The Philip DeFranco Show - Inside the Messi Allegations Rocking the World Cup & Rogan Gets JD Vance to Slip Up About Epstein

Starting point is 00:00:00 This episode is brought to you by Activia. You might already be eating yogurt, but not all yogurts are created equal. Activia contains over 1 billion probiotics per serving to survive and reach the gut alive. When it comes to gut health, Activia is the number one family doctor-recommended probiotic yogurt brand. Choose Activia. Feel good from the inside out. Visitactivia.ca for more details. The Hulu original series Furious is coming to Disney Plus.

Starting point is 00:00:32 Starring Emmy Rossum, Furious follows FBI agent Alice Black on the hunt for a mysterious and calculating serial killer. Both walk their own paths toward justice, and as their lives start to intertwine, the line between right and wrong begins to blur. Don't miss the three-episode premiere of the Hulu original series Furious on July 27th, only on Hulu on Disney Plus. Care for your skin like you care for the game. Plus Care is an official sponsor of the FIFA World Cup, 2026, and has just dropped their new limited edition deodorant and antipersprint collection for 72 hours sweat and odor protection, helping you stay fresh, from kickoff to the final whistle. Visit dove.com slash CA slash E.N. slash men dash care to shop now.

Starting point is 00:01:24 While you've got the Lionel Messi World Cup rigging allegations just blowing up right now, Joe Rogan and J.D. Vance's bombshells on Epstein and Israel expose a lot, including a maga ticking time bomb. I'll be live tonight to cover and break down Trump's controversial prime time address with your favorite DeFranco and Georgia State House candidate Lindsay DeFranco, so be subscribed and have all notifications turned on. And Trump's teleprompter guy reportedly got busted betting on Trump's speeches. We're talking about all of that and even more on today's brand new Philip DeFranco show you daily dive into the news, starting with this. Is FIFA rigging the World Cup final? Or that's something you've seen many people asking and saying

Starting point is 00:01:56 as Argentina's been advancing through knockout rounds. And you have them officially secure in their spot in the finals after beating England in another stunning If you've been on World Cup Twitter, which is a very special version of Twitter, you've probably seen a wide array of largely AI-generated memes that show Argentina's Messi, often depicted as a princess, a baby or a woman cozying up with a FIFA president, Regiani and Fantino. And the memes of kind of all kind, they do hit on general themes. These two talking about rigging games, handling bribe money, you know, you get the idea.

Starting point is 00:02:22 But it's also not just AI memes, you've got so many people that are broadly accusing Messi of cheating. You've got things like this TikTok with over 2.2 million likes that just baselessly alleges that he paid millions of dollars for extra penalty Other have also argued that FIFA rigged the tournament to give Argentina a clearer path to the semifinals. Or you've got people claiming that the team was set up with easier games and noting that they didn't face off against any of the top 10 teams in the FIFA ranking before their match against England. And then you're seeing plenty of allegations of referee bias. And I really want to stress to you, these are just some of the theories that have been floating around out there. But also I should note, like this is by no means the first time that there have been allegations about FIFA's favoritism towards Argentina

Starting point is 00:02:55 spreading online. Right, Argentina ops, they've been calling Messi FIFA's princess since the last World Cup in 2022, which Argentina won. While you had a lot of people sharing a lot of feelings about the Argentina-Cap Verde game, I mean, the favoritism allegations, they really came back in full force this year after Argentina beat Egypt three to two in the final minutes of their game. And that one was especially contentious because the refs voided an Egyptian goal due to a foul, but that apparently declined to review a later potential foul by Argentina shortly before they scored the winning goal. And it wasn't just, you know, soccer fans that were spreading the favoritism theories.

Starting point is 00:03:23 The coach of Egypt's team called the game unfair and said that the team suffered injustice. He even explicitly suggested that FIFA may have rigged the game to favor Argentina, saying, perhaps they wanted to keep the world champion in the competition. Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running. It has never been reported that Egypt has officially filed a complaint, challenging the results and asking for an investigation into that referee. Though, of course, FIFA officials and the manager of Argentina's national team have denied the allegations of favoritism. But that's also not where the controversy ends because you have been a UK leaders and fans calling for the team to be investigated after some players held up a political banner following their

Starting point is 00:03:52 semi-final win yesterday, where the banner in question being translated to the Melvinas are Argentine, with that being in reference to the islands located 300 miles off of the coast to Argentina, which are also known as the Falkland Island. And so just for a quick history lesson there, while many different countries have claimed the islands over the past several centuries, it's been under de facto British rule since the UK reestablished its rule in 1833.

