The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 10.2 P Diddy Situation Just Got Worse, Shocking JD Vance vs Tim Walz Post-Debate Polls, & Today’s News

Episode Date: October 2, 2024

Just go to https://www.zocdoc.com/phil and download the Zocdoc app for FREE. Then find and book a top-rated doctor today!  Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “PDS” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/PHIL  Daily Dip newsletter subscribers can win up to $1,000 in SeatGeek credit so make sure you’re subscribed: https://www.dailydip.co/ 24HR SALE @ https://BeautifulBastard.com - Use Code: ‘SPOOKYSZN’ for Extra 20% Off Entire Order! Be a part of the DeFranco Book Club! My October Book Recommendations: Get "Incidents Around the House" https://amzn.to/3TS22E2 (Physical and Audiobook available) Get "Project Hail Mary" https://amzn.to/3N9J1JM (Physical & Audiobook Available) 34 Days Until Election Day! Make Sure You Are Registered to VOTE: https://Vote.org  – ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - Diddy to Face 120 More Lawsuits 04:00 - Highlights From the VP Debate 12:52 - Sponsored by ZocDoc 13:59 - FL Primary Candidate Indicted for Threatening to Hire Hit Squad on Opponent 16:32 - Israel Vows Response After Iranian Missile Attack 19:53 - California Bans Legacy Admissions to Private Universities  22:02 - Cambodia Arrests Journalist Known for Exposing Crimes in Scam Centers 24:25 - 24 Hour Sale At Beautiful Bastard! 24:58 - Why Many Local Elections Only Have One Choice Per Party 29:16 - Sponsored by SeatGeek 29:53 - Comment Commentary  Watch the full VP Debate Here: https://youtu.be/jEphfGpJjc8?si=Xx9ad9U_AmmG5WZk ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Local Elections: Brian Espinoza ———————————— #DeFranco #Diddy #JDVance ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup, you beautiful bastards. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show, your daily dive into the news. It is Wednesday. There is a lot to talk about today. So let's just jump into it. This is a news show. P. Diddy, Sean Diddy Combs, the Diddler,

whatever you wanna call him, that situation around him, it has gotten so much worse because we are now seeing 120 people set to launch lawsuits against him, alleg has gotten so much worse. Because we are now seeing 120 people set to launch lawsuits against him alleging sexual abuse and assault. With these cases being revealed during a press conference yesterday. We will find the silent accomplices.

We will expose the enablers who enabled this conduct behind closed doors. We will pursue this matter, no matter who the evidence implicates. Now this obviously follows a long string of lawsuits alleging similar claims against Diddy. It also comes as he was just charged and pleaded not guilty to sex trafficking and other crimes.

But even amid all the bombshell accusations we've heard already, the claims coming from this new set of suits is fucking shocking. Right of the 120 cases, attorney Tony Busby said that 25 came from people who were minors at the time of the alleged abuse, with the youngest victim being just nine years old at the time.

And their allegations go back as far as the 90s and all the way up to this year. And they largely stem from parties that Diddy hosted as well as auditions. Right, and during the press conference, Busby said that many of the alleged victims reported their assault either to police or to a hospital, and some had toxicology reports that found

that they had horse tranquilizers in their system. And even though all of these cases are being filed individually, Busby said that many of the accusations followed a similar pattern where victims were lured into a situation where they were given a drink that turned out to be lace,

and saying that once the drug took effect, the victim would be sexually abused, often by multiple people, and often as others watch. Now, these cases are gonna be filed in a handful of states, primarily New York and California, and around the next 30 days. And in addition to sexual assault and abuse,

the suits will also accuse Diddy of false imprisonment, sexual abuse of minors, among other forms of misconduct. Now for his part, Diddy is continuing to deny any wrongdoing with one of his attorneys saying in a statement, "'As Mr. Combs's legal team has emphasized, "'he cannot address every meritless allegation "'in what has become a reckless media circus.'" But adding that said,

