Will Cain Country - Why the Left Keeps Celebrating Assassins ft. Michael Malice

Episode Date: April 29, 2026

After the most recent attempt on President Donald Trump’s life, there was an alarming air of disappointment among the Left. What would the reaction have been had the attempt been successful? Host of "YOUR WELCOME" and Author Michael Malice joins Will and The Crew to discuss how today’s society has created an incentive for political violence, and take a deeper look into how the motivations of today’s assassins compare to those of past years. Plus, Michael and Will share their thoughts on the second indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, this time over an Instagram post of a seashell arrangement that reads “8647.” 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 (⁠⁠⁠@silicanes⁠⁠⁠)Follow Will on X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WillCain⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's something else here now. Something new. From exclusively on Paramount Plus, it's the series Stephen King calls Scary as Hell. Everything here is impossible, but it's also real. Sci-fi Vision calls it the best show streaming right now. We're running out of time and we still don't know the rules. Don't miss what the movie blog calls something you need to watch.

Saving those children is how we all go home. From binge all episodes exclusively on Paramount Plus. Social Media Manager for United Healthcare. Pre-K teacher in Wisconsin. People we entrust our children with. People we turn over. Important jobs to. People we just walk around them.

Lament the fact. Nicole Allen missed at the White House Correspondents dinner with Michael Mallet with Michael Mallet. Michael Malice. And contrary, streaming live at the Will Cain Country YouTube channel, the Wilcane Facebook page. Always here. Just hit Follow at Spotify or on Apple. That's also where you will find.

The host of Your Welcome. The author of Not Sick of Winning, The White Pill, The New Right? That's where you will find Michael Malice. But today, you find him, along with Tenfoil Pat, two of days, Dan, right here on Will Cane Country. What's up, Mike? great to see you will have you ever been mike or have you always been michael uh my friends call me much worse than either of those but i hate it when randos on social media start calling me mike don't you does it bother you when people get chummy with you strangers no what do you mean by

you're a lot nicer first start you're a lot nicer person than me like uh i don't even know what you mean by chummy. Like, strangers don't walk up and go, hey, Willie. I mean, if somebody randomly on a street or at an event goes, hey, Willie, I'm on defense. Like, I feel like we're about to fight. Something's gone down and this has just gotten aggressive. Right. So I feel like when people on social media use the diminutive, they're trying to establish a level of, hey, we're bros.

And it's like, I don't know you. I'm from Russia. We don't play that. I don't think it was true. So if somebody said, hey, Mikey, if somebody said, hey, Willie, the establishment of a diminutive, that was a superiority play. We are all of a sudden in a contest, and it may be a physical contest. Yeah. So that's, and I think that happens very often, especially. in social media, people want to bring you to their level.

You keep bringing up social media. I mean, I give a damn about social media. You know, the thing is, like, whatever somebody says on social media, I don't really even read it that much, Mike. I don't want to overstate my, oh, yeah, look, Dan, I'm not trying to overstate my, my bulletproof skin. I read it, but I've been through this now for a while. Like, I know my different stages of internalization of social media.

I know there were times in my career. where I read it and it might have affected me emotionally. I'm not telling you it never does. I'm not telling you there aren't a few comments, but I have gotten to the point now where I think I'm pretty capable of reading it. And if, and scrolling past it, it only ever resonates if I think there's an element of truth. And then it's like, oh, there's a little bit of sensitivity here. Like when somebody says, Will, you did this poorly in that segment or you said,

this. If I agree with them, that's when it bothers me. I think the only reason I bring it up is that's the time I have the most interaction with normal people because I'm here in Austin and boys at hot. So I'm staying in my house and they're not here. So social media is the only place I'm going to be talking to the average person. Okay. I like what Michael is doing now, though. Like he's using grok to combat these these heathens. These Cretans. It's pretty genius.

I haven't seen this. Yeah. What's he doing? Well, it's the greatest thing ever. So if someone comes at me and is like, well, you know, Trump's been impeached twice, and I'll just say, hey, Grock, explain to Pat that impeachment is not the same as removal from office and has no impact on someone's status as president. And then Grock explains it to the person, and the two of them can go, have it.

their little argument and I don't have to waste my breath. It's the greatest time sever of all time. Forces people to argue with AI. Yeah. Well, the reason why my, that I kind of jumped on you invoking social media is because the question for our time at this point is how much does social media reflect reality? And I don't mean that as like, you know, you or me or somebody in the public sphere or even somebody out there who, especially younger people, start to think that social media reflects reality,

but I think the question for you and me is, are they wrong? So what I mean by that is, all right, this is, I believe, Pat, tell me about Patrick Meyer, if I get it wrong. I believe that Patrick Meyer is a school teacher in Wisconsin, and he posted on X. I am not impressed with recent presidential assassinations. It's effing embarrassing. Booth, Gito, Slagos. Shagash. Help me. There you go. Oswald must all be spinning in their graves. M-A-G-A-A-A, MAGA. Make Americans great assassins again, sad. Okay, by the way, who is Shaggav? Shagos shot McKinley. The other day, I have it. Do you want to see his autopsy? brain I happen hanging my living in my hallway.

Really? God, look at you. You want to see it? As a quick. Yeah. Well, do you have to get up to go get it? What are you going to do? Look at that chair.

Oh, he's already gone. I know. This is what kind of chairs you should have on the set. It's horns. What is that chair? It's like a long, it's like Texas chair. Yeah, we need to get you a longhorn chair with actual horn. I'm telling you this instead of those schools.

It looks positively. So, here we go. Nah. This is... What do you got? This is the telegram saying McKinley was shot and then McKinley died from 1901, and this is the autopsy of Leon Shalgosh's brain. What does it reveal in his brain? What do we see in that autopsy?

Nothing. They thought it meant something at the time. They thought you could see a criminal's criminality through the folds of his brain in 1901. The chronology? The thought was there. Right. Is there any chance? I have so many conversational threads I'm ready to jump on.

I told Patrick, don't even produce. Don't worry. It's going to be fine. I have so many conversational threads. First of all, let's do this. Do you know how like, interestingly, human beings do experience progression. We get better. And medicine is one of the things where we definitely have gotten better.

Like, I love this show that I watched for one season. I believe it starred Clive Owen. It was called The Nick. And it's about the sort of advent of surgery. and by the way, one of these presidential assassins, like it's Guito that killed Garfield, Garfield didn't have to die. It's that he died from the infection of the wounds because they didn't know how to prevent infection, what caused infection, all of those things.

