The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.25 Suing Google For $50 Million, BTS vs VMAs, Implant Recall, Trump Veto, Mueller, & More

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards, hope you've had a fantastic Thursday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. And a little quick note, today's show ends a little bit different. We're testing something out, so be sure you stick around for that. Also, as you may have noticed, today's PDS is XXL. Hit that dang like button, let us know you notice. But, with that said, let's just jump into it. And the first thing we're going to talk about today is everyone's favorite segment,

Starting point is 00:00:21 Who's Getting Called Racist Today? A brand new show on ABC at 8 p.m. Spoiler alert and a twist, it was you that was racist the whole time. No, but stupid, I didn't get enough sleep last night intro to this story aside, this is a story today involving BTS, their fans, and the MTV Video Music Award.

Starting point is 00:00:38 Earlier this week, MTV announced the nominations for the VMAs, and in that, they included a new category called Best K-Pop. And in that category, you had the likes of BTS, Blackpink, NCT 127 and more. Also in addition to being nominated there, BTS was also nominated for Best Collaboration, Best Choreography and Best Art Direction.

Starting point is 00:00:55 But very notably they were not included in major categories like Video of the Year, Song of the Year, Artist of the Year or Best Pop. This despite things like the fact that their music video for Boy With Luv broke the record for most views on YouTube in 24 hours. And it actually has more total views than any of the Year or Best Pop. This despite things like the fact that their music video for Boy With Luv broke the record for most views on YouTube in 24 hours. And it actually has more total views than any of the songs nominated for Video of the Year.

Starting point is 00:01:10 And so with all of this, there are a lot of fans that think this K-pop category not only separates them from popular Western music, but they also think that it gives MTV something of an excuse to shut them out of major categories because they've already been nominated elsewhere. Because BTS is so popular worldwide, there are a great number of fans that argue

Starting point is 00:01:24 that they deserve to be in those major categories just as much, if not more, than Western artists. And so following this, a lot of fans use the hashtag VMAisRacist to call the show out for separating the band and snubbing them from the top slot. Some saying it just shows how intimidated and xenophobic they are. Others saying this is just so Asian artists

Starting point is 00:01:39 don't mix with the Westerners. Saying you've just proven how xenophobia runs in the Western industry's blood and your racist ass is ugly as fuck. And their frustrations with this spread around the internet. There was a Teen Vogue column that even called the category another way to marginalize successful non-white artists. Also writing the details around these nominations

Starting point is 00:01:54 sound like they're saying you can come, just don't sit with us. And since the VMA winners are all fan voted, some fans are yes, encouraging everyone to still vote for BTS so they win all their categories, but then to still boycott watching the show so they don't get the numbers from K-pop fans. Essentially saying our guys deserve the support

Starting point is 00:02:07 and the praise, but because of what the VMAs are doing, we don't wanna support them. Which I will say, it will be interesting to see. I mean, last year the show hit an all-time low with just 2.25 million viewers, and it kind of put that in perspective to K-pop numbers. When BTS member J-Hope did a livestream counting down to his birthday,

Starting point is 00:02:22 he brought in over nine million viewers. So you know, it's something that's been popping up more and more in a lot of mainstream industries of how much do we actually need one another? Also, if it feels like, hey, hasn't something similar to this happened before? Yes, and also specifically with the VMAs. In 2010, they added best Latin to the show.

Starting point is 00:02:39 And while Latino artists have been nominated in other categories, since the addition of the Latin spot, only one time has a Latina artist been nominated for the top prize of video of the year. And that is also despite the fact that Latin music does incredibly well globally. Also, for example, this year, Mia by Bad Bunny featuring Drake

Starting point is 00:02:54 was just nominated in the best Latin category. We have people pointing that out because that video has 870 million views, which is actually twice as many views as Bad Guy by Billie Eilish, which is notable because not only is Bad Guy nominated for video of the year, it is the most viewed video

Starting point is 00:03:07 in the video of the year category. And you know, one of the arguments against that is, you know, it's not just about the number of views, it's about the quality, and I'm not gonna argue which video is better than the other. But I would also say, this is part of my opinion here, I think it's weird to have that argument, and ultimately, the VMAs are a popularity contest.