"'Mr. Combs emphatically and categorically denies as false and defamatory any claim that he sexually abused anyone, including minors. He looks forward to proving his innocence and vindicating himself in court where the truth will be established based on evidence, not speculation. And with all that said,

while obviously a lot of people are paying attention because Diddy is at the center of this, this could just grow and grow because you had Busby saying in some of the suits, "'Other perpetrators are gonna be named. And while he did not name names there, he did say that well-known people could be a part of these cases. I expect that through this process, many powerful people will be exposed. Many dirty secrets will be revealed, but the names that we're going to name, assuming that our investigators confirm and corroborate what we've been told,

are names that will shock you. You know, he is not the first person in recent days to suggest that public figures could come down as part of all the claims against Diddy. Because, for example, another lawyer representing one of his alleged victims said she was contacted about an explicit video featuring Diddy and another high profile person. With the lawyer saying she was contacted

to represent someone in the sale of said video, which she declined, but regarding the contents of it, she told News Nation. There already have been tapes leaking around Hollywood, being shopped around to individuals in Hollywood. But one particular person contacted me to shop a particular video they were in possession of and to contact the person who was in the video to see if they were interested in purchasing the video before it became a public not. Mr. Combs was in the video to see if they were interested in purchasing the video before it became a public not. Mr. Combs was in the tape and this other person is, I would venture to say more high profile than Mr. Combs.

But then adding that she has seen stills of the video and it is pornographic in nature, but it also doesn't look like this unnamed person was aware they were being filmed. Right, and all of this just fueling more and more speculation about who witnessed or enabled Diddy's behavior. You know, if any of these cases keep moving forward, it does seem like we could find out

at some point down the line. But as far as where things stand for Diddy at this current moment, he is currently being held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in New York, but his lawyers filed an appeal this week seeking his release. They're with him aiming to overturn a previous ruling

that denied him bail, but we're gonna have to wait to see what happens. But then we gotta talk about last night's vice presidential debate, an event described as unusually normal, which it was in the scope of the last eight years. Like Vance and Walls, who, by the way, fantastic makeup artists,

they both had a little morning glow glam on. They were cordial and friendly with one another. They actively said they agreed with one another on certain things. They basically never attacked one another personally and barely even politically, instead reserving their shots for Trump and Harris. And I'll be honest, I was kind of shocked

when I saw the post-debate polls. Because like I said yesterday, before the debate happened, like Walls has a reputation for not being a strong debater. He was definitely a bit wobbly, faltering at times, stumbling over his words. With easily his weakest moment being about him responding about his time in China. Because Walls has previously said that he was in Hong Kong

during the Tiananmen Square protest in the spring of 1989. But recent reports have shown that he actually didn't travel there until later that summer. And so when he was asked about this discrepancy, he just gave this weird word salad. He starts talking about his experiences growing up and joining the National Guard at 17 and then saying, my first year out, I got the opportunity

in the summer of 89 to travel to China. 35 years ago, be able to do that. With him then going on to outline some of the work that he's done for his community, saying they know who he is and they repeatedly elected him as a congressman and governor, and then adding, I've tried to do the best I can, but I've not been perfect. And I'm a knucklehead at times, but it's always been about that. So look, my commitment has been from the beginning to make sure that I'm there for the people, to make sure that I get this right. I will say more than anything. Many times I will talk a lot. I will get caught up in the rhetoric. But being there, the impact it made, the difference it made

in my life, I learned a lot about China. With Walls then continuing on a bit longer, criticizing Trump's attitudes towards China and again, emphasizing his commitment to his community, to which one of the moderators was like, my guy, what? Can you answer the question to which he then said? All I said on this was, is I got there that summer and misspoke on this. So I will just, that's what I've said.

So I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protest went in. And from that, I learned a lot of what needed to be in governance. Right, and for the most part, Walz's fumbles were especially notable because they came in such sharp contrast to Vance. He's a lawyer by trade.

He came off as very smooth, articulate, and prepared. But this is who had critics saying, while his debating may have seemed strong and posh on the surface level, if you dug even a fraction of an inch deeper, his performance was very dishonest. Or with many critics accusing Vance of trying to remake himself

as this even keeled moderate Republican. Others also noting that throughout the debate, Vance made numerous false misleading claims about a wide range of issues, including the environment, inflation, and immigration, among other topics. With him seemingly using both tactics when talking about abortion,

trying to paint himself as someone who has moderate and flexible views, and then falsely claiming he didn't vocalize certain hardline views in the past. In the past, you have supported a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks. In fact, you said if someone can't support legislation like that, quote, you are making the United States the most barbaric pro-abortion regime anywhere in the entire world. My question is, why have you changed your position? Well, Nora, first of all, I never supported a national ban.