They were digging around in Garfield's back with like bare fingers and all that. So obviously medicine is one of those places where we've advanced and we've understand, for example, the role of microbes and infection. But at the same time, I do want to balance that. reality against the reality that sometimes we leave behind common sense traditional based wisdom that is not totally worth discarding. Like there are things that people did for thousands of years or hundreds of years, and they, by virtue of it having survived that long,

there's something in there that we need to remember had some semblance of truth in it, right? Do you think like where they were headed at one time with phrenology was completely bogus moment in time science? We'll look back on that and go, actually the whole phrenology movement had this kernel of truth or this ability to lead us into a direction that we somehow have missed with modern science. Well, the first part of what you were saying, leeches are a good example of this, right? Leach has killed President Washington and then they regard as this anachronism. And now they use them again in contemporary medicine because if your blood is too thick and, you know, this could cause heart attacks and all sorts of other issues, strokes, you could have the leeches to actually thin the blood in a very natural. way. So there are examples of exactly what you're saying. They weren't used in the right application,

but they certainly have a purpose that didn't need to be discarded. Phrenology is no, because phrenology to my understanding, and I did not expect the conversation to go here, but I can wing it, is not about the shape of the brain, but about the shape of the skull. So you can make the argument for me, I'm not a brain surgeon, that if you look at how brains are shaped, that could be determinative of certain things, certain regions are enlarged. I think that's pretty well-established science. But in terms of the physical skull, which is a bone, I don't see how that can be used to be demonstrative. Wouldn't there be some correlation between the skull and the brain?

You know, the casing and the contents? Wouldn't there be some correlation between brain and its casing, you know, the skull? Like if the skull takes on a certain shape, doesn't that tell you certain things about the shape of the brain? No, I don't think that's true at all. I don't think the skull is the skull is has soft spots, the fontanelle, but the skull's already pre-shaped. It's doesn't, it's not like putting like jello in a container. You sound like you're sensitive about your head. Uh, no complaints.

Um, okay, one, okay, so okay, maybe phrenology, just, just being open-minded here. Maybe there was something to phrenology, but Michael Miles is raining on that parade. The other day I was talking to my TV staff about there was some name that came up in my prompter and I was like, I don't have a problem with that, that ethnicity's names. Meaning getting to the pronunciation, the correct pronunciation. But I was telling them, there is some language that I have never been able to master. If you throw up a name from that country, I cannot freaking, like there's nothing. If you throw up a Spanish surname, there are some others that sometimes, boy, I just see it.

And I'm like, I got it. The vowels fall into the right places. I can do this, right? Is it romance language? I don't think it's just romance languages. There are others, like French. I think I have a lot of trouble, Dan, with French names. You throw that in the prompter and I'm like, here we go.

This is going to be a roller coaster. If I haven't asked ahead of time, how do you say this name? I'm going to, this is going to be a white knuckle grip situation on my way through this pronunciation. And this assassin, C-Z-O-L-G-O-G-O-S-Z, no chance. You heard me Tripp. That would have been great on television. I would have just, because I quit on it. Did you notice when I tried?

I actually quit. Rarely do I quit, but I was like, slug, a lot. And then I just pulled the rip cord. I don't even think I got to the last Z. Well, let me tell you a little about him because it's really an interesting story. So when he killed McKinley in 1901, right, he's arrested. He shot him in Buffalo. And he says, Emma Goldman radicalized me.

Emma is right behind me on my shoulder on the cover of my book, the White Pill. And then Emma's like, oh, crap. Because she had met him once, and he was so crazy, she thought he was a Fed. So she's on the lamb, because now there's the belief that there's this anarchist conspiracy to kill President McKinley. people can't get it through their heads in 1901 that it was that easy after Lincoln had just been assassinated a few years earlier to take out a president and they finally find her and they arrest her, but they had nothing to hold her on and they had to let her go. And she became the most hated woman in America.

So he was a very interesting figure. Wait, so you obviously know a lot about this, Mike, because in my final point on this, before we get to the actual substance of this tweet by this guy Patrick Meyer, is slow gloss, slow gloss, slow gloss, slogloss. Is he the most forgotten? Shal gosh. Shal gosh. I got it now.

I have to see it in my brain different than the way it spelled. No, S-H-L-G-O-S-H. Shogosh. I just did it differently in my head. Is he the most forgotten assassin in American history? Like, I didn't know who that was when I just read that right there. You knew about McKinley. I don't remember him at all.

I think Guteau is the most forgotten because people don't even remember Garfield. So that's, that's, but people remember McKinley and Roosevelt. So I think Guteau is the most forgotten one. I only remember Guteau because of the musical assassins. Yeah. Yeah. Well, Gito's in my head as well because they did a Netflix series on this just recently. Uh, what was it called like the thunder and the lightning or something like that?

Uh, and they did, it's like a five, four part. series. It was pretty good about death by lightning. Yeah, death by lightning. And I've kind of fallen down the rabbit hole of Guito. He's fascinating. He went to that upstate New York like cult compound that was we're talking now in the 1800s. It was free love. Like they had basically everybody could have sex with everybody.

But it was a movement. It was at one point pretty large. Yeah, but they rejected Guito. Like nobody. would have sex with Guito. So like they were all, the whole deal was you didn't have to just have sex with your wife. You get to have sex with everybody's wife all this, but they were also like, but not you, Charles. Well, no wonder. We would rather you not be here. No wonder what you do with me. Myling a malice laughing. Well, can I quote Dr. Steve Broll when he says, orgies are no fun if no one wants to do with you. So yeah. It's got to be particularly

damaging to your ego. I am finally here. I've got it. This stuff is free. Everybody's having fun. Everybody's open. And then like, but not you. But also, in all seriousness, well, this leads to 1981 when Hinkley thought, well, Jody Foster's going to be my girlfriend if I take out President Reagan. And, you know, when he failed, that turned her away from men forever. But we underestimate how much, and I think that's the case today, you know, to circle back to where we're going to talk about the main topic, a lot of these young, frustrated low status males see this as an opportunity to become something. And it's very natural in the sense of animals, right? If you take out that alpha, you grow up the status ladder very

quickly. So it's a really cheap and easy shortcut to become a big deal. The fact that we're talking about Leon Shalgosh, you know, 125 years later, says something. Let's take a quick break, but continue this conversation with the host of your welcome, Michael Malice. on Will King Country. Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMDM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. 19 plus to wager.

Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor. Free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming Ontario. Amazon presents Jeff versus Taco Truck Salsa, whether it's Verde, Roja, or the orange one. For Jeff, trying any salsa is like playing Russian roulette with a flamethrower.

Luckily, Jeff saved with Amazon and stocked up on antacids, ginger tea, and milk. Habaniero? More like habanier, yes. Save the everyday with Amazon. Welcome aboard via rail. Please sit and enjoy. Please sit and stretch. Steep. Flip. Or that.