Starting point is 00:03:22 So it feels like one of the driving factors here is the numbers, is the popularity. And also regarding the specific comparison of the numbers between those two videos, there are differences. Bad Guy was released more recently and while it has fewer views, it also has way more likes. But then that also gets into this muddy conversation about what kinds of engagement are worth what

Starting point is 00:03:37 in general and comparatively. And so that's why you have people saying that this outrage around the K-pop category isn't coming out of nowhere. It's just a different version of things we've seen before. And ultimately, that's where we are with the story right now. And as far as the fans' concerns, I believe that they are valid.

Starting point is 00:03:50 I don't believe that it's a racist situation. I mean, ultimately the VMAs are a popularity contest with just ads and ads and ads. For MTV as a company, right, the VMAs as a show, their whole goal is how can we get the biggest names around the world to come over here so people pay attention and have as many of the fans and the artists and the bands feel like winners.

Starting point is 00:04:09 It makes me think of when we mentioned the 15 most influential online creators from time. A little of that article is supposed to be informative. It's supposed to show the landscape of today. They also did it in a way where everyone that was on that list could feel like a winner because there was no specific ranking.

Starting point is 00:04:23 It's an ego-fluffing business with ads thrown in. You know, ultimately, where I'll end here, I'd love to know your thoughts in general about the situation. And hey, even if you don't care about the VMAs, because it's not on my to-do list either, what do you think would be the right step from here, right? Do you remove the K-pop category?

Starting point is 00:04:37 Do you remove the Latin category? Do you expand the number of nominations in bigger categories? Or do you think that this move makes sense, both from a business perspective as well as an inclusive perspective? And yeah, I'd really love to know your thoughts on this one.

Starting point is 00:04:48 Then in news that has most likely resulted in the majority of climate scientists saying, "'I fucking told you so. "'I wasn't just talking to hear myself speak.'" We are currently seeing a crazy heat wave right now. And crazy is not even the right word, historic. Today, a number of cities and countries are experiencing their hottest temperatures ever recorded.

Starting point is 00:05:06 According to reports, Germany clocking in at 106.7 degrees Fahrenheit, Belgium 105, the Netherlands 104.7. Also, there was a report that in Paris it reached 108.7 degrees Fahrenheit. And also, before any of you beautiful bastards are like, "'Well, I live in Arizona,' and no. For a variety of reasons,

Starting point is 00:05:23 Arizona should never be considered a standard. And more importantly, in Europe, many there are not prepared for this kind of temperature. According to reports, many homes and just places people gather do not have standard air conditioning. And while of course this can be bad for the general population,

Starting point is 00:05:36 it also means that, you know, young children, babies and the elderly are at risk. So there was that. Then in news you should know about, if you have breast implants or someone you know has breast implants, there is a new global recall on a number of products. And specifically what we're talking about

Starting point is 00:05:50 is there is a worldwide recall on allergen biocell textured breast implant products, as well as tissue expanders used by patients prior to breast augmentation or reconstruction. And as far as why is this happening, why did the FDA request that allergen recall the product? And according to reports, it's because of the increasing number of cases

Starting point is 00:06:06 where people are dying because of implant-caused cancer. And regarding that, the FDA says that worldwide, 573 cases and 33 deaths from the cancer have been reported, with 481 of the cases clearly attributed to allergen biocell implants. And reportedly, of the 33 deaths, the agency said its data showed that the type of implant was known in 13 cases,

Starting point is 00:06:24 and in 12 of those cases cases the maker was allergen. What they were talking about here is anaphylactic large cell lymphoma, which is a rare cancer. That said, given the situation, given the numbers that we have now, it does appear that the lymphoma is rare. You know, you have millions and millions of women that have breast implants, but still,

Starting point is 00:06:37 I think the recall makes sense. People need to be aware of this. That's also why the FDA says, quote, "'At the present time, we believe all individuals "'who are considering a breast implant of any type "'be informed of the risk of developing, and adding that patients should consider monitoring symptoms, including swelling and pain in their breasts.