Starting point is 00:04:10 But Argentina, they've always claimed that the islands were illegally taken, and in 1982, the military government invaded in order to try and take them back, initiating the Falkland War, which lasted 74 days and actually ended during the 82 World Cup when Argentina surrendered.

Starting point is 00:04:22 But also since that war, Argentina has still claimed that they have sovereignty over the islands. Though that, as 99.8% of the island's residents, voted to remain under British rule during a 2013 referendum. Like literally only three people voted against it. But leading up to yesterday's game, you had numerous Argentinian leaders painting the match against England as this broader political statement. And that actually included the vice president saying that the game isn't just another match while referring to the English as invaders and usurping pirates. So it's not surprising that that banner made its way to the pitch with some outlets noting that it appears to have been handed down by the fans and the crowd who were photographed holding it earlier.

Starting point is 00:04:53 But you also have it appearing to violate FIFA's rules for both players and stadium content, both of which strictly prohibit displaying or wearing any material with political messaging. And so as a result, while you had leaders in Argentina cheering on the message, you had numerous UK officials calling for a formal probe with a spokesperson for Prime Minister Kier-Starm are telling reporters, the World Cup might not be ours, but the Falkland Islands definitely are. Our position is unchanged. Self-determination rests with the islanders and our commitment to the Falklands will never waver. And you have the madding that any potential sanctions or a matter for FIFA to resolve. But as far as what that punishment would be, that remains unclear, though I will say there is some past precedent. Because you've had a situation where during a warm-up game for the 2014 World Cup,

Starting point is 00:05:28 Argentina's players held up a banner with the same message about the Falklands, a move that resulted in a $37,000 fine from FIFA. But now, you have some speculating that this could be much more serious because this isn't a warm-up. It was an official match. And then another possibility is that FIFA might sanction the players who held up the banner, right? And that's also something they've done in the past, suspending individual players for a game or two after they made political statements. But that said, it could be a while before any potential punishments handed down, and experts say that it's unlikely anything's going to happen before the final.

Starting point is 00:05:53 But then also at the same time, you're seeing widespread questions about FIFA's political neutrality at this World Cup. Right, Infantino, the FIFA president, he's been widely panned for his close ties with Donald Trump, who he's cozyed up to in the lead up to the games. And that was a relationship you saw received even more backlash after FIFA reversed a red card suspension for the United States. Right, that was at Donald Trump's request, though it didn't fucking do anything for the game. We still lost 4-1. But then also Trump, he's a big ally of Argentina's president, and they're both reportedly set to sit with Infantino during the final on Sunday. So kind of just to bring it full circle, even if you don't buy the whole messy Argentina favoritism accusations, it is true that FIFA has pulled some incredibly questionable moves recently, which also isn't that great for an organization that is a deep history of corruption. But for now, we'll have to wait to see how all this plays out, and that goes for, you know,

Starting point is 00:06:34 investigations, probes, as well as who's going to win the World Cup, which, hey, a question for you, who do you think's going to win the World Cup? But also, I'll say, you know, Argentina and FIFA, they are not the only ones who found themselves in some tricky waters. Because this Joe Rogan, J.D. Van situation you've got on your hands, it's a wild one. Because this new interview, it really tested both of them on some crucial controversies inside of this Magus' Civil War we've seen play out over the past year and a half, namely the Epstein files and the war in Iran. And you've had Joe Rogan being among the many conservative voices who have been slamming the Trump administration on both of those fronts. So I also, of course, have to add an asterisk there because it hasn't stopped Joe Rogan from being a very willing prop of the administration.