And enjoy. Via rail, love the way. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're still hanging out with the host of your welcome and the author of Not Sick of Winning, The White Pill, the new right Michael Malice. Yeah. So, okay, let's like to your point, let's go back to the main topic. That rationale that you just described,

is the one that we have often ascribed to assassins and would-be assassins. The play for relevance. And in this case, perhaps like eternal relevance in some ways. And that play, I don't know, you just explained it as rational, which would divorce it from insanity. Because we've got competing instincts going on, right, when it comes to, oh, they're crazy people, right? Or B, they're pursuing what is, as you just have done. described irrational motivation to sort of give themselves some relevance. And then there's C. And this guy, Cole Allen at the White House Correspondent Center, in my mind, seems to fall

into a new bucket, a C bucket. He may be making a play for relevance. He may be. He doesn't actually seem like an insane person. He seems like a fairly normal, maybe even somewhat, somewhat what, high functioning person out there who has guzzled mainstream rhetoric by the gallon. And the things that he's saying in his manifesto are indistinguishable from the types of things you would hear on MSNBC. Or what this guy's saying, this teacher from Wisconsin, who's basically saying, you know, this I'm not impressed with the current day presidential assassins and basically their failures. And this really is full circle, Michael, to the conversation. Like, the social media versus reality thing. Like, I am concerned.

This guy, Patrick Meyer, who writes this, who's a teacher. Well, first we can go, shouldn't be teaching kids. But second, what makes him different than the types of things that was being said by Cole Allen? Well, I think the difference is Cole Allen has some testosterone and the courage of his convictions, unlike most teachers. And I would want to take an aside here to point out that one of the most disturbing things for me among conservatives who understand the nature of government and especially the nature of D.C. is how willing they are to hand over their children to people who despise them and their values to raise as their own. So don't be surprised when you hand over your kids to the teachers union when they come back after 12, 8, whatever years, despising you and everything you stand for and then going off to university where they will be completely lost to you. I think this teacher is just being a little bit glib and the joke's not landing. There are very many failed presidential assassinations as well, thank God. I mean, no one wants to see something like that happen.

But to your point, I'm glad to hear you say that some of these people are not crazy, because oftentimes when we call someone crazy, that's just saying, I don't understand their thinking. And they're thinking, I don't think, I think it's very hard for anyone to say, Luigi Mangione is crazy in the sense that you don't understand his thought process. His thought process is very clear, very internally coherent and malevolent. And I think something people need to appreciate is if we are in a cultural war, which seems to be pretty indisputable, at some point you start stacking those bodies. And I hope people watching this wake up and realize that political violence serves a purpose for very many people.

And that's something that is very disturbing to appreciate with something necessary to acknowledge. All right. So I wonder when you start circling the drain how you pull yourself out of the suck. But I also think context is important. So I think you and I would agree that political violence and rhetoric is that it's worst. This is an easy statement I would suggest in your my lifetime, Michael. Okay? The worst that it's been and that I don't know how old you are exactly, Michael, but let's put, let's give it 50 years, right? Meaning. I see you thinking. This is the worst it's been in 50 years. I feel confident in that statement. Do you not? I think it might have been worse during Trump's first term. Really?

I think we forget. I remember I was in Japan a couple years ago and I turned to my friend. I go, isn't it great to be in a country where we don't have to worry that someone's going to bring up Trump in every conversation? I think it's easy to forget how deranged people were during 2017 to 2020. I think it's calmed down. Now, I don't think it's calmed down a lot, but I think it was just open discourse among leftists that praying that someone would, air quotes, do something about this guy. I think it's come down a bit. Well, I mean, that's hard.

I hear you. And the purpose of me bringing this up is to try to give all of us a little bit of sense of historical context so that we don't over, we don't overestimate our current moment. That's what everybody always does. And the reason why we shouldn't overestimate our current moment is we're trying to predict where we go next accurately. I don't know because the president just survived. I know it wasn't, the guy didn't get that close, but a third assassination attempt. We're not even one year removed from the assassination of Charlie Kirk. So I don't know, because it's not just about Trump.

I don't know that I can grant you that it was worse eight years ago. And we don't know that it was the third. It could be the eighth. I mean, we're not privy to all the information. And I also, there's another point I would point out, which is I think we all remember when Biden was in front of the White House lit and red, pounding his fists and talking about, you know, like the evil Americans. That, I think, was also a very intense moment in American political discourse. Okay, so to the point of circling the drain, if we went back to the 60s, though, now we've changed the aperture, right? It was really bad in the 60s.

A lot of guys were actually killed. and the country was really tearing itself apart. From the 60s, we'd probably rewind the clock to the 19-teens, you know, I would guess maybe, like, the rise of progressivism, the role of the burgeoning role of communism in America. Somewhere, I'll let you address that period in time, because it's somewhere around actually McKinley's attempted assassination, but also up through the 1920. and then, of course, the Civil War. So the point is, the country, we're not in uncharted territory. We might, in a bigger historical context, not even be at the worst. And I only bring that up to say, are we circling the drain?

Because the country has pulled itself out of these situations before. The 1960s did not lead to a civil war, right? It did not lead to, like you brought up a men to go political violence. But when I see stuff like this post from this teacher, who you say was making a glib joke, or this, Michael, let's listen to this together from Charlemagne the God. I almost can hear the drain. I can almost hear the sucking sound. Listen to Charlemagne the God.

The Trump administration has caused so much pain to people's everyday lives that some folks are fed up and willing to risk it all. Simple as that. And if you're going to talk about anybody toning down violent political rhetoric, start with the president. I'm Donald J. Trump. So that's a bit of a justification for Cole Allen. I don't think it's a justification as much as it's a call to action.

It's both. He's basically saying, hey, if you want to take a shot at the guy, I don't blame me. This is Charlemagne speaking, not me, don't come from the Secret Service. Will, I think to your point, the difference between now and let's suppose the 60s, but certainly the 1910s, is a lot of this is individual violence as opposed to like rioting or mass violence or like civil unrest. And that's very dangerous. because when you have that lone gunman, you know, again, like a Hinkley or some of these other people,

it's very hard to, if you have a movement, you know what I mean, you infiltrate it, you arrest the leaders, you know what I mean, it's kind of much easier to grapple with. But if it's that one random weirdo, you know, in his house and he gets a message from Grock saying this would be a good idea, what is, you know, what are the authorities supposed to do? How are they supposed to preempt that? It's almost impossible. So I agree with you completely. The fact is, I don't think anyone, even the complete bigots, and please correct me from wrong

in the 60s, were applauding Martin Luther King's assassination, for example, or saying, well, he got what he was coming, maybe under their breath in certain vile contexts, but they didn't have access to the microphone and the cameras like people do now with social media. But nowadays, you can get Luigi Mangione t-shirts. are regarded as heroic figures and as long as there is an ins- something conservatives understand better than leftists, conservatives understand that people respond to incentives. And if there's an incentive for a person to have his name on a t-shirt to be regarded as heroic and he's got nothing to lose, as Charlemagne said, out of 350 million people, some are going

to kind of roll those dice. And that is something that I think that is, and it's not going to be just the president. We saw this with Steve Scalise. We saw this with Gabby Giffords. You don't have to go for number one to kind of do something about it. So there's infinite targets, and that's something, and like Nangioni didn't go after a political figure. This is something I agree with you that I can see the drain. So let's talk.