I did during when I was running for Senate in 2022, talk about setting some minimum national standard. For example, we have a partial birth abortion ban in place in this country at the federal level. That exact same 15 week federal ban on abortions that the moderator's referencing there, he supported it. And while that isn't a total ban on abortion, it would overturn the laws of many liberal states

that allow for longer periods. And in addition to that, as recently as 2022, this man said, quote, "'I certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally.'" He has also voiced support for national bans to stop women from traveling across state lines to get abortions as well as banning the mailing

of abortion-related materials. You know, that was just one of the many false claims Vance made, with in fact, his continued false claims, even forcing the moderators to make clarifications more than once, even though CBS, which hosted the debate, said that its moderators would not be aggressively fact-checking the candidates. Though I will say a big thing there

is that the network did say beforehand that it reserved the right to fact-check seriously false statements. And so that's exactly what ended up happening when the debate turned to Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, which of course, as we've talked about in the show, Vance has been spreading lies about for weeks now.

Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio, which, of course, as we've talked about on the show, Vance has been spreading lies about for weeks now. Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status, temporary protected status. Well, Margaret, but thank you, Senator. We have so much to get to. Margaret, I think it's important because we're going to turn out of the economy. Margaret, the rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check. And since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for 10 years. That is the facilitation of illegal immigration, Margaret, by our own leadership.

Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process. We have so much to get to, Senator. Those laws have been on the books since 1990. Thank you, gentlemen. The CBP1 app has not been on the books since 1990. It's something that Kamala Harris created, Margaret. Gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut. We have so much we want to get to. Thank you for explaining the legal process.

Now here, just to be very clear, basically everything he said there is wrong. Even his claim that CBS had told both candidates that it would totally avoid fact checking. That is wrong. And the other thing that he's talking about there is CBP One, which is an app that was actually launched under Trump, but expanded under Biden. And while Vance is correct that the app is used by migrants to start the parole process and schedule appointments, Haitians arrive in America through the TPS program, which is a totally separate thing. Also, the U.S. has a separate humanitarian parole program for citizens of Haiti and three other

countries that doesn't involve the app. But that also wasn't the only time CBS had to issue a clarification to something Vance said. Also, just like with Trump in the last presidential debate, Vance also failed to answer many of the questions asked of him, even after being pressed by the moderators. This including during a discussion on climate change, where the moderators noted that Trump has called climate change a hoax and asked if Vance agreed. With Vance refusing to answer the question directly, prompting this response from moderator Nora O'Donnell.

The overwhelming consensus among scientists is that the Earth's climate is warming at an unprecedented rate. But arguably the most significant moment of the whole night, and I think it's part of the reason the post-debate polling was so close, would have been Walls' best moment, and that is when Vance refused to say whether or not Trump won the 2020 election. But he kept dodging it, trying to deflect it into some social media censorship thing, claiming that that is actually the single biggest threat to democracy. But I mean, that moment was so bad for Vance, the Harris-Walls campaign turned it into an ad already. It's really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy

when he peacefully gave over power. He is still saying he didn't lose the election. I would just say that. Did he lose the 2020 election? Tim, I'm focused on the future. That is a damning non-answer. And on the stage in that moment, America, I think you've got a really clear choice of who's going to honor that democracy and who's going to honor Donald Trump. And on the stage in that moment, Wall segued into this powerful moment. Look, when Mike Pence made that decision to certify that election, that's why Mike Pence

isn't on this stage. What I'm concerned about is where is the firewall with Donald Trump? Where is the firewall if he knows he could do anything, including taking an election and his vice president's not going to stand to it? That's what we're asking you, America. Will you stand up? Will you keep your oath of office even if the president doesn't? So America, I think you've got a really clear choice on this election of who's gonna honor that democracy and who's gonna honor Donald Trump. Now with all that said, obviously we're just touching on key moments.

If you wanna watch last night's debate, if you didn't see it, I'm gonna link to it down below so you can watch everything for yourself where you are always your own best judge. But yeah, as far as what others thought, like I said, it was a pretty even split. Post-debate polls from CNN and CBS News showing pretty much a tie.

