes, the loss of common sense would be a bloodbath if he lived. loses the election. I have a hard time steelmating my way into understanding how they're saying he's asking for a bloodbath, that he's asking for insurrection, he's asking for January 6th should he lose the election. I have a hard time understanding how they arrive at that phrase in that context, even with those non-sequiters, even with that stream of consciousness, is a call for political

violence. Now, in steel manning this argument, in trying to understand them, and weigh it against the potential that it's simply Trump derangement syndrome or willful manipulation of your mind, I have to take into account that most of the people hyperventilating and yelling about political violence are the very same people that sold me the lie about very fine people in the wake of Charlottesville, Virginia. There is a decent chance that some of you listening, and there is a greater than decent chance that anyone not listening to the Will Cain Show still today believes that Donald Trump called neo-Nazis very fine people. But in order for them to believe that, they can only exist and live in the emanations of words, the repetition of rumor, throw a rock into a canyon and hear the echoes. They don't ever hear original source material.

They hear the repetition of rumor. what did Trump say that day and this one blows your mind when you revisit source footage Trump said in the wake of Charlottesville that there were very fine people on both sides of that debate talking about those that don't want to see our statues torn down he then goes into would you take down a statue of George Washington in that case remember after Charlottesville they were taking down statues of Robert Lee he said George Washington was a slave owner how about Thomas Jefferson he says how do you feel about Thomas Jefferson In that moment, in 2017, he's actually, as is often the case, to be quite honest, with Donald Trump, he's prescient.

He's a fortune teller. He's looking into the future. Because here we sit today in 2024, some seven years later, and of course they've attacked George Washington. Yes, they have gone after Thomas Jefferson. And he's asking, would you go after them? And he's recognizing there are very fine people on both sides of the debate about how to address revisiting our history, taking down statues. Then Trump says, very specifically,

I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis. I'm not talking about white supremacists. Go back and look at the source video from that time. Look at it. He specifically says, I am not talking about neo-Nazis. I am not talking about white supremacists. He says there's very fine people in the argument to take down the statues.

And then he says, but I'm not talking about the people in black, he's referencing Antifa. He's talking about the goodwill debate on both sides of this issue of how you deal with parts of our past that we've evolved morally beyond in rewriting our history. And he's accepting from that. He's complimenting both sides of debate, calling them very fine people, and he's accepting from that Antifa and white supremacists and neo-Nazis. But that is turned into Trump calls Nazi. Very Fine People, the opposite of what he said.

How do they justify that to themselves? How do they get away with it by clipping the very first 10 seconds? There's very fine people on both sides of this situation. Before he gets to the part where he says, I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis. I'm not talking about the white supremacists. This is what the media has become so adept at, and I know that I'm media. This is what the legacy media has become so adept at, and I know that I'm legacy media. But in the end, I'm Will Kane, and I'm going to do my best to share with you the truth.

I'm going to be real and be honest. That's my pledge to be authentic, to do my best to search for the truth and be honest about my biases. I don't get dictates down from on high. I'm not told what to say. How do they get away the media, the legacy media, with that, by clipping things out of context. They have to be not stupid, not insane. at a minimum willfully obtuse, again in the words of Shawshake or Addipion, or manipulating your mind.

Zoom in. Zoom in to the very first few words and then lie about the greater takeaway. Zoom in to his call for a bloodbath and lie about the greater takeaway of the auto industry, the greater economy, perhaps even the country, by suggesting it's not a predicament. for the state of the country, but a call for political violence. Now, how does this work into manipulating your mind? Here's how. Those headlines I read to you earlier from across the media landscape, they're then echoed.

If you do a Google search on Trump and Bloodbath, you'll see how big tech plays a role. The top headlines, the entirety almost of the first page, will be Trump calls for Bloodbath in the wake of an election. Google represents 97% of the search market. If you want to see the truth, if you want to see full context, you have to dig. You have to work. You have to do things like listen to the Will Kane Show. Now, now that tech is helping formulate the minds, a mass psychosis, a mass formation psychosis, politicians pounce. They use the opportunity.

We saw from Nancy Pelosi. How about this from Hawaii, from a senator from Hawaii? He immediately told the media how to report this. He tweeted the following. Brian Shats. Headline riders, don't outsmart yourself. Just do, quote, Trump promises bloodbath if he doesn't win election. That's a government official telling the media how to promote misinformation.

How to write the headline. And by the way, how about an administration who is championed the fight against misinformation? They even look to put in a board in to help, you know, advance their goals of censorship. in advancing their goals of a mass formation psychosis, in advancing their goals of manipulating your mind. How does that work for the administration who's fought misinformation? Well, of course, to perpetuate misinformation.