So let's describe what that would mean circling the drain. So do you think, Mike, so I'm going to ask you two questions. God forbid if President Trump were assassinated, and that's a God, I reemphasize on multiple levels, God forbid, right? But the man still has almost three years left in his term. He's experienced, as you mentioned, a minimum of three assassination attempts, a minimum. A lot of people pointing out to me, like just a couple of months ago at Mar-a-Lago, there was another issue, which people are not even talking about. if he actually were taken out I think that would probably be the Tinderbox match

because now you're going to talk about the right response and I think it would not be pretty I don't know because if you look at 63 if you look at McKinley there seems to be this rally around the flag scenario the vice president obviously then becomes president and he gets a boost of support I don't think you'd have this draconian crackdown because I think very quickly the Democrats

withdraw quite hopefully. I mean, hopefully we have this much sanity. We'd throw that person on the bus, disavow and denounce. I don't think there was any cheering in, you know, when Scalise was shot among Democrats or leftist circles like MS now that, oh, this was a good thing or we're in favor. Oh, man, I don't know if you're right. You don't think there would be, forget, forget random social media commentators. you don't think there would be prominent people that within some period of time, maybe not the day of.

But God, dog, it's President Trump. It might be day of that would celebrate his death. I think that is, at that point they've won so they can have this mea culpa by like, oh, we'll miss him. He had such a great sense of humor, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I don't know. I don't want to know. I mean, this is one of those questions. I would be happy if us talk about it for hours and never have to figure out which one of us was right.

Do you know what I mean? Sure. Sure. Well, okay, here's a test that I've thought about this week. In whatever way that President Trump is no longer relevant, including his retirement, do you think this type of stuff that we're talking about, what you're hearing from Charlemagne, the stuff that I just shared with you from a teacher, do you think it largely goes away? Or does it even stall? Like, how personalized is it at this point to President Trump? I know right now it appears very personalized to President Trump.

And Dan, our friend on the show here, he thinks it is personalized to President Trump. I do. I've been around long enough that I don't think it is, like maybe 20, 30 percent is at this point. I think it is easily transportable over to the next guy. I've seen it go from Bush to Romney to Trump at varying degrees and speeds. And I think a significant amount of this mindset easily transports to J.D. Vance. I've been wondering, I've had this conversation almost verbatim with several people over the last couple of weeks. And the question was, okay, is Trump some sort of like myasma in D.C.

where he makes everyone, including Republicans, crazy? or is this been a slippery slope and this is where we are as a country now and things are just going to get worse and worse? I'm leaning toward the former because I don't, first of all, you and I both remember the Bush hatred, which was extreme, wasn't as deranged. It wasn't 24-7 people obsessed with George W. Bush. Now, counter to that was social media wasn't as prevalent then. there wasn't this kind of machine there to gin up people's agitation and keep them in a state of perpetual unrest. I think what happened as a side note was during COVID, this was great for the media and social media. We were all stuck on our screens. We couldn't leave the house figuring out what's next.

And those tools that Mark Zuckerberg and Elon and other, and New York Times learned, are there even as COVID went away. So now there's still those mechanisms to keep everyone agitated and always looking at their screens. I don't think J.D. Vance generates or DeSantis or Rubio as much animus as Trump for the specific reason that Trump goes up to these people and takes a dump in their house, right? And you and I love it and think it's hilarious, but you could see why Nancy Pelosi just stepped up. Like the no kings post yesterday or the two kings post? He literally put a picture. The White House put a picture of him and King Charles on the social being said two kings. Yeah, I think But if a JD Vance did that

It would seem a little tryhard I don't think he would stick the landing The way that Trump does Because I think Trump has this like larger than life You know, WWE personality And J.D. Vance is a smart guy From I know Trump went to Wharton But from Yale or Harvard where he went to

And he has that kind of intellectual side to him That's a Trump is a street guy Even though he's a billionaire You can see how he's been to Brooklyn J.D. Vance is not the kind of guy. I'm sure he's literally been there, but it's not of the streets, even though he comes from poverty. It's not the same thing as being like an urban figure. It's weird.

I do think a lot of this will go away. Is that just an urban thing? Because J.D. Vance literally grew up poor in Appalachia. Donald Trump grew up rich in New York. And Donald Trump is the street guy? Is that just an urban and rural thing? I feel like people in Appalachia, no matter how poor they are, treat each other a lot. nicer, whereas people in New York, no matter how rich they are, are going to be busting each other's

chops all the time. And I think that's something that happened in his first term. He really thought, I believe, that he could clown on Pelosi and Schumer and say the worst things, but then behind closed doors, they're going to shake hands and kind of hash it out. And I don't think he appreciate to what extent these people's egos and their sense of respectability was cut to the quick so that when he met with them, they really were salty about it. That's the sense. That's my impression. Why do you think New York, I lived in New York for 15 years, Michael. You grow up there?

Like, was most of your life in New York? Yes. Yeah. So, I mean, the hard thing about New York is there's a lot of different social layers to it. And most rich people in New York, Upper East Side-style rich, don't actually live a life like you just described. They're not busting each other's chops. They're not that rough with each other. Maybe a little bit because maybe there's some school situations where they get some socioeconomic diversity exposure.

They are, you do have to walk on the streets, literally, even when you're rich. So you will interact with some various walks of life, perhaps more than if you grow up rich in Dallas. You know, but so there is that. But there is a genteelness to the upper crust of New York. And Trump doesn't have that. Like he just doesn't have that. You've met other rich people from New York, and he's different than them. And the people do make the argument that the Trump family was always a little bit of a black sheep within the rich worlds of New York anyway.