CNN's poll saying 51% of viewers said Vance won. CBS's polls said Vance won by 1% with 17% declaring it a tie. Also both men's favorability went up. Walz's from 46% to 59%. Vance's from 30% to 41%. Politico's snap poll said it was a tie. There were also several undecided panels

that the networks had though, rightly or wrongly, I never believed those. And the results were also all over the place. Six of seven CNN's undecideds were still undecided. 506 for NBC news said that Walls won the debate. And then over at the Washington Post, it was a pretty even split, barely any movement. But you know, with all that said,

who knows if any of this moves the needle in any way, which is maybe for the best. Cause of course, remember the only poll that matters happens on election day. So if you haven't yet, go to vote.org, go to vote.gov, make sure you're registered to vote. If you're not registered, go register. You can even look into early voting,

come up with a voter plan, and get your friends and family involved, because remember, I always say it, you may not fuck with politics, but politics will fuck with you. Vote for what you want to see in this world. Then taking a quick break from the news, it is true what flight attendants say.

You need to put your oxygen mask on first in order to be there for others. And finding the right doctor that you actually want to see is all part of this idea. And personally, I constantly find success using our sponsor of the PDS, ZocDoc. And truly, I recommend this service. With ZocDoc, you can find and book doctors

from family doctors to specialists who make you feel comfortable, listen to you and prioritize your health. And a big one, you know before you book if they take your insurance. Search by location, availability, and insurance, and there's no compromise here because they've got more options than you know. Plus, ZotDoc is a free app and website where you can search and compare high-quality in-network doctors, choose the right one for your needs, and click to instantly book an appointment. I mean, we're talking about in-network appointments with more than 100,000 healthcare providers

across every specialty, from mental health to dental health, eye care to skincare and much more. And ZocDoc appointments happen fast, typically within just 24 to 72 hours of booking. You can even score same-day appointments. So go to ZocDoc.com slash Phil and download the ZocDoc app for free.

Then find and book a top-rated doctor today. That's Z-O-C-D-O-C dot com slash Phil. That's ZocDoc.com slash Phil. And then it feels like ever since January 6th, when you know that fun loving group of people took a nonviolent unscheduled tour of the Capitol. U.S.A. ZocDoc.com.

That American politics have seemingly become more violent. And according to newly unveiled charges from the DOJ, William Robert Braddock III was just leaning right into it. See, back in 2021, Braddock was running against now-Representative Anna Paulina Luna in a Florida primary, and he wanted to make sure that he'd win by threatening to, quote,

call up my Russian-Ukrainian hit squad to kill her. And that is actually just one of the threats that he made against her. In June of that year, Braddock had a phone call with Aaron Olszewski, an acquaintance of Luna's that secretly recorded the call. And during that call, Braddock was concerned about an with Erin Olszewski, an acquaintance of Luna's that secretly recorded the call. And during that call, Braddock was concerned about an upcoming poll and he threatened

that if he wasn't ahead, he'd need to sacrifice Luna. And that wasn't some weird metaphor either. He wasn't saying, I'm gonna throw her under the bus. According to court documents, Braddock then allegedly said, "'I will be the next Congressman for this district. "'Period, end of discussion. "'I really don't wanna have to end anybody's life

"'for the good of the people "'of the United States of America "'cause it'll break my heart. "'But if it needs to have to end anybody's life for the good of the people of the United States of America because it'll break my heart. But if it needs to be done, it needs to be done. With him then advising this acquaintance to stay away from Luna or she might get caught in the crossfire. Saying that she shouldn't be on the wrong side

of supporting Luna because if you're near her when time comes, I just don't want that to happen to you. You've got kids, so don't be associated with Luna under any circumstances, please. With him then apparently making similar threats to many people who knew Luna, to the point that she was getting texts from multiple people warning her

about how unhinged Braddock was. And so understandably, Luna sought a restraining order against Braddock back in September of 2021. But despite knowing at the time some of these details, a judge ultimately dismissed the case after a three-month temporary one. Though the judge also wasn't happy about it,

saying to Braddock, in no way does me following the law condone anything you have done in this case.'" But this recent indictment, it shows that one, the feds are taking his statements very, very seriously, as well as two, it highlights what he did afterwards to dodge justice. Back then, he originally denied all the allegations

and claimed they were politically motivated. However, he then quickly left the United States and was discovered to be residing in the Philippines. And that's actually where things stayed for a while until he was deported from there and sent back to the US. With that being when he was slapped with this indictment, which is for one count of interstate transmission of a true threat to injure another person.

While that could land him behind bars for five years, the DOJ is still investigating and more charges could be added. While Luna hasn't really said anything about the situation since Braddock's arrest, a spokesperson for her office used the opportunity to highlight that, quote, "'Female members of Congress are disproportionately targeted

"'for stalking, violence, and harassment compared to their male counterparts. This alarming trend points to a broader and more disturbing issue of violence in the political arena.'" I think, or maybe it's, I hope, regardless of your political opinion, you know, it's safe to say that calling

for the literal death of a political opponent, it's too far. Right, that's not a hot take. We haven't hit that point yet, have we? Ugh. But then, you know, with everything that happened yesterday between Israel, Lebanon, and Iran, it won't come as a surprise that there are updates.