Starting point is 00:07:08 Whether it be him with the biggest smile on his face being buddy buddy inside of the Oval Office or on the White House salon. But yesterday what you saw is that when they got together, Vance addressed both of these things on his podcast, even admitting that they botched the release of the files. We absolutely screwed up the comms of the Epstein files like we just did. But do I think the reason we screwed up the comms is because we were trying to hide something? No. I think that we should have just dropped everything at the very beginning. To which you might understandably respond, but your boss was the main person trying to make it so nothing got released. You very transparently made it his mission to knock Republicans who supported this thing from the beginning out of Congress, namely Thomas Massey. And then, of course,

Starting point is 00:07:43 you had just Marjorie Taylor Green leaving. So you then also had Rogan bringing up Pam Bondi, repressing Vance on things like the former AG doing that big performative binder release with Van Saying. I think Pam was trying to respond to the political moment. I think she overstated what we had and what we didn't have. And I think that she, you know, got roasted for it publicly. But ultimately, Vance claiming that the big issue with the files isn't actually with the Trump administration, but rather errors made way back during the investigation in 2007 and 2008. And so even while seemingly admitting that Trump and his DOJ, they missed the mark, he still

Starting point is 00:08:13 ultimately defended them. We eventually collected six million documents as part of the effort. The president, people say the president was forced into releasing the documents. Like, again, the idea that Donald. Trump could not have killed that legislation, especially with the United States Senate, is a joke. He absolutely could have killed it. I've never seen a single piece of credible evidence that the president engaged in wrongdoing with minors, ever. So like when the president says the hoax, that's what he's talking about, is this democratic idea that he somehow was a,

Starting point is 00:08:47 was a pedophile. It's absurd. But to that, I would just say no. He seems to be deflecting, making a very specific argument. And there are plenty of people who want the release of the Epstein files that don't actually think that Donald Trump himself. is a pedophile. There are definitely other issues like the back that he literally had to pay just a ton of money over sexual abuse. But there are also plenty of people that think that Donald Trump didn't want the release of the Epstein files and even still had a hand in what was and wasn't released with like what we've seen publicly because he either wanted to protect or still have leverage over a bunch of other rich people, right? Elites, a lot of the people

Starting point is 00:09:16 that he surrounds himself with or who have supported him. Because a lot of people in this country think that it's not really left versus right though there is that stuff at play, but it's rather top versus bottom, the elites versus everyone else. And then also it's this while you advanced saying that while he believes that there is likely a bigger conspiracy behind it, we just don't know. It's saying that he as the vice president of the United States, he just can't do a thing to get to the bottom of it. There was something he was doing where he was trying to either influence people or compromise people. Correct. So it's not, there's some sort of an operation that was going on. There is a story there and, you know, I will go to my deathbed believing

Starting point is 00:09:55 I think there's a story there, but I can't prove it. And for me, I will say it was very wild to watch this happen. Like, how are you on the inside? Like literally, one extra fish fillet for Trump away from being the president of the United States going, ah, if only, if only there was a way to be on the inside and figure this out. You've literally installed loyalists everywhere that matters.

Starting point is 00:10:15 Funny enough, you had a lot of people making fun of Vans pointing to an onion or I guess now Info Wars video where they're like, the conspiracy, it goes almost all the way to the top, but not quite there, because that would be Trump. but, you know, right around here. So yeah, you advanced doing this conspiracy bro thing, but also officially being the vice president

Starting point is 00:10:32 of the United States and not giving any more information. And actually, I'll say the timing here was interesting because Epstein was also the main focus of politics yesterday as the House Oversight Committee continued its interviews. I mean, it also came up repeatedly during Blanche's confirmation hearing. And also just this week, we learned that the Trump DOJ it so far refused to turn over unredacted files

Starting point is 00:10:47 to the state of New Mexico amid its investigation into Epstein and his infamous Zoro Ranch. But you've got the state's attorney general accusing the Trump administration of obstructing this inquiry with, holding information and refusing to cooperate. Though for its part, you're the DOJ writing, federal law, court orders, and privacy protections

Starting point is 00:11:00 for victims, witnesses do not allow us to release millions of unredacted documents. To capitulate to their demands would be to break federal law. Is that what the New Mexico AG is suggesting? And if you feel like the last part of that statement, it was kind of petty or antagonizing, you're definitely not alone. What we're actually seeing is that doing that

Starting point is 00:11:15 is not a winning strategy when it comes to Epstein. Are you of polling from earlier this year that found that over half of Americans say that the Epstein files have lowered their trust in the country's political and business leaders? And 75% still think that the United States is hiding information about Epstein and his clients. But then that also wasn't the only contentious issue