I'm just wondering, like, I don't think many other rich New Yorkers are even like Donald Trump. That's my point. He's different even amongst them. I'll prove that what you just said is true. At one point, they had a spinoff of The Apprentice, and instead of Trump being the, the, a leader, it was Martha Stewart. It lasted a season. And when it was canceled, Trump publicly issued a letter about Martha Stewart being a complete loser. This shows an embarrassment. What a joke. You know, she should go hide her head in shame. And Martha Stewart, who is far more like those New Yorkers

you described, couldn't even bring herself the counterpunch. In her reply letter, she goes, oh, I can't believe these words are coming from my good friend Donald Trump. So instead of giving the finger saying, screw you, I'm more wealthy than you, I've never liked you. She's still in her counterattack saying, oh, we're still good friends. And there's this air of civility. And you said this John Tiel thing. So it's very true. Trump, despite his wealth and accolades and success, has always been much more of a

blue-collar attitude. Brawler. The wealthy than he isn't with Barbara Walters, who I remember at one point in the view freaked out because Rosie O'Donnell said, Barbara, you're just. not a normal person. You have Picasso's in your house. And Barbara Walters freaked out and was like, how can you say I'm not normal? And Rosie's like, you have Picasso's. And that's fine. You earn them. But they have this idea that they're like none of the people. And it's very clear if someone's giving a speech, who's more of a man to people, Barbara Walters or Donald Trump.

Let's take a quick break. But continue this conversation with the host of your welcome, Michael Malice on Will Cain Country. Want to go electric without sacrificing fun? That's the Volkswagen ID4. All-electric and thoughtfully designed to elevate your modern lifestyle. The Volkswagen ID4 is fun to drive with instant acceleration that makes city streets feel like open roads. Plus a refined interior with innovative technology always at your fingertips. The all-electric ID4.

You deserve more fun. Visit vw.ca to learn more. S-UvW, German engineered for all. In communities across Canada, hourly Amazon employees earn an average of over $24.50 an hour. Employees also have the opportunity to grow their skills and their paycheck by enrolling in free skills training programs for in-demand fields like software development and information technology. Learn more at aboutamazon.ca. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're still hanging out with the host of Your Welcome and the author of Not Sick of Winning, The White Pill. The new right, Michael Malice.

I wonder how Trump got that way. I really do, like, in his bio, is it his time with Roy Cohn, you know? Is it, is it his dad? I just wonder how he would say again, Patrick? He was on the streets in Queens, right? Going door to door and, like, going dealing with the people in the apartment complexes and things. That's how I thought. Yeah.

I mean, you just have to be rough and tumble to do deals. Doing business with his dad. Right? You know, like, to be able to be successful. That's for that way. Yeah. No, but Dan, there's something different. And I mean, I'm telling you, like, I have seen this play out in so many different scenarios where somebody, there's a consistency to his personality.

Now, it's not, he acts. I mean, Donald Trump is awesome, too. He's nice and he's fun. But there's a consistent authenticity where it's like, I've seen people that appear to be rough and tumble, then come on a show and turn into meek. You know what I mean? And maybe it's the cameras and the looming presence of two to three million people watching you that changes you or whatever. It's like just because you make big deals behind closed doors doesn't mean you're ready to tussle with everybody in every single environment and scenario. Isn't the trolling that, though? I don't. Like the troll is part of that.

In other words, you couldn't just grab Lloyd Blankfine. You know, Lloyd Blankfine is a billionaire, former CEO of Goldman Sachs. You couldn't just grab him and go, hey, you've done a lot of business. big deals. Now, go rough it up in politics. It doesn't translate in the way it does with Donald Trump. I just don't know what it is about his life and his personality that made this, because he is an outlier. That's the point. You are a huge outlier from where you come. Look at Steve Forbes, right, even though he hosts a Shannon Live, look at Tom Steyer, who's currently running for governor of California. I don't think Forbes was a billionaire,

but he's certainly extremely wealthy. Steyer, I believe, is a billionaire. They don't talk like this. Bill Gates doesn't talk like this. Elon, to some extent, does. I think he has that very kind of high schooly trolling side to his personality. But Will, that's a great question because it's not like Trump, you know, it was little orphan Annie. Daddy Warbucks took him in, and so he's basically coming from the streets or an orphanage. He always came for money. That's no disrespect to him, and he wouldn't deny that. And he went to Ward and he went to fancy schools. He's not, you know, undercover boss or something like that. So it is a bit incongru. how he's so comfortable trash-cault. That's the point I'm making. And by the way, Malice, the Steyer points are great, because you watch Steyer, who's running for governor of California in the debate stage or wherever,

and you think 10 minutes in a rhetorical back and forth with Steyer, I would destroy him. I think I'm not trying, I think I could reduce Steyer to tears. I might be able to, right? Now, that doesn't mean that Steyer isn't a killer. He's probably a killer

in a boardroom, in a deal room. You don't get to be a billionaire without some of that element to you unless you inherited it, right? You don't get to be that without that angle, but he doesn't have it on a debate stage

to stand next to Steve Hilton. He doesn't have anything close to it. He looks like a wuss. Well, I think a lot of that is because corporate culture is based on passive aggression. I remember when I graduated college, one thing I was most concerned about is I knew there was this language people speak in offices where they say one thing and they mean another.

And, you know, like if I want to end this interview, you'd be like, oh, you know, good to see you today. I can't wait to see you soon, which often means I'll never talk to you again. So Steyer comes from that space. But Trump is like, well, this has been a waste of my time. I have better things to do. Good luck with your show and you're going to need it because it's a mess. Steyer doesn't know how to handle that because you don't talk that way to billionaires. especially on camera to their face.

So he's completely in a foreign environment if that were the case. But does it make him a man of the people? Yeah. I don't know. He certainly speaks that language, I think, far more than anyone, you know. But he lives up here, though, still. At his level. You know?

It makes him very unique, Dan. It makes him very, very unique. And I think, I'm not going to speak from Michael, capable of straddling two worlds in a way that very, very, very few people can do. But he doesn't understand the plight of the every man, right? I mean, he could, but he's never lived in. And in fact, he straddles it. In fact, he straddles it, Dan.

He may be the only one I can think of. You could see people straddle it when they came from nothing and made a billion, and they always feel a little uncomfortable in those ivory towered walls. I've met those types of billionaires. Those types of billionaires always have a chip on their shoulder, a little bit of Napoleon complex when they are amongst high society. but you're looking at the opposite with Trump. He actually comes from it and is capable of stepping down into the street.

That is a rarity that I might make him one of one. I really don't know of another. Yeah, and I don't know that he understands in a literal sense the struggles of poor people because he's never been hungry, but I think he understands what their priorities are and what buttons to push that they, I think a lot of, In 2015, when he started, a lot of people felt, oh, I feel seen, I feel heard. This guy is speaking to the issues that concern me. Now, you can say he's doing it for political purposes.