The Biden administration tweeted the following the Biden campaign, and then Joe Biden himself this morning, Monday morning, tweeted, it's clear this guy wants another January 6th. He's referencing, Donald Trump's speech from Ohio. He's taken the bloodbath and says, it's a call for political violence,

it's a call for another January 6th. And then the money line. And then the poker player puts his cards on the table and says, I'm going to play my cards face up so that you can see. He then says, after saying it's clear this guy wants another January 6th, but the American people are going to give him

another resounding electoral defeat in November. Play the cards. Face up. Let them know exactly what you're doing. Lie. They don't care. Too many want the lie. The rest will be manipulated by headlines in Google. Lie. Bloodbath hoax. By the way, various Biden officials went on MSNBC and said, he's calling for a bloodbath. And in order to do that, they referenced other hoaxes that they've already perpetuated. They talk about it. about January 6 being insurrection. They talk about January 6 being deadly. The only person that died as a result of that day in January 6th was one of the rioters, Ashley Babbitt. It was deadly only to one of the people involved in that riot. It's not as the hoaxes perpetuated. Law enforcement officers died on January 6 as a result of the actions of January 6th. Support your hoax with the evidence of other hoaxes. So play the cards face up. Lie. Perpetuate the hoax.

Instill fear. Make you afraid. There'll be an insurrection. It's a move towards authoritarianism. It's the last election in America. We must save democracy. And then marshal your fear for your vote. Joe Biden says the American people will not allow him to do so and will give him a resounding defeat in November. That is the poker player's hand. That's the cards. brazenly lie. Never let go of the hoax. Double down. Triple down. And that's what was done this morning on MSNBC on the show Morning Joe. Triple down. Listen. He's talking about a blood bath for America. It's laid out in the terms of it. And these idiots on Twitter, these idiots on cable news, these idiots on Sunday shows going, where are you, presidents, you know, he was talking only about the auto industry, and this is one more.

It's just bullshit. Let me say that at 6.15 a.m. It's just bullshit. He knew what he was doing. We're not stupid. Americans aren't stupid. He was talking about a bloodbath. He was talking about a literal bloodbath,

says the show of Trump derangement syndrome. But it's not. It's not simply mistaken. It's not simply insanity. It's not simply Trump derangement syndrome. It's willful. It's taking it out of context. It's been done before on dozens of occasions.

It's being done now. And it will be done again. Get ready for the next seven months. They're playing their cards. face up and all of it is designed to manipulate your mind so that they can manipulate your vote bloodbath can you charge should you charge a 13 or 14 year old for vile speech that plus Aaron Rogers for VP Aaron Rogers as a conspiracy theorist let's get into what I missed over spring break with our lunch break panel.

That's coming up next on the Will Cain Show. I'm Janice Dean. Join me every Sunday as I focus on stories of hope and people who are truly rays of sunshine in their community and across the world. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com. Hey, I'm Trey Gowdy host of the Tragutti podcast. I hope you We'll join me every Tuesday and Thursday as we navigate life together and hopefully find ourselves a little bit better on the other side. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com.

I told you my favorite thing about spring break. Sprang break was competition. A little spike ball, a little golf. Well, I competed this morning. As many of you faithful listeners of the Will Kane show know, one of my New Year's resolutions was four physical challenge in 2024. I just completed the first, a 5K row. After nine weeks of training on the C2 rowing machine, I competed this morning, I registered my time. Was I victorious or was I a loser?

I will let you know in tomorrow's episode of the Will Kane show. But for now, streaming live at foxnews.com and on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page is our lunch break panel. Let's bring in Bobby Burrack. He's a columnist at Outkick.com. He covers culture, politics, sports, media. You can follow him on X at Burrack Bobby underscore. And Andrew Heaton, he's a comedian. He's the host of the political orphanage podcast.

And adults are talking with Andrew Heaton show on free people. He's also an ex at Mighty Heaton. What's up, guys? Hey. Happy spring break. I applaud your physical prowess. I look like a pregnant mirror cat when I take my shirt off. I am very skinny and out of shape compared to you.

So kudos. Really? Andrew, you're skinny fat? Yeah, well, yeah. I'm like, that's why I wear suits because I look like a scarecrow. And then I hit like 38 and started putting on this weird, like, one inch of blubber. So it's very disconcerting. It's not horrible if I'm fully clothed.

bathing suit less so well young bobby here is in the prime of his life you i get a text saying how pale i look because you're always coming off some vacation whether it's hawaii or florida and you're all tan uh we got tying this matter where i get you free vacation not host vacation well we could do that um i could give you a couple other tips move out of michigan a uh b take a vacation or c do the television secret of get yourself a little makeup and bronzer, Bobby. And I'm not going to even lie. I mean, everyone listening can know, but we're going to be real. There's a little makeup every weekend on Fox and Friends, and you can add a little tan.

By the way, Bobby, you're in the prime of your life. You're in your 20s. Not like Andrew and myself. So this is it, man. This is when you've got to get after it. It's after this, buddy, it's, I've figured it out. My energy is all over the place. I don't control it.

