The Philip DeFranco Show - Hasan Piker Shock Collar Allegations, Katie Porter Interview Disaster, & Trump's Chicago Invasion

Starting point is 00:00:00 Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. You daily dive into the news. It is Wednesday. There is a lot to talk about it. And in fact, you're getting a double dose today. What are you getting this? And I just uploaded episode two of my brand new podcast crashing out where explained in the title, I crashed out about some things that do and do not matter.

Starting point is 00:00:15 Apparently, Taylor Swift's new album, it's her MAGA coming out party. So after this video, definitely check it out. Links, of course, in the description. But we really do have so much we need to talk about today. Starting with this. Let's talk about this, Asan Piker, Controversy and Backlash. Because while Hassan, who's a political commentator, often pops up into the news over a political take, this time he was trending everywhere over this clip.

Starting point is 00:00:36 But it is emblematic of all of America's much more consequential violence. Okay? It's the same reason as to why America, Kaya, please just fucking go back. Just stop. Jesus Christ, what are you doing? You're being such a baby. Right, so that sudden yelp, after Hassan seems to reach off camera, it's led many to claim that he was using a shock collar against his dog. Or with many also now demanding that Twitch ban him.

Starting point is 00:01:06 And then to back up these claims, you've had people pointing to things such as zooming in on the collar and saying it's not a normal one. With other big streamers in the space like XQC, looking at old footage that apparently showed the collar blinking. Others have also gone further back to find old clips of Hassan admitting that he owns a shock collar. Though this also, as you had many noting in the clip, he says, My old roommate wanted to use a shock collar for... um fish and his dogs um for fish and his dogs uh barking i couldn't do it i have it still i bought it they are incredibly effective but then also in addition to that some of the clips that people found they're not necessarily about a shock collar per se but instead uh how tight the collar is and now it's

Starting point is 00:01:50 mainstream i love her i think her collar's too tight you well it's uh higher we can it's you have to to be able to get two fingers and I couldn't even get one. I think you're choking her. She's like it's a lot of neck meat. Also another angle here is you had people critical of Hassan saying that they felt like the dog Kaya was being used as a prop and essentially forced to stay in frame. But then there you also had plenty of people scrubbing through the video saying you can see large amounts of time where she's just not there at all. In all of this it's playing out while you have a lot of people going after Hassan you also have a group of people defending it. Right for this group the general consensus is that maybe Kaya caught her do claw on the bed and that's what caused her to

Starting point is 00:02:28 Or with people showing the clip in slow motion, and you also saw people having takes like she clips her paw. It's very obvious Saying you are willfully dumber than a dog if you choose to believe this and care more about imagining the suffering of a single animal than millions of Palestinians But that then had its own pushback and backlash with creators like Asman Gold for example saying you guys really need to stop invoking Palestine every time someone you like gets criticized It doesn't help you and it certainly doesn't help Palestinians. It has nothing to do with this topic and you're effectively using their suffering as a shield for bad behavior And then, as far as Hassan's response here, I actually reached out for a comment and reaction. Right, and so with that, he called this one of the most insane brigades he's ever seen. Then adding, I rewatch the video and I totally get why people are angry. I should have instantly gone over to check on her.

Starting point is 00:03:07 I was in full panic mode over the internet going out and the stream crashing and I take total accountability for that. But the Saan then also talking about the allegations around the collar as well as the allegations that he shocked the dog. Starting the collar, he said, I have a bunch of different collars for her, including a vibrating collar for communicating with her over a long distance when she's at the park, etc. saying she was professionally trained to be off-leash, that collar can't actually shock her. I didn't press anything. I didn't have any remote or anything with me. And then regarding his dog yelping, he said, I don't know what happened, but I assume it was her clipping her dune nail on the corner while following the place command, but I get why it looks horrible to a person who's seeing this interaction for the first time.