Starting point is 00:11:28 that JD Vans touched on while talking to Rogan. Because you also had them talking about what Rogan himself called a betrayal and a terrible decision, the war in Iran. And there what you saw was Vance kind of having to toe the line again of defending Trump while also playing into a maga base that is losing interest. I think that the goal is certainly good, which is to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Starting point is 00:11:47 And I think that there are obviously a lot of questions about how best to achieve that. If it was your call, would you have done exactly the same thing? Well, what did the president said publicly that J.D. was less enthusiastic about it? I think it was the exact phrase that he used. I mean, my attitude towards this man, as you know, is the vice president, I'm not a public commentator. Like, my job is to give the best advice I can to the president of the president of the United States. And so here, it really felt like he was trying to do this dance to still have a possibility of

Starting point is 00:12:19 being president in 2028. Or yet I'm saying, as long as the president's making legal and ethical choices, it's his job to make sure that his missions are as successful as possible, right? Even if he personally would have done that thing. So he's worked on negotiations, he's worked hard on that, he says, but it's also not his job to talk about what he thinks. So as far as what the American public thinks, Americans do not like this war. In fact, just this morning, the Washington Post putting out a poll showing that overall approval is just 29% for this war. And while you see things like a separate recent U.gov poll found that 77% of MAGA Republicans, believe that the war is the right decision, it's at just 31% for non-Maga Republicans. And so

Starting point is 00:12:51 it's not just divisive for the country. It is very divisive. of inside of his own party. And you have many including big voices like Tucker Carlson, calling it Israel's war, not the US's, and you had the Wall Street Journal noting, Republicans have long seen support for Israel as an unshakable tenet of GOP orthodoxy. But a younger generation of influential conservatives

Starting point is 00:13:06 is pushing to change that. And actually, what you saw there was Vance, he did sort of cater to that side when he ramped up his critiques of Israel while speaking to Rogan. Right now, Israel is losing the public opinion battle in the United States of America. Israel is an ally.

Starting point is 00:13:20 Like France or like the United Kingdom, kingdom, we're going to have disagreements with them. We're going to have agreements with them. Do they try to influence American politics? Yes. But like I said earlier, a lot of other countries do. I think some are the extent that Israel does, though? I think some are better at it than others. I think the Israelis are definitely more effective at it than most. But I wouldn't say that they're the only effective country by any means. And again, a lot of the way that he's been talking about these things, it does seem like he's trying to think about 2028. Right. And that makes sense because we've talked about the Pew Research polling that came out recently. And even with Republicans,

Starting point is 00:13:48 especially younger Republicans, this is just not popular. And Yahoo, the people around him, the people who have enabled this, they have possibly messed up Israel's PR generationally. And personally, I'll say, I'm very interested to see how Vance continues this apparent balancing act in the years to come in hopes of getting the support that he needs. And then there's even more that we've got to dive into in just a minute. But first, let me thank a sponsor and say, you know, I've realized one of the easiest ways to accidentally waste money is to never question the bills

Starting point is 00:14:14 that show up every month, right? Your phone bill. It's usually one of those bills that's on autopilot. But in years later, you're still paying for a plan you probably wouldn't choose today. Oh wow, right now, today's sponsor, Mint Mobile, they're offering a summer promo of three, six, or 12 months of premium wireless for 15 bucks a month. That's any plan, even unlimited. And so naturally, one of my first questions would be, okay, well, what is the catch? And it turns out that switching, it was easier than I expected.

Starting point is 00:14:34 Bring your unlocked phone, keep your number, and activate online in minutes with ESM, no store visits. And then coverage, of course, was the other thing I cared about. And Mint, they run the nation's largest 5G network reaching 98% of Americans and 4GLTE reaches 99%. You're not giving up coverage to save money. And you, you choose the plan that fits for how you actually use your phone from 6 gigabytes all the way to unlimited. And hey, if you're still on the fence, every plan comes with a seven-day money-back guarantee, so there's very little risk and giving it a try. Stop overpaying for wireless just because that's how it's always been.

Starting point is 00:15:01 Scan that QR code or go to mintmobile.com slash DeFranco and get three, six, or 12 months of premium wireless for 15 bucks a month. It's any plan, even unlimited. And again, that's mintmobile.com slash defranco. In Toronto, every arrival is a statement. And nothing says it better than this. Cadillac Optic was the number one selling luxury EV in Canada for 2025. Find your rhythm across a seamless 33-inch display and an immersive 19-speaker AKG surround audio system. This city demands agility and optic delivers with precision to make every drive extraordinary.