My performance is unpredictable. So you need to start doing what you're going to do right now. Get after it, Bobby. So I have a question for both of you guys, and I mean this sincerely. So guys get a lot of energy when they're like 16. They finally get a car and they feel like they're on top of the world. But I heard recently the midlife crisis is actually just as energizing. So do you think you have more energy when you're 45 through 50 when you go through that crisis

or 25 through 30 when you're stuck right in the middle of those two demographics. You have more energy when you're 25 to 30. You don't get the reason that you get a charge during your midlife crisis is that you just bought a portion. You left your wife to date your secretary. That is energizing, but it's not anything biochemical. It's just the dumb decisions you make. But the nice thing that you can look forward to is I have found my sloping,

declining testosterone levels to actually be quite pleasant because when you're 26 you just want to like climb stuff and scream like go to like if you drive by college campus what are the guys doing they're climbing stuff and screaming that's all men want to do until they're about 28 and so like now like it's just it's it's I'm about where I want to be it's a level of placidity that I'm comfortable with where I'm still industrious and I still get things done but I've got I don't know I don't have a weird drive to go out like fight and skirt chase and stuff okay I well noted well what I would say Andrew is you've described the 1980s midlife crisis like date the secretary and get the Porsche is 1980s the the modern day midlife crisis is what I'm going through where it's like oh I need to get in shape I need to do some things I need to climb that mountain that's that's the modern day midlife crisis and all I'm saying is it's harder than than doing these kind of things at your age Bobby but Andrew is 100% correct you do not have more energy you might have more inspiration but you don't have more energy than as a young man.

Hey, let's get into what I might have missed when I was on spring break with both of you guys. So first of all, I want to dive into Aaron Rogers. There's two levels to the Aaron Rogers story, and suspiciously they came out at the same time. The first is that he's on a short list, reportedly, for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for vice president. The second is that at the same time, there's this report from CNN, Pamela Brown, and Jake Tapper, that Aaron Rogers is a conspiracy theorist who denies the reality of Sandy Hook. Now, from what I could tell as I read it poolside on spring break, this came down to two sources. And I'll go to you first, Bobby, as somebody who covers the media here.

It was the reporter herself, Pamela Brown, and an anonymous source. I don't know. Like, reporters themselves being the source is simply me telling you I heard. You know, it's firsthand account, but it requires me to believe, A, in anonymous sources, and B, in CNN. Yeah, this read to me, like, the anonymous source. source had reached out to Pamela Brown and she just happened to say, oh yeah, he told me that two, 12 years ago at a Kentucky Derby party. That's the way I took it. Look, it was, there's no such things as coincidences in media. This was obviously tied to the RFKVP list. This was obviously

planted and reported to damage Aaron Rogers. But it was so bizarre because I think you used to put this phrase better than anybody. You can't disprove a negative. We can't disprove that this didn't happen. And because CNN didn't provide any proof, we're just left believing what side we want to. I didn't take much of that because we have no proof of it. We don't know who this anonymous source is. And Pamela Brown using herself as a source, I've never seen that in journalism to that degree, especially on a story as consequential as this one. I'll go back to you with this, Bobby, because you and I both, I was in sports media, you covered sports media.

That was enough for most of sports media, like those sources and that allegation that you can't disprove. I mean, I watched, and sometimes I get so angry at sports media commentariat reporters because they are so willing to do confirmation bias. Oh, I heard something about somebody that I already didn't like, so that means it's real. And they ran with that, man. I mean, they ran with, he is a pure conspiracy theorist and he's completely irresponsible. I'm not going to say it was the entirety of sports media, but it had the loudest megaphone.

Will, Rich Eisen's executive producer said that the New York Jets should cut Aaron Rogers and the NFL should never sign him again. They called for his NFL career based off these anonymous sources. insane. Andrew, by the way, you can address that. And also, like, it's pretty interesting to think about, I mean, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s VP list, I mean, almost everyone is, let's put it this way, outside of the central circle of politics. So I'm down in Austin, Texas. I met RFK Jr. last week. I went to an event that he was at. He was getting interviewed by former head of the Ace Field You. I was impressed by him. I went in with very low expectations as I do with anybody that, appears to be banking on a family name. And he is somebody that seemed to me to have a very good grasp of civil libertarian issues and a inherent understanding that government will abuse whatever power you give to it. I don't know that I would agree with them on everything, but there are things

that I really liked about him. And the other thing I'll note is that when I went to his campaign event afterwards, he is running a real campaign. And I mention that because a lot of the time, third party candidates are doing a kind of ceremonial trot of ideas that are not in the mainstream, but they're not real campaigns, they're not going to functionally make it. I got the distinct impression that he is actually running for president. He's not just trying to get a book deal or going to do this and then try to segue into an ambassadorship or something. The two people that are at the top of the list right now are Aaron Rogers and Jesse Ventura. I think Aaron Rogers is a very interesting choice. If I were running as a third party candidate, having somebody