He's a phony, but he's still using the correct jargon that makes them feel, okay, this guy has at least aware of the things I care about as opposed to climate change or transing my kid. I think he gets him on a subconscious level, is your point. I don't think it's Machiavellian. I don't think it's calculated. I think he likes, for example, I think he loves his own Diet Coke. He likes W.W.E. He literally likes W.E. He, he, he likes McDonald's. He likes celebrity culture, which celebrity culture isn't a way in opiate of the masses. You know, he gets that kind of stuff subconsciously. And that makes him more, I think he likes that stuff

more than caviar. You see what I'm saying? All the other things that are supposed to, to signal that you are of, of high class. or wealth yeah he I was gonna say one thing he has high wealth he does not have high class because everything in gold you know this is like a poor person's idea of wealth like most wealthy people it's very understated it's demure you walk in the house you don't really know there some you know that that those plates are worth thousands of dollars with trump you walk in you know everything is wealth ostentatious rich luxury you know golden toilets it's like This is, he's very flashy.

And that is not how old money works. That's why I think the hate ends with him. I don't think it goes on to a JD Vance. I think that's why people don't like him, especially on the left, who think they are of high class, you know, and better than. That's a good question. I don't think it ends with him. I think it goes to J.D. Vance. Mike, I want to hit really quick, if you don't mind, even though, you know, I'm going to need a lot of luck with this show.

That felt very subconscious. That felt like Mike, not Trump. Do you guys agree? I got to go. This has been a waste of my time. I wish you luck with this show. You're going to need it. I'm a high-level communicator here, Mike. I mean, I know what's going on on multiple levels. You can't slip one past me there. Hey, well, being a high-level. Yeah. Well, being a high-level communicator is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't. That was a warning. That wasn't a boast. That was a warning. Don't try to slip a pitch.

pass me, Mike. I know. I can see the balls and strikes coming. So you might as well just say it straight. Now, two quick topics. Okay, both of which you I think bring interesting insight too. I want to go back to the story that's a little bit over a week ago or

about a week old. The Southern Poverty Law Center now we know it was funding. I don't buy the informant thing. I'm not going to entertain the informant thing. They were funding things from the KKK to various all right groups, including a the right individual who was, at least in some ways, coordinating online conversations and logistics on Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville.

And according to the indictment, did arrange travel, help transportation for some members to get to Charlottesville. So I had this conversation. I can't, guys, who was it last week? I had the conversation with. And they called it a hoax, Charlottesville. And I said, hey, I think that's too far. because and I think that really actually undercuts the validity of what places like the Southern Poverty Law Center actually do. And my contention, Mike, is they take something that is real and make it really big.

They can't necessarily create something out of nothing, but they can take something that exist on some level and make it seem hugely relevant. So my point is, I'm not saying there's not a white, supremacist movement or, you know, whatever, a neo-Nazi movement or a KKK movement in the United States. But from what I've been able to understand, they're pretty damn small at this point. Some of those groups they helped fund were in the dozens of people, not thousands of people, in the dozens of people. And they helped infuse cash into those organizations to keep them alive in some cases and seeming relevant. You were at Charlottesville. Yes.

How much of that do you feel like was Astrospection? Triffed versus real. Well, it's hard to tell, but first of all, to your point, there were very few people at Charlottesville, right? There were far more Antifa than there were anyone who you could even remotely call, you know, all right in that space. I remember I was walking the streets with my friend Bob, and he had a, like a little hat, a cowboy hat on, whatever type, and someone, you know, try to knock it off because they assumed he was, you know, not one of them, so he's got to be a fair target. So there was, they were itching

for a fight. And I think your point is, I would agree with it verbatim. I think the Southern Poverty Law Center is an extremely malevolent organization. They are not interested in fighting bigotry. They're just interested in fighting bigotry on what perceived as the right. And their fundraising is based on the bigger the threat, the bigger the checks. So they are playing a very dangerous game. I am shocked and delighted that this has been made public and exposed and that it's being acknowledged in any segment of the left because a few years ago, if you said this, you know, that they're doing these false flags and this sort of things, oh, you're a crazy person, tin for a half, blah, blah, blah, and now I think there's an understanding of how some of these

so-called not-for-profits actually work. But I also don't think it's necessarily a numbers game. If it was between me and you, if I could persuade six members of the Supreme Court and you could persuade 600,000 Americans, I'm going to take that Supreme Court every time. So I think the model is this kind of Leninist vanguard, where if you have that kernel of intelligent operators, as they call it, hiding their power level, they can get into those corridors of power and flip some levers without ever having to go through this kind of democratic vetting where people know what your views are. And Mum Donny is kind of an example of this as well. You know, he kind of slipped past in the primaries. And once you're the nominee of the Democratic Party, you're almost certainly, at least in recent years, guaranteed to win the mayor's race. It's going to be hard to beat you, especially with some discredited old school party hack.

So I think there's a lot of this kind of stuff going on in both parties. But it's the thing with the beautiful thing about the Constitution is once you get there, your powers are quite limited. I mean, people criticize President Trump for not doing more. I'm like, look, he doesn't even have the House. Like, how are you going to get that MAGA legislation through Congress if you have a one-seat majority? And you got Massey and some of these others who aren't really Trump fans whatsoever. You're not going to get it through.

You certainly can't count Democratic votes. So I think it's not necessarily a numbers game, but I'm giddy that they're being kind of exposed, to be honest. I assume what you're saying is the SPLC was capable of taking something small, not a numbers game, and making it very relevant to the powers that be inside Washington, D.C. so much so that at one point we get to see the sitting president of the United States stand before those red banners you referenced earlier and say the biggest threat to the country is white supremacy. And there is no number that backs that up, only the power of the SPLC's narrative inside the halls of power. Interesting, that was really interesting analogy, as you said, if you, I get 600,000 people, you get six Supreme Court justices. You take that every time. You know what's interesting about President Trump? He was the first time that I would have questioned.

question your proposition. You're right. You always take the six Supreme Court justices over the 600,000 people. But President Trump was the first time that showed the power of the 600,000 people. Like every other example of the six Supreme Court justices, the, you know, the five senators that you need, whatever, you needed all that to become president. And he had none of it. In fact, he had the opposition of all of it. And he took the proverbial 600,000. people and got elected not once. Well, we'll say once because the time he comes around the second time, he does have those others on his side.

Yeah, I mean, at some point, the math doesn't math. Wait, does he? What do you mean? In 2024, yeah, he did. I think everybody tried to make DeSantis something, the powers that be. Because of January 6th and 2020, he lost a lot of those. But he got him back by the time he's running in 2024. But he definitely didn't have it in 15 and 60s.