Starting point is 00:03:42 And then regarding people saying, you know, the dog just there in the background, or maybe even the dog is forced to be there. He said, Kaya is an incredibly well-trained dog and super well-taking care of. She gets two hours of activity in the morning at the park, and then another hour-long walk in the afternoon with my mom. With Hassan then adding, her place command is there, so she doesn't lay on the hard ground and her joints as a big dog, but she is free to do whatever. And saying people have been sequencing minor infractions to make up their own insane narratives about this. And adding anyone that knows me or has been around me can vouch for how I spend every waking moment with my dog and how much I love her and take care of her.

Starting point is 00:04:11 But ultimately, that's where we are right now. And I really love to know your thoughts because depending on where you go online, very, very different reactions. What are your thoughts, your opinions and your reactions here? But the next step in the news, well, Donald Trump now wants to lock up. Democratic leaders in Chicago. With Trump writing this morning that Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson should be in jail for failing to protect ICE officers, Governor Pritzker also. And this is coming as Texas National Guard troops have now arrived in Illinois after Trump

Starting point is 00:04:36 authorized their deployment, which is just the latest escalation and stage of Trump, sending the National Guard to cities with liberal leadership, claiming often without evidence that they are lawless, violent, and dealing with escalating crime. Trump has also specifically compared Chicago to a war zone, but you have J.B. Pritzker saying that if the city's a war zone, it's the fault of the Trump administration and federal agents with him telling CNN earlier this week. They're raiding neighborhoods where instead of going after the bad guys, they're just picking up people who are brown and black and then checking their credentials.

Starting point is 00:05:06 Are you a U.S. citizen? They need to get out of Chicago if they're not going to focus on the worst of the worst, which is what the president said they were going to do. They need to get the heck out. You can also at Pritzker denouncing Trump's move to send in troops vowing to fight their deployment and accusing Trump of carrying out an authoritarian march in Chicago and other blue cities. And with all that, both the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago have now sued to block the troops, arguing that this tactic is unconstitutional. But also, those aren't the only

Starting point is 00:05:31 actions that we've seen taken against the Trump administration this week. Where we talked just yesterday about Mayor Johnson signing an ICE-free zone executive order in Chicago yesterday, which prevents the agency from using city-owned property in their operations. With Johnson saying that Chicago stands firm in protecting the constitutional rights of our residents and immigrant communities and upholding our democracy. Then of course that, it led to Trump's comments this morning saying that he should be jailed alongside Pritzker for not protecting ICE officers in his city. But then, Johnson responding, This is not the first time Trump has tried to have a black man unjustly arrested.

Starting point is 00:05:59 I'm not going anywhere. And you Pritzker also continuing to stand against Trump, writing that I will not back down. Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives checking his power. What else is left on the path to full-blown authoritarianism? And you have many noting that the threat to jail these do it comes as Trump has repeatedly threatened legal action against politicians and others who oppose him. But for now, we have to keep our eyes on Chicago for multiple reasons. We're both with what's happening on the ground?

Starting point is 00:06:20 What does it look like? Is there an escalation as well as, looking towards Thursday, that's, when the hearing is set for the lawsuit to block troops. So then next up today, let's talk about that Katie Porter interview. Right, so if you don't know, Katie Porter, she's running to be the governor of California. And you had Julie Watts, who covers the state of California for CBS interviewing her. Right, you had Watts sitting down with this pool of candidates to discuss issues in the state. For some reason, things got quickly heated between Porter and Watts during this question.

Starting point is 00:06:43 What do you say to the 40% of California voters who you'll need in order to win, um, who voted for Trump? How would I need them in order to win, man? Well, unless you think you're going to get 60% of the vote. You think you'll get 60% all, everybody who did not vote for Trump will vote for you. That's what you're saying. In a general election, yes. If it is me versus a Republican, I think that I will win the people who did not vote for Trump.

Starting point is 00:07:07 What if it's you versus another Democrat? I don't intend that to be the case. You then had Watts asking how Porter can guarantee that she's going to be the only Democrat, which Porter then suggested, you know, she has the support and the name recognition to pull it off and then added. I represented Orange County. I represented a purple area. I have stood on my own two feet and won Republican votes before. That's not something every candidate in this race can say. But you just said you don't need those Trump voters.