But I mean, first off, we had a cliffhanger about just how much damage this massive Iranian missile attack did. And there, as it turns out, it doesn't look like Tel Aviv itself was actually the target, despite footage making it look like that. Instead, it was army bases very close to Tel Aviv

that were hit. Now, considering the nature of the target, Israel isn't giving too many details, but they did emphasize that no civilians, soldiers, or planes were damaged by the approximately 180 missiles Iran sent. With it also being said that the damage wasn't enough to actually stop any operations.

With Israel also making it very clear that it still has the capabilities to strike back at Iran, saying it won't be immediate, but it promised that it would retaliate. Now there, it's believed that the obvious targets would be Iran's nuclear program, but when asked, President Biden said he opposes Israeli strikes on those sites, instead saying that the U.S. would talk with Israel about how to best respond to Iran. Also, at the same time,

G7 countries are discussing sanctions against Iran for its attack on Israel. And all of this is, you know, one thing that many fear is that strikes between Iran and Israel would force the U.S. to be involved. However, we actually already kind of are, because during yesterday's attack, U.S. destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean apparently helped intercept Iranian missiles. Although obviously helping a country defend itself from being bombed is without a doubt very different from bombing someone else. But then, slightly shifting gears, we're getting many more reports now within Lebanon that Israeli troops are actually engaging in combat with Hezbollah forces. With that reportedly already leading to eight Israeli soldiers being killed and an unknown number of Hezbollah fighters being killed. Although Lebanese news did say that six people were killed during an Israeli attack on a town while three others died in an airstrike elsewhere, including paramedics. Then another update was the

drama with the UN, with Israel very mad about the tweet General Secretary Antonio Guterres made in response to the war in Lebanon and Iran's missile strike. Because when Israeli troops entered Lebanon, he wrote, I am extremely concerned with the escalation of the conflict in Lebanon and appeal for an immediate ceasefire. An all-out war must be avoided in Lebanon at he wrote, "'I am extremely concerned with the escalation "'of the conflict in Lebanon "'and appeal for an immediate ceasefire. "'An all-out war must be avoided in Lebanon at all costs, "'and the sovereignty and territorial integrity "'of Lebanon must be respected.'" And then, following Iran's massive missile attack,

he followed that up with, "'I condemn the broadening of the Middle East conflict "'with escalation after escalation. "'This must stop. "'We absolutely need a ceasefire.'" And the lack of specifically condemning Iran's attack on Israel led to Foreign Minister Katz declaring that Guterres was persona non grata, meaning that he was flat out banned from ever coming to Israel, although it's unclear if he ever intended to.

Though Katz went on to write, anyone who cannot unequivocally condemn Iran's heinous attack on Israel, as almost every country in the world has done, does not deserve to step foot on Israeli soil. This is a secretary general who has yet to denounce the massacre and sexual atrocities committed by Hamas murderers on October 7th, nor has he led any efforts to declare them a terrorist organization. With him then closing by claiming that if Guterres continues to avoid condemning the actions of Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc., it will be remembered as a stain on the UN's history. But I think Katz forgot that Guterres has condemned Hamas and Iran's actions. Just after October 7th, he demanded that all the hostages be released and was outraged by the violence Hamas carried out. And after each of Iran's attacks on Israel, he spoke out, even saying yesterday,

As I did in relation to the Iranian attack in April, and as should have been obvious yesterday in the context of the condemnation I expressed, I again strongly condemn yesterday's massive missile attack by Iran on Israel. These attacks paradoxically do nothing to support the cause of the Palestinian people or reduce their suffering. And all of this coming as Jewish people around the world start their new year with Rosh Hashanah tonight. With as of recording Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu being relatively quiet about the occasion, only tweeting, It will be a year of total victory. Happy New Year to the people of Israel.

But for now, that is where we are and we'll have to wait to see what happens from here. But then, do you know how private colleges and universities, they give special consideration to people who apply that had family or other connections to the school? They call them legacies or legacy admissions. Well, in 2025, California is banning that. And also, the reason we're only talking about private institutions is actually

because public universities in California banned legacy preferences decades ago. But still, with this new law, I mean, you're talking about a massive shakeup in admissions at some of the most selective institutions in the nation. Stanford and USC, for example, in those schools have both reported admitting roughly 14% of students, at least in part based on legacy or donor connections.