Yeah, I think also to point out in 2022, all the people he endorsed in swing races lost. So he was, and he was regarded in many circles as a pariah. The argument was DeSantis is Trump without the drama. And, you know, Bill Clinton was famously called the comeback kid in 92. I think Trump might be the big, and Trump, to quote Trump himself, the biggest comeback story ever. It's kind of true. I mean, I was in Chicago for my birthday. My friend calls that Trump was shot.

I was like, what? And then seeing that footage and as horrific as it was, that ending was so heroic that even Mark Zuckerberg was like, I've never seen something this awesome or whatever he said, you know, paraphrasing him. I think that was that moment where it's like people, I think 2020 and COVID was such a debacle that I think a lot of people had left a bad taste in their mouth. And Trump as a candidate is such a powerful force and so inspiring and so engaging and also so self-effacing. Him and McDonald's, him driving a garbage truck. You're not going to see Officer Harris or Joe Biden driving garbage truck. If Biden was driving garbage truck, it would probably tip over on the freeway and take out a school bus. So I think that kind of side of Trump is something people forgot in the Biden years.

And boy, were they happy to see it again on the campaign trail? Let's take a quick break, but continue this conversation with the host of your welcome, Michael Malice on Will Kane Country. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're still hanging out with the host of Your Welcome and the author of Not Sick of Winning, The White Pill, the new right, Michael Malice. Yeah, doesn't they have to have Biden? They had to have Biden use a robot truck when he went to the Ford plant. Oh, wow. They literally steered it with like a remote control.

Oh, wow. I'm not surprised. Last thing here I wanted to get to with Michael Malice. It's this, 86-47. That's the post from James Comey onto Instagram. Cool shell formation on my beachwalk, he posted. Yesterday, a grand jury indictment on former FBI director James Comey. The statute, and I can't pull the numbers off the top of my head,

but the statute is basically willfully, intentionally threatening the life of the president of the United States. I said this on area state. And the way the statute reads, I don't think it's really, really predicated on the word threatening. It's about incitement. No one believes that James Comey was out there like, I'm going to go get the president. It's whether or not he was inciting violence against the president, which, by the way, passes constitutional muster. To me, Michael, this isn't a free speech or First Amendment question. The Supreme Court's opinion of the First Amendment has suggested there are limitations on free speech.

and the limitation is incitement, direct incitement to violence. That statute that they've charged him with reflects that Supreme Court opinion. The question is whether or not the facts support it, right? What did James Comey mean? And John Yu, who worked for the Bush administration as their lawyer and assistant attorney general, told me it's not, you don't have to climb inside James Comey's mind. To establish intent, we don't have to climb inside his mind. What we have to do is ask what a reasonable person would intend if they said 86-47. I don't think there's, I think the question is strategic, right?

So I remember, we remember in Trump's first term, Democrats like impeach Trump, Pete Trump. It's like, okay, they impeach him, nothing happens. Well, we've got to impeach him harder. So they impeach him after January 6th, nothing happens. The Republicans, you know, they were all excited. Oh, we're going to impeach Mayorkas. Okay. I don't think there's a single person in the cocktail parties, Mayorcist, goes to where they look down

him. If anything, they look at him as a victim because that is currency in those circles. And I think this is just going to make James Comey look persecuted because I think the chance of any kind of conviction is zero. I don't think this has any legs. So my point is, like, let's lose a hunting analogy, if you got the prey in sight, take your shot, but don't take a shot that's going to spook it. So I don't see, and there's only so many of these indictments you could do before people perceive it, as many did when they did it to the Republicans, as politically motivated, so I don't see the point of this indictment. There's so many, and I do want to see calling in jail, and I think there's so many

worse things that he did. Correct. Right. I like your analogy. I'm going to offer one rebuttal or two. I don't think the chance is zero, but I don't think it's high. I think it's in the like 10 to 20 percent range. Because literally, I think the question in this case will be, what does 86 mean to a reasonable

person? And honestly, 86, when you ask that question, will have so many different definitions. If you look up what 86 means, if you think about the way that people use 86, it can mean fire, it can mean run out of town, it can mean thrown out of a bar. It means get rid of. And that part of that get rid of can mean murder as well. Yes. But he'll wiggle out because there's so many other ways in which you could define it that it won't be interpreted as a willful threat or incitement of violence against the president. That's my prediction.

I actually think that Comey did mean, by the way, I don't think Comey meant resign or impeach. I don't think that. But I don't think you're going to have good luck proving that argument. I also don't think James Comey has much clout with people who are assassins. I think he has clout with people listen to NPR. And they're not going to be dangerous. So I don't see this going anywhere. And I also think we have to realize the legal system.

Realized the legal system, Trump had to pay millions of dollars to E. Jean Carroll, who said he assaulted her in Bergdorf in midtown Manhattan in the middle of the day, which is a very busy place with lots of other people at a time when Trump was famous already. So that is how skewed the legal system is against Donald Trump. So you have to keep that in mind when you're dealing with the jury. Sure. Last rebuttal on this, the hunting analogy, that's really good. I'll use another analogy, but bring it back to hunting. Somebody described this to me yesterday. Keep in mind that we're just, what, two or three days removed from an assassination attempt and all these, the rhetoric around that and after it. And maybe even the jokes from guys like Jimmy Kimmel before it,

that this essentially serves as a brushback pitch. Hey, get your house in order. Get your stuff together. Stop talking like this or you're going to face. when not he's convicted or not, James Comey's not going to enjoy this process. And neither will Jimmy Kimmel with this FCC thing. That doesn't mean it's right or wrong,

but it is like, we've got to figure out a way to get everybody back on rhetoric. And this is a bit of a brushback pitch on people need to stop talking this way. Will, do you know how great this is for James Comey's brand? This guy gets to be a professional victim. He gets to get another book deal. He gets to go on MS now and talk about like,

I've been personally targeted and persecuted by this evil dictator. Jimmy Kimmel has been, you know, waving that bloody shirt around for months now about how he's the free speech champion. And it's me versus the FCC. This is great for them. They love this. That's true. And some have said it saved Jimmy Kimmel's career because his ratings are horrible. And ABC might have been motivated to get rid of him anyway, but you keep turning him into a martyr and they're not going to to appease Trump.

Right. And then from then on, he could have, like, Colbert's making himself into a martyr as well. They're going to pivot to podcast and go increasingly deranged. But they're going to be like, look, I was the one who said President Trump, while you were sitting at home on your hands, standing up to him, meaning, doing jokes while the audience is clapped her. Yeah, it's Don Lemon. What you mean they're not funny? Exactly what I said about Don Lemon, what you're saying now.

That's right. All right. Michael, this has been largely a waste of my time. I wish you the best of luck with your show. You're going to need it. But I appreciate you still spending some time with us today here. Make sure you check out your welcome or any of his number of books. Thank you, Michael.