Starting point is 00:07:30 Well, you asked me if I needed them to win. So you don't think you need to do. I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question? The question is the same thing I asked everybody, that this is being called the empowering voters to stop Trump's power grab. Every other candidate has answered this question. This is not argumentative.

Starting point is 00:07:46 And I said I support it. So, and the question is, what do you say to the 40% of voters who, voted for Trump? Oh, I'm happy to say that. It's the do you need them to win part that I don't understand. I'm happy to answer the question as you haven't written and I'll answer it. And we've also asked the other candidates, do you think you need any of those 40% of California voters to win? And you're saying, no, you don't. No, I'm saying I'm going to try to win every vote I can. And what I'm saying to you is that. Well, to those voters. Okay, so you... I don't want to keep doing this. I'm going to call it. Thank you.

Starting point is 00:08:19 You're not going to do the interview with us. Nope, not like this. I'm not, not with seven follow-ups to every single question you ask. And we're just going to circle around. I am an investigative reporter. I have never had to do this before, ever. You've never had to have a conversation with a reporter. Okay, but every other candidate has done this. What part of, I'm me, I'm running for governor because I'm a leader. So I am going to make.

Starting point is 00:08:42 So you're not going to answer questions from reporters? Okay, why don't we go through? I will continue to ask follow-up questions because that's my job as a journalist, but I will go through and ask these. And if you don't want to answer, you don't want to answer. So nearly every legislative... I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you. And I don't want this all on camera.

Starting point is 00:09:00 I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you either. Right, and with that, you did have CBS noting that she did ultimately stay and continue answering questions. But this interview, and specifically this section, it's gotten a ton of attention online. So I'm calling it a train wreck, a car crash reporter saying it's a bad look, applauding the reporter for continuing to press on. You also had tons of people in the political sphere weighing in here. Right, people like Elizabeth Ashford, who's been a strategist for several high-profile California politicians saying, when you're governor, you're governor of everyone, not just the people in your party.

Starting point is 00:09:26 Adding it's a bad look to say you don't want or need votes from certain Californians, even those you really disagree with. But then also adding, even good candidates have bad nights. This was a miss for Katie, but not every interview is going to go great. You then also add other candidates in the race, seeing this is an opportunity to speak out. With, for example, former health secretary Javier Bacera writing, I'm not interested in excluding any vote. Every Californian deserves affordable health care, safe streets, a roof over their head, and a living wage. You also had California State Superintendent Tony Thurmond also writing this is a pattern for Katie Porter saying no candidate for governor should hide from the press or mistreat them We owe it to the public to be transparent saying if she can't answer basic questions from a reporter

Starting point is 00:10:01 How can Californians expect her to stand up to President Trump? And the timing here not great as you have outlets like CalMatter is noting pretty recently that the race for governor remains pretty open right now We're saying that while Porter does have a slight polling edge. It's still anyone's game I mean the primary is not until June of next year So it's not super far away, but it's also not super super close That's plenty of time for things to change up, as well as for someone to hop in and jump to the top. And actually, with that, you have rumors about people like Senator Alex Padilla joining the race. But that said, there's a lot that could happen, and we're also going to need to see, you know, how this kind of affects things and if it does and to what degree. And so actually, in the meantime, what I want to do is I'd love to know your thoughts, your opinions, or reactions here, especially if you're someone that lives in California. Where to seeing this change things for you, or do you see it as a bump in the road, yay, nay, why? I'd love to know.

Starting point is 00:10:44 And then I've got more news for you in just a minute, but first, let me say, you know, that's not just numbers. It's a rig game, and if you think you're playing fair, spoiler, the banks already wrote the rules. Right, every minimum payment, it's just another way to keep you locked in their system. But today's sponsor brings some good news, right? PDS debt helps regular people break free. And they've already helped hundreds of thousands cut debt, stop the harassing calls and actually keep their money. Credit cards, personal loans, medical bills, PDS debt has custom options for all of it. And this also isn't a one-size-fits-all gimmick, right?