Starting point is 00:06:50 And what I'll tack on regarding, you know, monitoring for symptoms, do not consider this announcement like the big red alarm of like, ah, you have to breast implant removal, because we've actually covered this in a deep dive before, and studies and research have found that you should only consider removal if you have these specific allergen textured breast implants.

Starting point is 00:07:05 But despite findings that these implants greatly increase your risk of anaphylactic large cell lymphoma, the FDA says only to remove if you show symptoms. So really just something to be aware about here. Also, a quick update, I've just been informed it's pronounced allergen. I'm not gonna reshoot the whole story.

Starting point is 00:07:17 Sometimes I mispronounce or say things wrong. Side note, yes, I have seen your comments and roasts. Warhammer 40K, Nicholas Sturgeon, you happy, sometimes my mouth no work good. And then finally, we're going to cover a few bits of US political news. One of the things actually broke as we were finishing up today's show,

Starting point is 00:07:32 Representative Tulsi Gabbard, Democratic presidential candidate, is suing Google for at least $50 million. And this is reportedly because her campaign is alleging that Google suspended her account for six hours on June 27th and June 28th, stifling her ability to capitalize on the attention spike and raise money. One of the reasons that the timing of all of this

Starting point is 00:07:51 was notable was that it was after the Democratic debates were interested in her spike. And that makes sense, she entered the race relatively unknown and so people were Googling, who is this? Now as far as why this happened, according to a report from the New York Times and emails they reviewed, June 27th at 9.30 p.m. the campaign sent Google a screenshot of a notice of suspension for

Starting point is 00:08:06 quote, The account was reactivated at 3.30am on June 28th, and in the email announcing that it had reinstated the account, Google wrote that the company temporarily suspended the campaign's account to verify billing information and policy compliance, but offered no other explanation for what had happened. And the lawsuit has said this was Tulsi's freedom of speech being silenced with Gabbard Also having said in a statement Google's discriminatory actions against my campaign are reflective of how dangerous their complete dominance over internet search is and how The increasing dominance of big tech companies over our public discourse threatens our core American values adding

Starting point is 00:08:38 This is a threat to free speech fair elections into our democracy and I intend to fight back on behalf of all Americans Then we got the news from the Department of Justice today where they said, quote, "'Attorney General William P. Barr has directed the Federal Bureau of Prisons to adopt a proposed addendum to the federal execution protocol, clearing the way for the federal government

Starting point is 00:08:54 to resume capital punishment after a nearly two-decade lapse and bringing justice to victims of the most horrific crimes.'" And adding, "'The Attorney General has further directed the acting director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to schedule the executions of five death row inmates convicted of murdering and in some cases torturing and raping the most vulnerable in our society, children and the elderly.

Starting point is 00:09:12 Which is a massive deal, as it kind of referenced, there hasn't been a federal execution since 2003. It'll be interesting to see if we see a shift in general following this, because I mean, in general, capital punishment has been on the decline, we've seen it less and less. Also, as far as the public opinion of Americans, you know, capital punishment, the on the decline we've seen it less and less also as far as the public opinion of Americans You know capital punishment the death penalty is not as popular as it once was reportedly according to a Gallup tracker back in 1994 80% of Americans supported the death penalty whereas now it's closer to 56% and then regarding President Trump specifically there were a few things No, there's a lot of things happening at all times when it comes to Trump

Starting point is 00:09:42 But you know yesterday we talked about Trump the other Trump administration Immigration when a federal judge that he appointed ruled in his favor and today well a lot of people are kind of making fun of this of things happening at all times when it comes to Trump. But you know, yesterday we talked about Trump, the Trump administration immigration win. A federal judge that he appointed ruled in his favor. And today, while a lot of people are kind of making fun of this, this moment at Turning Point USA, where the president spoke in front of a conservative student group. It turns out that the presidential seal that is behind him,