Starting point is 00:15:31 Let's take the Cadillac. Find out more at Cadillac Canada.ca. Luxury sales claim based on S&P Global Mobility Canadian New Vehicle Total Registrations for calendar year 2025 for the Cadillac definition of luxury. Then, diving right back into the news, we've got to talk about how celebrity investor and alleged human man Kevin O'Leary accused two Utah residents of acting as Chinese agents. Right, seemingly because they had the audacity to question his plan to build a massive data center of the state. With him then, admitting to having no evidence to back this up, and now, he, along with Fox News, they're being sued for defamation. All while, you have that

Starting point is 00:15:59 project continuing to face incredible pushback, and it's just one high-profile example of how data centers are becoming just this increasingly important issue in American politics. And a big key thing is that it doesn't seem to be falling neatly along party lines completely. But starting with the shark, though, I would say he seems more like an oversized albino Goblin, let me introduce you to the strangers that he decide to make his enemies. Are you of Gabby Finn Laysen, who's a political strategist with a firm called Elevate Strategies? And then you have Josh Cantor, a lawyer who founded and serves on the board of a progressive nonprofit called Alliance for a Better Utah.

Starting point is 00:16:27 And they and their organizations are all named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit. You have their problem with O'Leary going back to May 11th when he decides to go on Fox business and he claims that he had an analysis showing that foreign actors were spreading misinformation about his data center. But then you also had him adding specifically, We found two cells inside of Utah. And you see and hear him specifically mention Josh, his colleague Taylor, and their nonprofit as well as Gabby and her company. I'm calling out Taylor, Josh, and Gabby operating in Utah.

Starting point is 00:16:54 I want a forensic audit who's funding their platforms. Who is it? These are proxies for the Chinese government's my argument. And if they're not, because I want them to be able to defend their name, Taylor, Josh, and Gabby. Come out, come out, wherever you are. Let's audit your book. And they should thank me for this promotion I'm giving them right now. If they have nothing to hide, they'll open their books.

Starting point is 00:17:13 It's the CPP at work here. There's no question about it. And so then with that, Josh and Gabby, they're reportedly shocked to all of a sudden be called out on national television, not least because they hadn't even been prominent critics of the data center. Their organizations that apparently only collaborated on a few social media posts against the project and Utah officials who supported it. But then also, according to this lawsuit, the groups played virtually no role in the organized opposition. But that allegedly did not stop O'Leary from repeating similar accusations against them during at least 10 separate appearances on Fox News over the following weeks. That's how to include falsely accusing them of criminal acts like acting as unregistered for an in. agents and money laundering. And you then saw all of that leading to a lawyer sending him a letter last month,

Starting point is 00:17:47 asking for a retractions. Yet O'Leary then posting a statement on his Instagram saying that he had no evidence that China or the Chinese Communist Party had been funding Josh or Gabby. And you then also had the Fox News host who appeared really more than happy to amplify O'Leary's claims, issuing a similar statement. Fox News Media is likely, likewise aware of no evidence that they are funded by or acting at the direction of or in coordination with Chinese interests in opposing Kevin O'Leary's project.

Starting point is 00:18:12 Fox News media apologizes for the error. But the plaintiff's lawyer, they were like, come on, too little too late, saying the damage, it's already been done telling the New York Times, these are people whose lives have been completely upended. And you have the lawsuit specifically alleging that they've suffered devastating reputational harm, significant economic losses, severe emotional distress,

Starting point is 00:18:28 and ongoing threats to their physical safety. While it doesn't specify a dollar amount, they are seeking compensation. Now, at least as of recording, O'Leary hasn't commented, though Fox News, which is accused of letting O'Leary just push those accusations without questioning, qualifying, or verifying them, did issue a statement through a spokesperson saying,

Starting point is 00:18:42 Fox News Media publicly corrected the record on every program where on-air guest Kevin O'Leary's comments were made, all of which was extensively publicized, saying we will vigorously defend against this lawsuit. Though I will tell you there, I mean, we've heard that in the past, like before when the network agreed to pay almost $800 million to settle a defamation lawsuit from Dominion voting systems over the network's spread of misinformation related to the 2020 elections. And so we're going to keep our eyes on this, right? We need to see where this case ends up. I'm very interested in it just because of who's involved. But also in the meantime, it's worth noting that this is only the latest twist in the drama surrounding O'Leary's data center. a separate lawsuit in Utah State Court brought by Alliance for a Better Utah and several other individuals