Starting point is 00:11:11 They actually look at your unique situation and create a plan designed for you. Also, no minimum credit score, no scheme, just real solutions at work. That's why PDS debt is A plus rated by the BBB has thousands of five-star reviews on Google and holds a five-star trust pilot rating. Translation, people trust them because they actually deliver results. It's your money, it's your future. Why let the banks keep writing the rules when you could be on your way to being debt-free in less time than it takes to scroll TikTok? You're just 30 seconds away from starting your journey to being debt-free. You can go get your free assessment and find the best option for you right now at pDSdebt.com slash defranco.

Starting point is 00:11:43 That's pDS debt.com slash defranco. And or the QR codes on screen, so just scan it. and take the first step today. But the next step today, we've got to talk about how several FBI agents have now been fired for their involvement in a scandal, arguably worse than Watergate. That is, at least, according to Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, who, along with other Republicans, released an internal FBI document suggesting that the agency analyzed the phone records of more than half a dozen Republican lawmakers back in 2023.

Starting point is 00:12:08 Right, and that is part of an investigation into Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. And most of the lawmakers there were among those who had planned to vote against certifying the election on January 6, 2021, including. Josh Hawley, Lindsey Graham, and Ron Johnson. Right, and after the attack on the Capitol, some of them did end up voting to still accept the results, though others still voted against certification. But then also with that, important notes is that the records analyzed were from a few days during the week of January 6th, and they only enabled investigators to see basic

Starting point is 00:12:34 information about the date and the time of the calls, not the content of the communications. Though the specifics there, it didn't stop Josh Hawley from falsely claiming yesterday that the FBI documents showed that agents had actually engaged in wiretapping. Right, and that as these records were obtained through a subpoena authorized by a grand jury, according to the senators who released the document. With all this, there's been no solid evidence that the Biden White House actually influenced the investigation. Right, the name of avoiding any kind of interference, former Attorney General Merrick Garland actually appointed Jack Smith as a special prosecutor to oversee criminal investigations into Trump back in 2022. And while the Supreme Court eventually ruled

Starting point is 00:13:05 that presidents have immunity for certain acts while in office, leading to cases against Trump to be dismissed at Smith's request, Smith did release his final report in January. Or with Smith writing that, quote, nobody within the Department of Justice ever sought to interfere with or improperly influence his prosecutorial decision-making. As well as noting that he believed that the evidence would have been sufficient to obtain a conviction. Right, but despite all that, you have Republicans using the phone records to argue that the Biden administration had politicized the department. And that brings us to Grassley saying that the weaponization by federal law enforcement under Biden was arguably worse than Watergate. Right, and then you had Trump himself writing on social media.

Starting point is 00:13:37 Derange Jack Smith got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, a real sleaze bag. Right, and then, along with FBI director Cash Patel, repeating the claim that the Biden administration had weaponized law enforcement against the American people, he added, that they had fired those who acted unethically, dismantled the agency group tasks with investigating public corruption that had been involved and launched an investigation into the matter. Then, deputy director Dan Bongino, adding,

Starting point is 00:13:56 under our leadership, the FBI will never again be used as a political weapon against the American people. Then of course, with all this, you have many arguing that, right, everything we're seeing here is actually being used to justify Trump's own politicization of law enforcement. Right, several FBI agents who worked on cases

Starting point is 00:14:10 related to January 6th, they've already been fired since Trump returned to office. Also last month, three former top officials actually sued Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi alleging that they'd been retaliated against for investigating Trump. And then there are all these ongoing cases against his perceived enemies, including, of course, James Comey, who we just saw making his first appearance in court today. And so all of this, it's kind of yet another chapter and something we're going to have to keep our eyes on, see where this situation ultimately leaves us. But the next step, on the note of Comey,