Starting point is 00:09:55 it's a parody seal that has been described as being similar to the state seal of the Russian Federation, showcasing it clutching a set of golf gloves and its talons. Text on the seal was also swapped. This one reading in Spanish, 45 is a puppet. So a lot of people were having fun with that today. Also, I mean, as far as how that happened, according to a report, a TPUSA source said,

Starting point is 00:10:11 we're sorry for the mix-up and meant no disrespect to the White House or the president or the advance team. Adding that the individual responsible, a member of TPUSA's AV team, was let go in the wake of the incident. With the source reportedly saying that this was kind of just a terrible Google search. A few hours before the event,

Starting point is 00:10:24 they were told they had to change the graphic to a presidential seal. The person that did it didn't realize it was doctored, and that's how we got this moment. Which is a thing I would mock, except I've been on the other end of a story like this, and I... Nothing like one graphic slip-up that just throws everyone's attention for the day. You know, you had a lot of people talking about that, but one of the biggest things in the past 24 hours is that Trump used his veto power. And you might remember, there were these bipartisan measures that were passed by Congress. They were meant to block the sale of billions of dollars

Starting point is 00:10:50 of arms to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Congress was saying that President Trump was bypassing them. This is because the President invoked emergency powers to push through the sale. And this is a situation where both of the countries getting the arms in this, though they're currently engaged in a war in Yemen.

Starting point is 00:11:03 Republicans and Democrats in Congress, as well as human rights groups, saying that this is a humanitarian crisis. But ultimately, the story here today is that Trump vetoed the bloc and it's very likely that he has completely killed the bloc because while there was bipartisan support, there is not enough to override a veto bipartisan support. Then we should talk about the massive update coming out of Puerto Rico. After days and days of these just massive protests that we covered on some of the shows, that of course connected to the massive leaked messaging scandal called Rikileaks.

Starting point is 00:11:29 With the leaked messages revealing sexist and homophobic comments, as well as jokes being cracked about people who died in Hurricane Maria. Following that, we saw some resignations, but that did not include Ricardo Rossello, who was the governor. And I say was, because despite Rossello on Sunday saying, "'Yes, he would step down as leader of his party.

Starting point is 00:11:45 Sure, he would not run for reelection in 2020, but also saying that he would not step down as governor has now stepped down as governor. So just massive news there where he's actually the first governor to step down. Although I do want to note, and this is no way trying to minimize the protest because that was and is the catalyst here.

Starting point is 00:12:01 According to reports, hours before he announced he was stepping down, an investigation brought forth by Puerto Rico's House of Representatives into possible wrongdoing, including corruptions and conflicts of interest, revealed five impeachable offenses against him. That's the news there. Obviously, I'm always interested in everyone's thoughts, but especially since we started covering this, we had a lot of comments coming from people actually living this story. So now today, I would once again, I would love to hear from you. Are you excited? Are you hopeful?

Starting point is 00:12:25 Do you have concerns around who replaces him? Which regarding the specifics here, the governor announced that he would be stepping down August 2nd, because right now his successor would be his secretary of justice, Wanda Vasquez. You know, it doesn't appear that the people are just angry at Rossello, it appears they are angry with his administration.

Starting point is 00:12:39 And on that note, Vasquez wasn't even supposed to be the next in line. Under Puerto Rico's constitution, the secretary of state was supposed to take over as governor, but he was actually one of the people who resigned because he was part of Ricky Leaks. Yeah, main point, I'd love to know your thoughts here. The last thing we're gonna talk about or mention today

Starting point is 00:12:53 is the testimony of Robert Mueller. That's a hard thing to do because both hearings ultimately lasted seven hours total. Also, a lot of it was Mueller not answering questions. In fact, according to CNN, Mueller declined to answer a question or deferred a total of 206 times yesterday, which to be fair, Mueller did warn everyone about.

Starting point is 00:13:10 Previously saying he did not want to testify before Congress and if he did, he would stick to the report. Also, his ability to give answers was further complicated by the Justice Department who told him he couldn't answer a wide range of questions. And most notably there was that he wasn't allowed to answer questions about people who have not been charged with illegal activities.