that is under 90 on the ticket would be pretty good. It's a good contrast to the two major parties. Donald Trump and Joe Biden are both older than Bill Clinton. Think about that for a minute. Bill Clinton's younger than the two major party candidates. And I think what you're seeing right now, and you're going to see a lot more of, is an attempt from the two major parties to make everything always a two-way race. And you're going to see an increasing emphasis on how do we intellectually disqualify candidates rather than actually fight them. We live in a two-party system that is run by the two-party system. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party don't actually want to compete for your votes. What they want to do is say, listen, we know you don't like us,

but at least we're not the other guy. They want to run campaigns based on fear and hatred, and it's easier to do that when you've only got two options and you vote for the lesser of two evils. So when a third-party candidate comes in and goes, well, actually, I've got some ideas you might like. That's very threatening to them. And they're going to spend a lot of time and effort, making them the crazy people so that no one will consider voting for it. Right. Well, that's actually what Donald Trump represented. I mean, while he was under the Republican banner, I mean, let's be real about the policies that he represented.

They were a departure from previous Republican politics, and he was an outsider. And because of that, the entirety of Donald Trump's campaign and tenure as president is fighting not just Democrats, but it's fighting every institution in American governance. from media to the intelligence agencies and the Republican Party itself. I mean, the only time he might have had the Republican Party behind him was after he got the nomination in 2016. But even after that, it was a pretty big obstacle towards him. And that's not the cult of personality talking.

That's an accurate analysis of someone who existed outside the political spectrum, right? The binary choice you just provided us, Andrew. So here's what I'd be curious about. Like, do you guys think we go right back to standard old politics? after Donald Trump, or did he break the seal? Did he break the glass? And so, like, a guy like Aaron Rogers, and I'm not advocating for Aaron Rogers. I mean, I don't know near enough about what he thinks. But, like, he's famous. He's weighted into some big issues. I mean, like, do you think we'll see more of these? So, I don't know who would be, Bobby, like, The Rock? Like, we had the Rock

right here on The Will Kane Show. We asked him specifically, would you run president? And the reaction, I see Andrew smiling. The reaction is almost always like that. But that was the reaction. towards Donald Trump, too, for like half a decade. On late-night shows, they'd ask him, and everybody laughed, oh, that can't be real. And so we're going to do that to everybody. That can't be real. But I'm curious, is there somebody else? I don't know, Tony Robbins, another guest, friend of the Will Cain Show, the Rock,

whoever, they can come in like Donald Trump and represent a separation from the binary choice. Well, and let's classify where Aaron Rogers falls on the political speech. spectrum because this is pretty fascinating because the legacy media would be like, oh, he's some conspiratorial right-wing cook. Not really. He actually represents, excuse me, what Elon Musk is, what Joe Rogan is, which is former Obama supporters who have grave concerns about the trajectory of American culture and COVID opened their eyes. Aaron Rogers is not a conservative. He's technically not a liberal at this point.

But that's what Elon Musk is. That's what Joe Rogan is. That's what sometimes Glenn Greenwald and Matt Tabibi represent. That's a movement that should not be underrated. Now, who can be the face of that movement? That's another question. But there's a lot of Americans, including Clay Travis, the founder of Outkick, who used to vote Democrat, and then between 2016 and now are so politically

discontent with the Democratic Party that they have changed their affiliation. So I think that there's more Americans than we realize that fall in the category of Aaron Rogers, who are not traditional GOPers, but don't believe in how institutions have progressed. The reason I was smiling when you brought up the rock is I don't think you should underestimate professional wrestlers. If not for the technicality that you have to be a natural born citizen of the United States to run for president, I think that Arnold Schwarzenegger would be president or would have had a very, very good shot at being president. People that are clearly capable of dedication and willpower can see a market opportunity by going into wrestling and then learn an intuitive ability to be theatrical. are very powerful players. So if the Rock wanted to be a politician,

I think he'd be very good at it. I think that politics has changed in several fundamental ways, although I think that Trump is probably more symptomatic than instigatory when it comes to that. One of the things you bring up, Bob,

that I think is very much correct, is that the two major parties are not the sum total anymore. They used to be large parties. So pre-Trump, really more in the, up until about like 2000 or so, you had a lot of conservative, Democrats and you had Rockefeller Republicans, liberal Republicans, and both of those camps have

pretty much died out. They're very, very small now to the point where in 1990, independence represented like, I don't know, maybe 20 percent of the electorate, and now independents are about half of the electorate. So a tremendous amount of people that might reliably vote Democrat or vote Republican do not want to affiliate with either party. And so there is a very big opportunity to reach people that are not being catered to by the establishment. I think some of the things that you're probably going to see moving forward are the way that we select presidents has changed. It's kind of flopped. So the Republicans used to have a very orderly seniority-based system. Whoever was runner-up becomes the next guy. So Romney loses to McCain, he's the guy. But