Starting point is 00:14:35 we saw him officially pleading not guilty to charges of lying to Congress this morning while appearing before a federal court in Virginia. Because as we talked about earlier this week, a grand jury indicted the former FBI director on one count each of making false statements to Congress and obstructing congressional proceedings. Right and that, based on claims by federal prosecutors that Comey lied when he told members of Congress during a hearing that he didn't authorize another person at the FBI to speak anonymously to the media about an investigation into Hillary Clinton. Now, notably, the person that that Comey allegedly tapped for the leak isn't named the brief two-page indictment against him. They're listed only as person three. And that is actually important to keep in mind because I'm going to come back

Starting point is 00:15:07 to that in just a minute. But with all this, you've had legal experts, career prosecutors, Democrats, and many others all slamming the indictment. arguing that the charges they're clearly trumped up, both in the sense that they're bogus and that they are only filed because of Donald Trump. Or with the president launching an intense public pressure campaign demanding that his Justice Department go after Comey. But a man, he perceives to be a political enemy and a man he blames for the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. So you've got tons of people arguing that this is an extraordinary attempt by Trump to weaponize his DOJ for his own personal revenge. And, you know, there's a long list of reasons to back up that claim. Right, like the fact that the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who Trump himself had literally appointed earlier

Starting point is 00:15:43 this year? They declined to prosecute Comey after career prosecutors re-investigated the allegations. Or also, I mean, how Trump was only able to get an indictment because he forced the attorney out just days before the deadline to charge Comey and installed his own personal lawyer, Lindsay Halligan. Right, and Halligan's a loyalist who is zero experience as a prosecutor, but who was willing to bring the indictment before a grand jury, even though career prosecutors in Virginia, who reviewed the case, had advised her not to, arguing that there just wasn't enough evidence to support the charges. And then there's the fact that Halligan barely got this passed a grand jury with just 14 of the 23 jurors reportedly voting that there was probable

Starting point is 00:16:15 cause to charge coming. And then also in the last few days, there have been two separate reports from ABC News that appeared to cast even more doubt on the indictment. But the other day, you reportedly had sources telling them about an absolute bombshell from John Durham, the ex-special counsel who Trump himself appointed during his first term to investigate the origins of the Russia probe. And specifically, the sources said that Durham told Halligan's team of prosecutors in Virginia, he was unable to find evidence that would support false statements or obstruction charges against Comey. But also, it wasn't just Durham, a separate team of DC prosecutors who investigated Comey for years, also allegedly told the Virginia team that they hadn't uncovered any chargeable

Starting point is 00:16:47 offenses. All of which would mean, there were three different investigations that all declined to bring charges against Comey, one from an ex-special counsel, and two, from prosecutors in both DC and Virginia. But then also, beyond that, you had ABC News reporting that Helligan's already fragile case has been undermined even more by a key witness who's believed to be absolutely central to the prosecution's allegations. And when I say absolutely central, I mean, central enough to potentially undermine the case entirely. Because as I mentioned before, Halligan's indictment doesn't name the person whom Comey allegedly authorized to speak anonymously to the media about the Clinton bro. Right, person three. But it's been widely speculated that that person is Daniel

Starting point is 00:17:23 Richmond. Right. In Richmond, he's a law professor and friend to Comey's who's acted as an intermediary between the former FBI director and the media. But now, you've got ABC reporting that sources say that Richmond explicitly told investigators that Comey never authorized him to provide information on Clinton probe to the media. In fact, he allegedly said that Comey actively instructed him not to engage with the media at all on at least two occasions. And in addition to that, investigators who reviewed material from Comey's emails, including his messages with Richmond, reportedly failed to find any evidence of Comey authorizing leaks. And so as a result, prosecutors who investigated Halligan's allegations reportedly said that she would face likely insurmountable problems if she tried to use

Starting point is 00:17:58 Richmond's testimony to prove that Comey lied to Congress. So really, unless there's some secret piece of evidence that's out there against Comey, it seems like this case. is going to likely fall apart. But as far as what's actually going to happen, you had the judge overseeing the case announcing today that a trial has officially been scheduled for January 5th. But then also you had Comey's lawyer saying that he'll be filing a motion to dismiss the case. And with that, accusing the DOJ of engaging in vindictive and selected prosecution based on Trump's demand to prosecute a perceived enemy, arguing that the grand jury process had been abused and claiming that Allegan had been appointed illegally. But as far as which way this is going