Starting point is 00:19:16 alleging that the construction approval process, it violated the rights of local residents. And then outside of the courtroom, the project also became a controversy that contributed to the shocking defeat of J. Stewart Adams, who's the president of the state Senate in his Republican primary last month. Right, Adams, if you don't know, he was one of the longest serving and most powerful politicians in Utah. This is a reliably Republican state. He won previous elections barely break in a sweat. But what you saw is that he also served as chairman of a Utah agency that approved the initial plans for O'Leary's Data Center back in spring. And what happened is that he lost to Stephanie Hollis to as a candidate who built much of her campaign on the claim that Adams, along with the rest of Utah's political establishment, had betrayed Utah voters by supporting this project.

Starting point is 00:19:50 Hollis saying after the fact that the data center had been the straw that broke the camels back and dadding. It concerns our way of life, our resources, our water, our air quality, across the Republican spectrum, people care about it. And you know, it's not just Utah. The debate over building AI data centers, I mean, it's helped tip races all across the country. In April, for example, you had voters in one small city in Wisconsin, they elected a new mayor who campaigned on his opposition to data centers. In a Missouri, voters in the city of Festus, the unseated four local counselors who had supported a $6 billion data center project. You're even seeing Trump trying to ease anxiety over data centers in the rising energy prices. There was several states now, having signed the White House's so-called rate payer protection pledge.

Starting point is 00:20:24 And that's notably a non-binding commitment to have data center developers pay their fair share of energy and water use, electric grid improvements, and maintenance. And yet that first signed by the heads of several tech companies back in March, but like I said, and as you can tell by the inflection, it's non-binding. And so there's a good reason to doubt that it's going to lower electricity costs. And very interestingly, you had staffers for several Democratic governors telling Politico that the White House actually didn't reach out to Democrats to sign this pledge. Are you a spokesperson for New York Governor Kathy Hokel who actually just approved the country's first state-level moratorium on large-scale data center construction saying, it's unfortunately no surprise that this administration would play partisan politics on such a critical issue. And adding, while Washington Republicans play politics and make pledges, they won't keep, Governor Hockel is taking real action to keep the lights on and costs down for New Yorkers.

Starting point is 00:21:04 In New York, they're actually a founding member of the U.S. Climate Alliance, which is a coalition of mostly Democratic governors. And their governors who, according to a spokesperson, have already enacted policies and made commitments that go beyond Trump's pledge. Opposition to data centers is actually one of the few issues that's united voters across ideological lines. Were you polling that shows that the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of both parties, they're now against data center construction in their communities? And also a key takeaway here is that the opinions are changing drastically. It was more like a 50-50 split just last year. And with that, you know, while you had progressives like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leading the initial wave of opposition to data centers,

Starting point is 00:21:35 we're now seeing politicians on both sides of the aisle kind of divided within their own respect parties. Even at a recent Bloomberg analysis finding that since December, at least 25 people running for governor or federal office have run ads either promoting their own opposition to data centers or slamming their opponent for supporting them. And again, the numbers kind of evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. I mean, in Pennsylvania, for example, a Republican who's running for governor said she supports what would effectively be something like a New York style moratorium on new data centers. But Josh Shapiro, right, the Democratic incumbent, while he's called for regulation, he's also been a big supporter of the industry. And in fact,

Starting point is 00:22:04 an analysis from The Guardian this week contending that one Democratic politician after another ground states has rolled out the red carpet for companies building these controversial energy-intensive projects. And there, you had importing to Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. You had her recently appearing at an event with OpenAI Sam Altman to celebrate the building of a controversial $16 billion data center west of Ann Arbor. A move that, at least to some Democratic voters' eyes, was her tearing up her White House ambitions. Then with that, just this week, after all the backlash, she made an announcement calling for increased regulation and commitments from data center companies. And then you also have Republicans like Byron Donald's, a Trump ally who's running to take over for

Starting point is 00:22:36 DeSantis. And he is similarly trying to take this kind of middle. of the road approach. Talking a lot about trying to keep energy prices low while still supporting their development. Though you then also have other Republicans like Jay Felia, former NFL kicker running to represent Arizona and Congress emerging as an outspoken supporter of data centers in the AI industry.