McCain lost to Bush. He's the guy. And so Republicans have this very orderly system. And Democrats love the king killer. They love the shot in the dark that's going to change everything. So what they loved to do is have Hillary Clinton come up and she's clearly going to take it. And then Barack Obama out of nowhere and like the wheel of time is broken and this time it's different. And they loved that. And they've now flipped. They're now the lineup party. And so that dynamic is probably going to change. And then the other dynamic which I would love to revert back but seems to be part and getting worse of our politics is prior to 2016, most voters voted in favor of a candidate. Now voters,

vote against a candidate. So you go back to Obama versus Romney. People, the most part, voted for Romney because they liked Romney or voted for Obama because they liked Obama. Now people do it because they hate Joe Biden or they hate Donald Trump. And we're voting out of Antipathy. And that seems to be something that has changed and is increasing. That's really good. Really good point. Yeah. And what you speak of is that. I do really quick. The wrestling point, like if we're ranking sports, this is kind of like Aaron Rogers point, if you're ranking sports on who

would put you on the best platform to run for president, I don't know that you could beat wrestling. Like football players don't have theatrics and performance down. Basketball players at least have their face known. They at least have their face known to America. Like, I think wrestling probably is

number one. And they're going to beat out actors because this happens every couple of years like George Clooney will flirt with running for president or something. the deal is politics is actually really grueling you got to wake up at six o'clock in the morning and go shake hands at the elks lodge breakfast and you got to do it every day right for months and months and months and so i think a lot of actors in la that like the idea of like you know i've conquered hollywood i would like to go to dc and have everyone adore me and then they're like okay you got to go ask for money every 20 minutes for the rest of your life they go or i could just be in hollywood whereas those guys that are like you know i i wake up and i do a hundred crunches and then i i live lift a thousand pounds that are like used to just having these grueling existences that are based on a light at the end of the tunnel they're well situated for that kind of lifestyle right yeah and politics is so much like a wrestling right where you have the good guys the baby faces the bad guys

the heels and no matter what you pretty much just cater to your side which is so much what we're seeing but in some ways that group i just mentioned the erin rogers group they don't always do that they're sometimes politically inconvenient and unpredictable. I think there's a market for that. And I'll go back to your point about that's what I call the lesser of two evils phenomenon. And look, we heard that so much in 2016. Some people voted for Trump because they thought he was the lesser of two evils. And you have to wonder, does that eventually break where people say,

I'm not going to vote against someone anymore. I'm going to vote for who I like. And maybe that elevates a third party to not winning the election. election, but having a bigger impact than a lot of previous ones. All right. I want to get to two of the things with you guys today. First of all, I want to talk about Don Lemon. I mean, we have to talk about Don Lemon.

So, okay, Don Lemon does an interview last week after reportedly making a deal with X where he is going to exclusively post his content onto X. His first order of business is to interview Elon Musk. That interview is granted. Apparently, it goes horrifically. It's a horrific first date. And Elon Musk says that he is not going to sign a contract with Don Lemon for exclusive content. Lemon's still free to post his content on X, but he's not going to be exclusive and he's not going to be a paid, I don't know, content provider for X.

But in the process, and let me tell you guys something. Like, I know Don a little bit, and we're not friends. I think I've told this We're not friends Okay I actually ran into him at a bar In New York recently And the time that I saw him

Before that We had to be physically separated But So when I say this Understand that's my background Don Lemon's contract demands to X Are so absurd That it starts to make me like him again

Like I'm sorry Like it's so stupid that it makes me go, that's a good one, Don. Like, he asked for $5 million guaranteed, an $8 million contract a year. He asked for equity in X. He asked for a private flight,

this is according to New York Post, to Vegas, a day of day drinking, massages for he and his partner. All is part of his deal to do a three times a week, 30-minute show on X. That's so entitled and ridiculous that I'm like, good on you, Don Lemon.

No, no. Excuse me, I've a cold. You're misreading this, Will. His demands were purposely so outrageous because he wanted Elon Musk to cancel him because Don Lemon got so much pushback for teaming with Elon Musk and what's happening now. Now that he's branding himself as the guy who exposed Elon Musk, he's back on CNN. He's back doing these popular podcasts. This is the best thing for Lemon within his circles to force Elon Musk to terminate that contract before it actually ever began. I think it was so astute and wise on his part. I haven't heard that before. So crib this in my life. That was back in December. That was many times I've been fired.

I'm going to claim that was a student strategy that I put in place on purpose. By the way, maybe Bobby's right, Andrew. Like, are you, are you giving us? analysis or are you reporting that's what's happened he he made these ridiculous demands in order to have the contract fail no i'm just my that's just my read from it i don't have any um sources on it but i just he's a loving this right he's the most viral and newsworthy he's been since cnn can't him he did that video walking down the streets of new york saying Elon musk is not this free speech absolutist you have jemel hill now campaigning for cnn to rehire him

because he exposed Elon Musk. This worked out very well for Don Lemon. Him being fired this time was pretty strategic. This is Bobby Verac, the wrestling fan, Andrew. What you're hearing right here is this was all at work. And I'm telling you, he's a big wrestling. Bobby's a big wrestling fan. And I'm not telling him he's wrong.