Starting point is 00:18:27 to go, that remains to be seen right now. And then we've got more news to talk about in just a minute, but first let me say, you know, I love fall football, flannels, pumpkin spice. for me, but if you're still rocking underwear that looks like it survived Y2K, we need to talk. Right, more holes than fabric. It's time to upgrade to Mey Undies today's sponsor. Right, MeUndies keeps me cozy through crisp mornings and chilly nights and the glow-in-the-dark Halloween prints. Surprisingly fun, actually. You know, yeah, they're comfy, but more importantly, they move when I do, the way I need them to. And that, it's their signature micromotal fabric, breathable, ridiculously soft, stretchy, and straight-up cozy. And you know, with spooky season here,

Starting point is 00:19:00 MeUndies is dropping limited edition Halloween prints, including the glow-in-the-dark undies. And with 20-plus cuts and over a hundred colors in prints. Meandis has a style for literally every butt. Also, check out their breath line, right? Moisture wicking, anti-odor tech that keeps you fresh, whether you're working out or binging horror movies all weekend. They've shipped over 30 million pairs and racked up 90,000 five-star reviews. Which, you know, translation, people love these.

Starting point is 00:19:21 And if you don't, it's on MeUndi. Plus, they're sustainably sourced and ethically made. I mean, I wear MeUndies, and you should too. Right now, you can get cozy and spooky for less with deals up to 50% off when you head to meundies.com slash Philip DeFranco or scan the QR code and use promo code. code Philip DeFranco. It's meundis.com slash Philip DeFranco, promo code Philip DeFranco for up to 50% off. Meandis, comfort that's made for fall. But then next up today in some international

Starting point is 00:19:45 news, China is now punishing negativity on social media. Right, everyday users, bloggers, and influencers, at least two of whom had tens of millions of followers are getting their accounts suspended or even banned. And all of this, seemingly because last month, the country's cyberspace administration launched a two-month campaign aimed at, among other things, purging content that incites what they called excessively pessimistic sentiment or promotes defeatist ideas like hard work being useless. This seems to take aim at the growing dissatisfaction among many young people who have been hit hard by a slowing economy, property crisis, and high rates of unemployment. Because as you might expect, with that, an increasing number of young people

Starting point is 00:20:18 they've taken to social media to say that they've given up on just trying to get ahead. With that, you've seen things like the so-called lying flat trend, kind of being about just doing enough to get by. Though there's also the let-it-rot trend, which is basically just about abandoning certain goals entirely because they feel impossible. So then with those things, you have many believing that the Chinese government, they're worried not only about, you know, young people being less productive members of society, but also becoming more critical of the ruling Communist Party. With that, you had one researcher saying,

Starting point is 00:20:42 the root cause is deteriorating economic and social prospects for many Chinese, which has led to what for any country would be a natural social response, the expression of anxiety and misgiving. Saying such sentiment, the leadership worries might be infectious. So now what we've seen are viral videos showing, you know, young graduates working as delivery drivers or sleeping in dormitories among those that are getting removed for, quote, spreading negative emotions. And so with all this, you had, you know, officials in one city in central China saying two social media account owners were investigated for portraying the city in an unflattering light. We also had the local internet regulator in another city saying it punished five social media accounts for, quote, spreading false information about housing prices and real estate regulations.

Starting point is 00:21:19 And then Waybo, one of the country's biggest platform said last week that it had removed over 16,000 pieces of violating content and suspended more than 1,200 accounts. that it said spread rumors about the economy and government welfare programs. And so overall, I mean, the way this is playing out, it feels kind of like it is the government crackdown version of someone saying smile more. And it's going to be very interesting to see how this whole effort plays out. And especially to see if and what kind of impact it actually has, well, the concerns that have people being negative on social media aren't addressed. But then finally, today, let's end on a light note.