I'll be sure to say how to Gutfeld for you. Okay, all right. Thanks, Mike. What is that? Is he getting ready to do the Gutfeld show? Was he doing Gutfeld later? Did I hold him back? No, he did it last week, I think.

Oh. I wonder what that was about Well, you don't get to see Guffeld You're never on the show I know You know The guy The man is literally the king of late night

And Will Kane is never on late night He's on in the afternoons Like a schmuck See now Expert Communicator me What did he mean by I'll say hi to Gutfeld for you God I don't know

That's gonna stay in your head I don't know It's gonna stay in your head All right guys Is that when I told you it would? It went a lot longer than I thought. But I do want to do this, Patrick. Before we go here, you've had this produced, and I'm doing this largely just to appease you.

No, no, no, no. We can just get it. Let's save it. We'll kick it the can. And then one day, it won't matter, just like the Mets streak. And then we'll do it then, you know. Could do the movies. Well, now I think you're just, you're trying to save up work.

Now he's like, now I don't have to produce something for tomorrow. Yeah. Got one in the bag. We have the Vance thing. If we did, would you like to do A, our movie thing, B, your boomer game, or C, end this show right now? Hmm. I think the movie thing, I mean, I do have to book a guest for tomorrow, but I don't know. The movie thing's pretty fun.

It's all about Patrick in his work. We asked yesterday when movies went downhill. I shared with you the top 10 movies from 1995 and compared them to the top 10 movies from 1965. It talked about how movies had gotten better. 95 is better than 65. It just is. 95 top 10 movies were absolute bangers.

But we also compared that to now, 2025, 2025, 26. Not good. And we all feel very confident that it hit a peak and then came down. The question is when? When did it start to go down? Now, you guys have put together what? Top three? Top five movies?

Top five. Over a period of time in hopes that we can identify when this actually began to go into the toilet. Now, yesterday, just as an over-under, both of you guys, I think, Dan and Pat, said it at 2010. You said 2010 is when it started to go downhill or fell apart. So let's talk about this. Share with me a couple of top five lists from a couple of years, and let's see when it went downhill. All right, so starting with 2007. Number one, no country for old men.

Number two, there will be blood. Bangor. Number three, Zodiac, David Fincher. Number four, Born Ultimatum. And then five, Ratatouille. Great. That's good movies. Great movies.

Right? Are we proud of O7? I'm proud of O7. That's really, really good. Those are good? on the Born. Is that the first Born? I get lost on the Borns. Ultimatums is the third. The first couple were great.

Third? I think it was still really good, right? That was a good one. Yeah. Where are we on Borns? Are we like it five or six? I don't even know any. They did just Jason Born was the last one. That was five. Okay. All right. All right. So 07 passes the test. We're still rocking and rolling in O7. So 2008, I noticed it started to shift a little bit. Dark Knight was the number one movie. Wally Slumdog Millionaire

The Wrestler and In Bruges People of Wally and the Dark Night But Well those are some good movies The Dark Night is really good In Bruges was good What else did you say? The wrestler slumdog millionaire

Both really good Smaller movies by the way Those feel smaller than what we got in 95 and 07 but I would still say those are good movies. Yep. 09. Get into Inglorious Bastards. Great.

Up. Critically acclaimed. The Hurt Locker, Avatar, and a serious man, which is Cohen Brothers, kind of... Great movie. Small movie. Those are good. Those are good. We're still good in nine.

I would disagree. But let's go one more year. 2010, this is where we started to say. The Social Network, Inception, Toy Story 3, Black Swan, and the King's Speech. I don't know. Those are pretty elite. Okay. And different. Those are pretty good, but I do feel a certain sense of slippage here.

Like, I'm here to tell you, like, rattle those off one more time. 10. Social Network, Inception, Toy Story 3, Black Swan, the King. King speech? The King's speech, social network, you're not hitting the highs that you were before. You're not, I don't think the highs are as high as what we rattled off in 95 or 07. I liked the King's speech. The King's speech is not no country for old men. It's not seven, you know, which I think came in like number three and 95. Two. So came in number two in 95. Yeah. So we're slipping. I think, oh wait, starting. Do you have more years?

I don't. I can. I think 08 started the slip because the dark night. Well, do this for me real quick, Dan. Do this. Do this for me. And let's just find out if our premise is correct. Can you give me the top five movies from 2023?

Let's just jump forward now and see if our premise is correct. That it doesn't hold up to what we were doing in 95 and perhaps even 07. Okay. It's working. All right. 2023, we have Oppenheimer. Number one. Pretty good.

Killers of the Flower Moon was pretty great with Leo. Barbie. Okay, stop. Love Leo. Love Leo. Love Scorsese. Love the book. That movie is not on the level of the other movies that we've been talking about.

Hell no. It's a good movie. It's worth seeing. It is not on that level. Yeah. Then we get into Barbie past lives, I don't even know. And then poor things. I don't know.

I don't know, poor things, and Barbie, come on, come on, man. Really? Yeah. But that's where we get into, like, the Spider-Man's were in there, like the across the spider-verse. It was strong first half movie, actually. Barbie. When Ken took over, it was when Barbie's got control again that it really got bad. So.

But I think the slide was 08. I pick up what you're. That's my opinion. It's not a falling off the cliff, though. It just starts to slip. It starts to slip is what happens. Because we have big studio movies and stuff, and it's not like the dramas, like the fight clubs and the sevens, you know.

We used to have the original ideas, and it was like around 08. Yes. For some reason, we've shifted toward franchises instead of stars. Yeah. And, like, we haven't really created new stars because everything is so niched. The brand is bigger. And I would argue the thing that began to hurt was the rise of prestige television, but even that's gone downhill. Prestige television isn't what it was.

The Golden Age really was about 2000 to 2009 or so. That's when we had both great television and great movies. That's when you got Sopranos, The Wire. When did Breaking Bad start? Was it after that? D. Deadwood was in there. Breaking Bad 0-7?

So it's in that range. Mad Men is in there, and you're still getting your no country for old men's. So you're getting both. That's our golden age right there. But that's when streaming really started. Neither. The streaming thing is the reason. So that's when Netflix and all those things started really streaming.

Maybe not even yet, but kind of. And that changed everything because they just started doing remakes and things that would work that they knew would work. It wouldn't take any shots anymore. Yeah. All right. Save the rest. So Patrick doesn't have to work tomorrow.

That's going to do it for us today here on Will Kane Country. Appreciate you hanging out with us and Michael Malice. Make sure you check out Michael. And we will follow us on Spotify Apple and we will see you again 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 AdFour. on the Amazon Music app.