Which you know, of course, critics have been saying for so long that it's just not fair, saying that it's helping students who really already have enough going for them. With it also being noted that students who are admitted with legacy preferences are much more likely to be white and wealthy than other applicants. Now that said, the counter argument

is that legacy admissions play a major role in fundraising efforts that benefit all students. Or with the argument being that in exchange, we're offering special consideration for descendants of alumni. The school gets some money to build a new library or subsidize tuition for less well-off students. Though notably, there are schools

like John Hopkins University have started phasing out legacy preferences on their own, with the school's current president telling the Times that it's given them, quote, more space and opportunity to recruit a broader array of talented students. And so with that, the percentage of first-generation or limited-income students rose from around 16%

to almost 31%. And then also, besides individual schools, there's a trend of states tackling this issue as well. I mean, just this year, Illinois and Virginia banned legacy preferences at public universities and colleges. And in Maryland, they actually banned legacy preferences at all universities.

And in fact, all of this may have something to do with the Supreme Court's decision striking down affirmative action. But because that got everyone taking a closer look at the process and the case, however you feel about it, it actually shed a light on the extent to which legacy status has played a role

in admissions at elite universities. And in fact, the guy that wrote the California bill, he attributed it getting passed to the affirmative action rule. Though notably, I mean, he's been advocating for the end of legacy admissions in the state since the 2019 scandal involving all those rich and famous people who were cheating their kids into college.

But all that said, right, in any case, it is still an uphill battle. Where we've seen proposed bans in Minnesota, Massachusetts, New York, and Connecticut, all falling apart this year after opposition from Ivy League schools and associations of colleges. But really that's not gonna stop the advocates that are pushing for them.

And it's gonna be very interesting to see if a state like California passing a ban like this has any effect nationwide. But then in wild international news, I mean, we gotta talk about how US sanctions may actually be a part of the reason that an award-winning journalist was just arrested in Cambodia.

And so I want you to meet Mek Dara. He's most well known for reporting on human trafficking and online scam operations. And if you haven't heard, many of these scammers, they're often victims themselves. Or we're often talking about people who are tricked into signing up for what they think are legitimate jobs, but then they find themselves in tightly guarded compounds

being forced to work. And with that, the State Department actually recognized Mek for his work last year with Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, even presenting the award to him. And since then, he has not slowed down, with him very notably documenting links between scam center trafficking and one of the richest men in Cambodia,

who also happens to be a senator and personal advisor to the prime minister, which is why it seemed like no coincidence when last month, the US actually issued sanctions against this guy for, quote, serious human rights abuse related to the treatment of trafficked workers subjected to forced labor and online scam centers.

And a key thing here, Jake Sims, who's a founding partner in a global coalition fighting organized cyber crime in Southeast Asia, he says that the sanctions were the most meaningful policy action taken by any government since the global scamming phenomenon started several years ago. But the thing is, while that seems like a good thing,

it also pissed off some of the most powerful people in Cambodia. And Mac, he was an easy target. With that bringing us to this week, when he was reportedly dragged out of a car by police as he was returning from a family trip with his parents and others. And then being sent to pretrial detention

on the charge of quote, "'incitement to provoke serious social chaos.'" And I mean, that's a charge that carries a maximum jail term of two years. Now with all that, of course, they didn't just come out and say that it was because of his reporting and the sanctions it led to.

Instead, they pointed to now-deleted photos that he shared on Facebook, seeming to show some sort of digging or destruction near a sacred mountain in the southeastern part of the country. With the local government claiming the photos were fake and accusing him of inciting all Cambodians across the country to be confused

about the loss of the mountain. But of course you have people like Sims saying the arrest certainly implies that some of the most powerful people in the country feel threatened by the work that he's doing. With Sims also saying about Beck that he was effectively one of the last independent journalists working in Cambodia. And I mean, just looking at his resume,

you can see why that is. He previously worked for a paper called the Cambodia Daily, which shut down in 2017 because of government pressure. So then he goes to another newspaper where that one gets taken over by a government friendly businessman in 2018. And so finally he worked for a radio station called Voice of Democracy, but that was shut down last year.