Starting point is 00:21:49 Let's end with a congratulations and one more thing. Starting with a big congrats to Mark B who just scored C Geeks Weekly Prize and is using that to hit up the All Things Go Festival in D.C. And for the rest of y'all, that's right. Seekeek is still giving away $500 a week and tickets, and you should definitely answer today if you haven't already. I mean, you can be the next winner and snag $500 towards seeing your favorite artist, sporting event or play.

Starting point is 00:22:08 I mean, there's like over 70,000 events to choose from. And all you got to do is add Code DeFranco to your Seek app profile for a chance of the weekly $500 prize, no purchase necessary. So, you know, get in on it, I think it's a no-brainer. But that brings us to the final thing today, and that is just a snippet of me crashing out. Because, well, in episode two, we dove into just so much. Which is part of me that felt like I needed to vent a little about this Taylor Swift MAGA controversy.

Starting point is 00:22:30 And this is just a small piece of a larger conversation. I'm crashing out because apparently, like about things that matter and things that don't matter. One of the things I would say that does not matter is that apparently Taylor Swift's new album, the life of a showgirl, it's her MAGA coming out party that she's, this is her MAGA anthem that she's just released. There's a growing voice online that is saying this. It is mind-bogglingly stupid. And I know who to get shit for that because I'm talking about an area of the internet right now that is run by Colts. And then just some people in the middle that kind of just listen to music.

Starting point is 00:23:10 There's people that like love everything Taylor Swift. She can't do anything wrong. And then like fuck Taylor Swift. Everything she does is trash or has like some incendiary motive. And hey, I want to say, I understand when you're a sing, saudi, songy, thoughtful. poet slash a zodiac killer, riddle maker, clue, lever that you're fostering an environment where everyone's going to dissect every single thing to the craziest degree. And they are going to find things that are breadcrumbs that you left. And then they're also going to find things that just

Starting point is 00:23:45 aren't there. And they're going to push along with whatever they want to think or whatever kind of works. We see this in all these different conspiracy. enclaves online and I'm just like I'm like the the one of the biggest artists in the world who and like this is there's there's a lot of stuff there's a number of things that I don't agree with that Taylor Swift does that rubs me the wrong way but you're going to think one of the biggest stars in the world who multiple times in different election cycles has gone out of her way and risked alienating a big portion of her audience and money and is marrying captain Pfizer the face of of the fucking COVID shot himself that

Starting point is 00:24:25 that she's it you can have your opinions on it like on the album i get it like i listen to it and i was like okay i kind of like three or four songs and then like the ones i don't like i skip i know that's a crazy thing and i'm also open to the idea that when you have an artist that has so many different out she had a tour that highlighted that so many of her releases are different things like different moments of her life where she was feeling different things going through different things and even that concept it's not going to hit every single person the right way the first time i know so many people that are talking about like they don't like this album but then they'll also concede that they didn't like a certain album and then uh they

Starting point is 00:25:05 they you know they went through a different period of their life and all this and they went back and they loved it great that's cool but like this is too this has become too big of the news cycle even though it's probably going to be the thumbnail of when it's like the 187th most important thing that's happening right now. Well, can I tell you, Phil? First thing, I, I am shocked. I am shocked that you like three or four. I only liked like one song, I think, when I listen to the whole album. You just listen to it last night. You're just listened to Wood on Loop. You're like, yes, I was like, give me more new heights of manhood, okay? Well, that it brings us to the end of this video. Of course, you've got even more just a click away. You've got the full 80 minute

Starting point is 00:25:44 episode of crashing out that just came out. I really highly recommend it. And or you've got the The newest Philip DeFranco show you haven't seen yet right here. And I've also got links to both on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube in the description down below. But no matter what you do, let me just say, thank you for watching. I love yo faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.

The Philip DeFranco Show - Hasan Piker Shock Collar Allegations, Katie Porter Interview Disaster, & Trump's Chicago Invasion

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.