Like, well, I will say Lemon is very good at manipulating the public discourse. Like, you know, he's, this is a real hole in my game. Like, I got to figure out. how to start thinking two or three chess moves ahead on these things. I'm totally inhibited by this whole being real thing, you know, so. Everything's real wrestling, Will, I mean. Everything's pro wrestling. Is there a market for authenticity?

He was a bad guy. Now he's a good guy. We call that a face turn. Wow. Okay. Well, here's the thing, Andrew. I'm going to put this to you really quickly. Then it's awesome.

Because this does not, like those contract demands, it surprised me, zero, zero that Don Limit would ask for those things. So this is great. So I get to be the kingmaker here. Option one is Don Limit is a strategic genius. Option two is Dodd Libid has an ego the size of a solar system. And I got a pick here. Right. Oh, I, Will I hate to do this to you. Bobby's made a convincing case and the bit that I'll add that The bit that seemed to me to be a little bit disjointed here is using Elon Musk as the kickoff interview. If you listen to Elon Musk on Rogan, Elon Musk is a hyper-intelligent guy, but he's not a charismatic speaker. He's a very level, like, it would be a difficult interview.

So, like, I would love it if he came on my show, the political orphanage, but it would be a, it'd be tough. Like, there's a reason that they were trying to get high on Rogan. Using it as your kickoff, if you're a veteran interviewer is a very interesting choice. Like if you're going in, you want to do a softball interview with somebody that you already have rapport that you know is going to be really fun and engaging. And so the fact that he selected Elon Musk tells me that there was a strategic move there rather than just making content. All right. I want to move to this final story. It's a serious story, but it's important.

And it requires us to talk about it in full context. And I'm going to give some background on my thoughts on this kind of thing for a second. So Bobby will know this about me. This was a particularly – this thing. style of story, really quite honestly, was in the top three that made me the most mad when I was doing sports media. So what would happen is the minute that an athlete reaches his apex, be it the Major League Baseball All-Star Game, MVP, or top pick in the NFL draft, I don't know, self-styled

Pulitzer Prize-winning seeking journalists would dig back through that athlete's tweets or history and they'd go back as far as when he was like a 13 or 14 year old and they'd come up with stuff that was objectionable they did it to collar murray they did to josh allen they did it to oh i feel like it was a brewer at the major league baseball all-star game they've done it over and over and over and it's grotesque to me it's not just like it's it's it really is grotesque because it's adults morally crusading on the backs of children and using old stuff as evidence of how someone grows as a human being. But I don't think, I think this idea that, you know,

we're moral because we were better than we were 200 years ago is only more odious, it's only slightly less odious than we're moral because we're better than a 13-year-old. Like this is really, really vile stuff to me. Now, I need to say that, but also say what I'm the story I'm about to hear to share with you is very, very vile behavior

from some 13 or 14-year-olds, okay? condemnable vile behavior allegedly taking place in Massachusetts. This is a story according to NBC 25 in Boston. I think it's NBC. It's News 25 in Boston. Six eighth graders have been criminally charged for their alleged roles in using Snapchat to set up a mock slave auction and direct hateful and racist comments towards black students. So says the district attorney last Thursday.

The students are 13 and 14. years old. And they apparently set up this mock slave auction, said horrible racist things, vile behavior from these 13 or 14 year olds. I think everyone, I don't want to speak for either of you, but I feel fairly safe that not only both of you,

but me and everybody listening and watching would go, that's horrific. They set up a mock slave auction. That's horrible. But I also think that is a parenting problem. First of all, those parents need to do some long looks in the mirror and ask,

themselves how they're doing with their children right now but I think that also we have to understand that children make horrible choices and decisions as they work on becoming adults right and this is I look there's a certain segment of the media that says oh you're back ending what I didn't do anything like this I don't have anything to hide but I know the children or children and that's the thing and what I can't get over is that there's a district attorney champion on you know by condemning these children this district attorney I mean, of course he's verbally, rhetorically condemning it as he should. By the way, the kids have been suspended from school.

That's appropriate. Suspended from school. But he's charging these kids. He's charging them. I was trying to pull up the charges. It's interference with civil rights. You have it there, Andrew? It's interference with civil rights.

Interfering with civil rights and threatening to do a criminal act. Yes. Now, these are words, right? So there is a whole First Amendment. amendment thing. Like, first of all, like, free speech requires us not to prosecute criminally vile speech. Like, unless, I know the line, it's Brandenburg, the Supreme Court decision Brandenburg. It's direct incitement of violence. These kids, we can condemn and we should condemn, and we can also go, whoa, you're charging them for vile speech? I turn it over to you, Andrew.