And so since then, he's been using social media to share his work as well as working with international media. But now, obviously, that's just led to the government targeting him directly. And while everyone from the US government to NGOs in and outside of Cambodia are calling for his release,

right now we're gonna have to wait to see if that pressure actually does anything. But then, yo, just taking a quick break, it is officially October, which means that over at Beautiful Bastard, we have our big spooky drop come. And since we sold out of some of our sizes from our badass September collection, I need to clear some room, which is why for the next 24 hours, just for you, Beautiful Bastard, we have our big spooky drop come. And since we sold out of some of our sizes from our bad-ass September collection,

I need to clear some room. Which is why for the next 24 hours, just for you Beautiful Bastards, you can get an extra 20% off. Just use code SPOOKYSEASON for 20% off your entire order. And again, that's in addition to pretty much everything on the site being 20 to 60% off right now. That includes this villain's long sleeve

I'm wearing right now and all this other goodness. Tees, long sleeves, hoodies, core gear, graphic gear, all at beautifulbastard.com. But remember, you only got 24 hours for code spooky season. And then, so I know going into this election, like 90% of the focus has been on the presidential race. And I get it. It is an incredibly important one. But I also want to focus on right now how local elections are far more likely to affect your day-to-day life. Because what many people don't realize is that while these elections are free and fair, they have a certain North Korea flavor about them in that many come down to just one candidate.

And what's interesting is that the Democratic Party is actually the one that avoids fielding candidates the most. You just need to look at 2022 to see what I mean. In that election cycle, the Democrats didn't field a single candidate for half of all partisan offices, with Republicans not trying far, far less often. And so when you add all of it together, we're talking about tens of thousands of races and offices where voters had just a single choice, which can feel undemocratic.

Though the number might actually be bigger because the reality is is that there's no single database that contains every possible local election. We just know what multiple studies have come to. And that's also backed up by Ballotpedia, which states that on average, 58% of every election it follows has just a single candidate. And that's the average, right?

As of August, 2024, the year to date number is actually far worse with 75% of all races being uncontested. And they're having less competition at the ballot box. It can affect voters more than they realize. But it's often not just, oh, we don't have a choice and there's some abstract idealization about what a democracy means.

But you know, candidates who don't run against opposition are far less likely to actually be involved in their offices. Or they cast fewer votes and introduce less legislation because the only real recourse voters have against them at the ballot box, it doesn't actually work. And then on top of that, single choice elections, it represses voter turnout, right?

Because for many, it feels like, oh, well, my vote's not gonna make a difference. There's literally one fucking option. But the reality is, is that ballots often have far more things on them than just a single big name office. Though also to be clear, this is an issue that does affect major offices. Like here in Georgia, for example, three out of four of the state Supreme Court justices being voted in are running uncontested. And this is there's often other smaller offices and initiatives on the ballots where their votes do matter.

And so one of the questions with this is, well, why does it happen? Here, there are a few reasons ranging from partisan gerrymandering to parties being practical about how money's being spent in doomed elections. And what we see is that the consequences compound on themselves, often leading to more and more single choice elections. I mean, for example, Kiel Hunt, who was a former aide to a Republican Tennessee governor,

and has written about this topic said that, quote, "'You see extremist gerrymanders. "'You see all these rules affecting how people live "'from the schoolhouse and banning books "'to the hospital and abortion laws. "'You get this kind of extremism that only reinforces itself if there's never any competition. And the compounding effect can be seen in how state districts are broken up. See, states with large rural areas are far more likely to skew Republican even if it doesn't vote that way nationally.

Illinois is a great example where Chicago alone ensures that the state is blue in national elections. But it's so concentrated that in state elections, things are almost the opposite. In 2022, Democrats didn't contest nearly 500 partisan state offices, whereas Republicans just dodged 181. And this same trend was seen in Missouri, which has just two large population centers dominated by Democrats.

But 70% of the offices statewide still went uncontested. So what this often means is that for many voters, the only way to actually have a choice in who represents them isn't the general election, but rather the primary. So let's say you're a Republican in an area that is overwhelmingly Democrat. If you're allowed to vote in primaries,

you're stuck voting for what you see as the least bad option. The same is true vice versa, where it's actually far more common. And to be clear, this usually means things aren't proportionally broken down based on the voter base. Like Republican strongholds out in the countryside often end up far more overrepresented in state politics

compared to the amount of voters they get. And the only real check to this gerrymandering for state elections are state Supreme Courts, although there were efforts to even ignore them. Right, many Republican states tried to argue to the US Supreme Court that only the legislature had the right to set districts, but that was rejected six to three.