Starting point is 00:22:50 And then actually with all this, to bring it back to Kevin O'Leary, there is something that he's talked about that he might be right on. And that is that China and other US adversaries, they're trying to amplify this debate. And there's actually some evidence of that. Though again, to be very clear, there is less than zero evidence to support any of the specific allegations he was making. And I also think there's an important distinction

Starting point is 00:23:07 to be made here. And you actually had a former intelligence official hitting on this when they talked to the time saying foreign actors aren't manufacturing American debates over the future of AI. They are exploiting them. But with all that said, I do want to pass a question off to you specifically around what are your thoughts on data centers. In Georgia here, it's definitely a big issue. There's been a lot of controversies around people's homes essentially being taken against their will. I think the way a lot of everything kind of in this space that's been handled and is moving forward is especially fucked. But I'm also just one person. And again, I'd love to know your thoughts. But then from that, for your final block today, I want to cram in some more news you need to know, starting with the fact that it looks like Trump's teleprompter guy profited tens of thousands of dollars by placing bets on speeches on the prediction market, Calci. That's what you have ABC News reporting right now. His name's Gabriel Perez. He's been operating Trump's teleprompter since 2016.

Starting point is 00:23:52 And according to ABC News, sources say that he's in talks with federal regulators to settle allegations that he used his inside knowledge of the president's speeches to win more than $100,000. As far as how you've got things to this point, you had Calci's lead lawyer saying, our surveillance team promptly flagged and referred these trades to the CFTC, and we are cooperating and assisting regulators. Right, so you had them seemingly finding something suspicious and reporting it. The one of the things I found most fascinating is apparently this guy was day trading. Reportedly, the sources saying, the investigators uncovered times when Perez would back out of certain bets mid-speech when Trump skipped over a portion of the speech that included a word he had previously

Starting point is 00:24:22 bet would be mentioned. Or which makes sense because you even have Trump saying that he goes off prompt or 80% of the time. But as far as what happens next, it might not actually be that much. Reportedly regulators are willing to settle with Perez. You just have to give you to give you. back his profits and not make bets like this moving forward. Which to me, it feels like an insanely small slap on the wrist for just an ever-growing, emerging problem. Also, you've now got the news about the chaos with the Paramount Warner Brothers merger that we have to cover because a paramount shareholder just filed a lawsuit against Larry and David Ellison saying it they made illegal deals with the president to get the merger approved,

Starting point is 00:24:51 with the guy behind it being Paul Robbins and he's claiming that the Ellison's won the bidding war for Warner Brothers by promising sweeping changes at CNN and other personal benefits to President Trump. And he says that they plan to funnel cash to him by settling his legal claims against CNN and cut any anchors that he doesn't like. And notably, this isn't the first time we've heard something like this. Right, last year, you had Trump himself even nodding to a $16 million side deal with the Ellison's where additional ads and public service announcements all wrapped up in a 60-minute lawsuit settlement. But also adding to that, since the Paramount Skydance deal last year, the lawsuit says that the Ellison's

Starting point is 00:25:18 have remade CBS in the president's image. Right, they were talking about getting rid of any DEI initiatives. They hired the former president of a conservative think tank to lead the review of any complaints about their news coverage. And probably most notably, or at least most obvious to everyone out there, we've seen 60-minute hosts either leave or be let go from the show. So now that we're here in talks of the same side deals coming with this merger, you got people saying America's richest people want to turn America's most important media outlets into the propaganda machines for the president. This is bad for democracy. But Paramount, they say that these are just recycled allegations saying, quote, no commitments from either David or

Starting point is 00:25:48 Larry Ellison have been made to any government body. And doubting, we remain confident in the merger's fundamentals and will continue toward closing. But I will say it seems like they may have a tough road ahead of them. Right. And that's because on top of this most recent lawsuit, 12 states have also just filed a separate antitrust suit to block the merger. And that's in addition to the Writers Guild of America filing one as well, claiming that it would limit opportunities for writers and lead them into pay cuts. But then, my friend, you beautiful bastard, is the end of today's show, but depending on when you're watching this, I might literally be live right now. Again, with my amazing wife and also Georgia House candidate Lindsay DeFranco,

Starting point is 00:26:17 and we'll get through, breakdown, or react to whatever the hell this speech is going to be tonight. I'll see you then.

The Philip DeFranco Show - Inside the Messi Allegations Rocking the World Cup & Rogan Gets JD Vance to Slip Up About Epstein

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