I think you're absolutely right. I think that we're talking about two phenomena here. One is the speech, itself something that we ought to condemn. The answer is yes. The other element is, is it criminal? The answer is a very hard no. What this DA is doing, and I tried to do research on this in prep for the show, Will, like I went to the DA's website, I went through the press releases. I couldn't find the actual laws that he was citing. And so left with the stories that we have that are just coming from local media outlets, it very much appears that the DA has said, I am prosecuting racist for being racist. That's what he's doing is he's identified kids that have, as you eloquently put, they're saying odious things that ought to have social consequences

within the school and within their family. And he is taking it to a criminal level and saying that we are prosecuting racism. Now, racism is really bad. It is something that should be socially condemned. But in the United States, for very, very good reason based on, I don't know, all of global history for all time, we've figured out that when you give government the ability to condemn opinions, it is going to absolutely turn around and misuse those. And it's going to restrict the opinions to that which helps the government. And so we very rightly had a robust free speech regime put in place in our country where you can say odious things and you will deal with the social consequences of it, but the state is not going to prosecute you for that. And this is a

great example of that. The kids are saying dumb stuff. One would hope that they will learn from this and we can, you know, rehabilitate them and they'll be, they won't do it again. And I don't want to like ruin these kids' lives. I want to put them in the right direction. But the criminal element of this is a kind of nascent authoritarian impulse, which is you don't deal with speech by good speech. You deal with speech by treating it like a virus and lancing it and cutting it out. And that is an authoritarian, intolerant way of looking at the world. And the way to handle this is what the ACLU was doing back in the day of like literal Nazis wanted to walk through Skokie, Illinois, which was a Jewish neighborhood with multiple residents that had

survived the Holocaust. It could not be more offensive than that. And the ACLU, which much like Will here was going, we agree, this is horrible. This is absolutely horrible. But it is legally their right to do it. You don't get to restrict what people say and do based on how odious you find it. You get to restrict it if it's a direct incitement of violence. If it's, if there can be legal consequences for fraud. for things like that. But if it's an opinion, which is odious, you can do that. This is a very weak case based on what I've seen of threatening criminality as if they were truly going to hold a slave auction, and therefore we are going to preemptively charge them

for something they did not do, which clearly they couldn't do anyway. That's a very weak way of going, we're going to prosecute somebody for being racist. Yeah. And then, Bobby, there's the cultural angle. The cultural angle, the fact that they were 13 and 14 years old that doesn't forgive them but it should factor in like in wisdom using wisdom set aside the free speech angle just for a moment i'm saying just set aside the free speech angle um i just don't know about a society that that takes a 13 or 14 year old and says okay the district attorney is after you for your mistakes they're they're terrible mistakes but i feel really bad for the kids that they were doing this too and about that that needs to be said

as well. But I just don't know about a society and a culture that morally preigns on the backs of children. Yeah, and I think this further establishes the fear people have of where speech crimes are punished more thoroughly than violent crimes, right? Like if these kids would have came to blows at recess, we wouldn't even know about this story. The district attorney would have never gotten involved, but because it's a supposed speech crime, which it sounds like it technically is it's become this big issue where their lives might be ruined forever and i echo everything you guys said there and it just comes down to such a dangerous precedent where we let these district attorneys decide what is and is not racism or even a hate crime right a lot of this

stuff tends to be subjective in history always shows that it repeats itself or even rhymes and it becomes weaponized in abuse and it just gives the people in power even more power over us. That can't happen. Yeah. Bobby Burrack, he's a writer at Outkick. Again, culture, politics, media, and sports. Check him out, Burrack, Bobby, on X. And Andrew Heaton, he hosts the political orphanage, as you heard it mentioned just a moment ago,

and adults are talking with Andrew Heaton on Free the People. And find him on X at Mighty Heaton. You guys were awesome. Thank you guys so much for doing this today. It's been fun talking. with you here on the Will Cain show. Thanks for having us. Like your new tan, Will.

It'll last for another week or two. Appreciate it. All right. One of the things I missed over spring break was NFL free agency. And the Cowboys get an F. And it's an F that I'm afraid sets them up for a future that's an F. That's coming up next on the Will Cain Show. From the Fox News Podcasts Network.

Hey there, it's me. Kennedy, make sure to check out my podcast. Kennedy saves the world. It is five days a week, every week. Download and listen at Fox News Podcast.com or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Coming up tomorrow on the Will Cain Show, the host of Jesse Waters' primetime. Jesse Waters hangs out with this for I don't know what he'll give us, half hour, 45 minutes, with Jesse Waters. on the Wilcane Show streaming live at Fox News.com, the Fox News YouTube channel, the Fox News Facebook page,

always on demand at Apple, Spotify, or Fox News podcast, hit subscribe. And then if you want to catch up on exclusive contents, we're two months into the Will Kane show, and we have various features and segments like Off the Rails with Pete Heggseth or lunch break panels like we just had with Bobby Burke and Andrew Heaton. You can go over to YouTube and hit Will Kane Show. It's under the description of this live feed right now and hit Subscribe. And you can get previous interviews with Dave Portnoy or Tony Robbins or The Rock or you can get any of those featured segments like Off the Rails by subscribing to the Will Kane show. Last week was the kickoff of NFL free agency. Now, I have become a firm believer that you don't win the Super Bowl by winning free agency.