However, even though state Supreme Courts can overturn gerrymandered districts, they can also choose to ignore it, especially because so many state justices are voted into office. Because of all these little advantages each party gives toered districts, they can also choose to ignore it, especially because so many state justices are voted into office. Because of all these little advantages each party gives to themselves when they can, there's little incentive to run in many local elections.

So in some cases, as we've discussed, the voter bases are so gerrymandered that there's little hope of winning. And in other instances, it's just how the voters are naturally broken down. But either way, running a candidate costs money and lots of it. And if you're in a situation where the most you can hope for

is 35% of the vote, no amount of money is gonna be able to change that. And as some democratic strategists have learned, the risk of putting a D behind your name when running for office can also mean huge personal repercussions in small communities, like losing a job, which then further puts pressure on people to not even try.

And the unfortunate reality is right now, there doesn't seem to be a good solution at this point for many local elections. So I guess my question is, what would you do with this dead bird that I've laid at your feet? Is it fixable or is it doomed? Then finally today, let's end with a congratulations

and let's talk about yesterday. Starting with a congratulations to Christina B, the SeatGeek prize winner who just won $500 in our weekly SeatGeek giveaway towards her choice of SeatGeek tickets. Christina saying she's planning on taking her fiance to a rock concert. But for everyone else, that's right,

SeatGeek and the Daily Dip are still giving away up to $1,000 in tickets and you should definitely enter today if you haven't. Just add code PDS to your SeatGeek app profile for a chance at the weekly $500 prize, no purchase necessary. And when $1,000 prizes are available to Daily Dip subscribers who add code PDS newsletter, doubling entries and winning.

So if you haven't already, just get in on that. It's a win-win. But then finally, as promised, let's talk about yesterday. Starting with there just being so many comments about the abortion refusal story out of California. Right, with Bat Cat saying, quote, "'You're not in enough danger for us to help' is a wild thing to say to someone in the same breath

as you tell them they're dying." With Studio Wove more specifically quoting, "'Your life isn't at enough of a risk, but if you drive less than five hours, you'll die. What?' Some also talking about abortion in general. With one popular comment reading, "'I'm trying to understand who exactly ends up benefiting from abortion being made illegal. Literally every state which has had abortion on a ballot has voted overwhelmingly in

favor of legalizing abortion. It doesn't directly impact the bodies of 50% of the country's population who are male. Most eligible childbearing aged adults are overwhelmingly in favor of legalization. There are no benefits for pharmaceutical or medical corporations who might be lobbying to ban them. Most of the country has had the infrastructure in place to perform the procedures for decades now, and the stigma has been greatly diminished over the past 50 plus years. Who still wants to ban it, and how do they hold so much power? But then people are replying with two different reactions. Some saying the ego of certain religious groups, that's it. And others saying because with the dropping birth rate, it is in the interest of the capitalist economy to have not only enough new consumers

born to replace old ones, but increasing population, which is more spending. So on the note of religion, you had Morgan versus the internet saying, "'Hospitals shouldn't be allowed to deny women life-saving healthcare. If you want to be a religious institution, open a church.'" And while many agreed, you had some pushing back saying, "'The fact is that if religious institutions

didn't open hospitals, there are a lot of places that would not have any hospitals.'" With then, to end on a lighter thing that people were talking about in the comments, one, I was happy to see a good number of people excited about the DeFranco Book Club, which like I mentioned yesterday, I'm launching with two books

just because it's the launch month. You can find and get those at defrancobookclub.com. Also, you can always go there in the future for each additional book that comes out every month, but also a good comment worth sharing. Freelish Hobo wrote, as an aside to Philip doing the book club, please remember if you don't have the money to get a book,

visit your local library. They really need our support and patronage. And to add onto that, there's actually an app for your phone called Libby that you can get. For some libraries, you'll need to go in person. Others, you can actually do it all online. But yeah, honestly, whatever gets a good book in your hand

or a good book in your ears, I think that's a win. It's just good in general. And honestly, I think we all need an escape now and then. That's the end of today's show. Thank you so much for watching. For more news that YouTube thinks you're interested in, you can click or tap right here. Also, if you wanna get a fantastic deal

on one of the best shirts you'll ever wear in your entire life, you can click right here. Get something over at beautifulbastard.com. It also helps support the show. Thanks again. I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.