And in fact, you can probably find a negative correlation to the teams that do win free agency often do not. not set themselves forward on a good step towards winning the Super Bowl. Free agency is like going to the store and buying the most expensive items. When you can wait after the insanity calms down and get something maybe not quite as good, but 70% of the value for 30% of the cost. And as a fan of Warren Buffett, of value investing, of not being a big spender myself, I've appreciated teams, quite honestly, like the Dallas Cowboys, who've seen the light when it comes to free agency.

Ever since the 1990s, after the Dion Sanders purchase, Jerry Jones seems to have understood that you don't win the Super Bowl by winning free agency. The problem is he hadn't won a Super Bowl. But the team has been consistently better. The Dallas Cowboys usually shop on day three for the second week of free agency, and they get good buys. They've had a good history of bringing in players like Jayron Curse,

or Malie Cooker, whatever it may be, at a much better and cheaper value than who is signed on day one and day two. This year, that's guys like Sequin Barclay or Kirk Cousins. But the problem for the Dallas Cowboys is they have completely sat out free agency pretty much altogether and done nothing but lost players.

And there's a reason for that because their cap situation is terrible. They simply can't afford it. And that's a concern. They're paying so much money for DAC Prescott. They need to restructure Dak Prescott. They need to re-sign Dak Prescott. They need to do that in part just to free up cap money.

But that cap money is going to have to go to signing the guys that are already on the Dallas Cowboys, like C.D. Lamb or Michael Parsons. And those are important players, better than anybody you're going to get in free agency. You've got to keep those guys in-house, which means you're going to have to pay top dollar, which means you're going to have to figure out your cap situation. And it's going to keep you from signing guys from the outside. It's going to put more pressure on the draft. But the Cowboys are probably looking at a situation where they need five starters.

And they're going to find five starters in the draft. They had to say goodbye to Hall of Fame, Retiring Smith. Hall of Fame left tackle. Now, here's the most concerning thing for me. The Cowboys have three straight years of 12 and 5. That's incredible. That's an incredible run. That is one of the best.

in the NFL. And if you look at runs in the NFL, they don't last that long. They last three, four, maybe five years. The best teams of established dynasties reinvent those teams on three to five years cycles around a franchise player. Almost every New England Patriots Super Bowl looked different but for Tom Brady. You have to have a quarterback at that level and then revolve around that. That's somewhat you're seeing with Patrick Mahomes and the Can't Sea Chiefs. There's no Tyree Kill anymore. They've had to change out running backs. They've changed out the entire wide receiver core.

The only consistency out of Mahomes, really, outside of Mahomes, has been Travis Kelsey. And guess what? Travis Kelsey ain't going to be long for the Kansas City Chiefs. But that dynasty will roll on around Mahomes as long as you have a guy like that. Otherwise, you get stuck in purgatory of the Minnesota Vikings, paying top dollar for Kirk Cousins, which puts together a good team for the Vikings, year after year, winning record, playoffs, one round, maybe two, and out. And that's become the story of the Dallas Cowboys.

Your window was the last three years, 12 and 5. And that got you one round into the playoffs and out. And now what I'm worried about is you're seeing the closure of that window. Now, what are you reinvented around? I think we all have some, and I love him, but I have some healthy skepticism around Dak Prescott. Can you do it around a defensive player? Parker Parsons? Can you reinvent? Is he Lawrence Taylor? Can you reinvent over and over and over around

one guy on defense? Is he influential enough? Quarterback, by very definition, influential and he has the ball in his hands. And what I'm telling you is, while the Dallas Cowboys get an F in free agency this year, because not only they're not just value shopping, they're not shopping at all because they can't afford to. And that's a product of the fact that their future is set up. What it looks like to me, their future is set up as a failure as an F. I think tinfoil Pat, young establishment James, and two a days, Dan want me to put up a poll. Who's had the worst free agency? Bills, I don't even know who else is on it because it doesn't matter. You know who's had the worst free agency? And it's not close?

The Dallas Cowboys. All right, that's going to do it for me today here on The Will Cain Show. I'll see you again tomorrow. Remember, tomorrow, Jesse Water. The host of Jesse Waters' Primetime hangs out on The Will Cain Show. I'll see you next time. Listen 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 app.

This is Jason Chaffetz from the Jason in the House podcast. Join me every Monday to dive deeper into the latest political headlines and chat with remarkable guests. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com or wherever you download podcasts.