Starting point is 00:13:24 And so in general, what happened over these seven hours, I mean we kind of referenced a little bit yesterday Right, you had the republicans on these committees in general trying to discredit muller and his team and at the same time you had democrats trying to paint muller as a veteran as a patriot who was appointed by a republican who was kept by a republican since muller said that he would not be reading from the report that his team put out a Lot of what the democrats did was saying things from the report And getting Mueller to say yes or no, you know regarding that yesterday We showed a clip of Mueller being questioned by Jerry Nadler the chair of the Judiciary Committee Also another notable line of questioning about obstruction and indictments came from representative Ted Lieu and you wrote there on page 97 quote Sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing investigation into the president and his campaign."

Starting point is 00:14:06 That's in the report, correct? Correct. That would be evidence of an obstructive act because it would naturally obstruct their investigation, correct? Uh, correct. Then a little later, Lew goes on to ask about the DOJ rule that a sitting president can't be indicted, which is based off of a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel, OLC. Although before playing it, I do want to note that there was an update to this. I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements

Starting point is 00:14:33 of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met. And I'd like to ask you, the reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct? That is correct. Right, so you had this clip blowing up, people saying this is just a bombshell. But later in the day, Mueller actually revisited that statement during his opening statement in front of the Intelligence Committee. Now before we go to questions, I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning

Starting point is 00:15:04 by Mr. Liu, who said, and I quote, you didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion. That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. There was a lot of media focus on that exchange and Mueller's clarification, but we should once again look at the question that Lew asked before. Mueller confirms that Trump asked then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to end the investigation,

Starting point is 00:15:31 and it also appears that he agrees with Lew's analysis that this would be evidence of an obstructive act. Which actually, on that note, we also saw this interaction with Representative Cedric Richmond. So it's fair to say the president tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify records relevant to an ongoing investigation. I would say that's generally a summary.

Starting point is 00:15:48 There was also a lot of focus and confusion regarding the line of questioning from Representative Ken Buck. Right, so there's this lead up. Was there sufficient evidence to convict President Trump or anyone else with obstruction of justice? We did not make that calculation. How could you not have made the calculation with the regulation? Because the OLC opinion, the OLC opinion, Office of Legal Counsel, indicates that we cannot indict a sitting president. So one of the tools that a prosecutor would use is not there.

Starting point is 00:16:16 All right, so there's that setup, and then this moment happens. Okay, but the, could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? Yes. You believe that he committed, you could charge the president with a crime after he left office? Yes. You believe that he committed, you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office? Yes. And so we saw a massive debate around that statement. Some saying, this is the clip that we needed. Here's Mueller saying that after President Trump is out, he can be charged with obstruction.

Starting point is 00:16:38 Whereas others argued the statement that the president is just a president, any president. Right, a hypothetical, non-specific president could be charged once out of office. Also, one of the most talked about soundbites came from Representative Val Demings. Demings asked a series of questions about Trump's answers to Mueller's questions during the investigation, which, if you don't remember, Mueller never got to interview Trump in person. Instead, Trump gave written answers to Mueller's questions. But around that, the representative asked Mueller about Trump's answers. According to the report, there were follow-up questions because of the president's incomplete answers about the Moscow

Starting point is 00:17:08 Project did the president answer your follow-up questions either in writing or orally? And we're now in volume 2 page 150 through 150 one No, he did not in fact There were many questions that you asked the president that he simply didn't answer. Isn't that correct? True. And there were many answers that contradicted other evidence you had gathered during the investigation. Isn't that correct? Yes. Director Muller. And then later, very notably, we see this. Director Muller, isn't it fair to say that the president's written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete because he didn't answer many of your questions,

Starting point is 00:17:44 but where he did, his answer showed that he wasn't always being truthful. There, uh, I would say, uh, generally. Also during the Intelligence Committee hearing we saw Representative Mike Quigley ask Mueller about WikiLeaks. Right, we see him ask Mueller if he would agree with the assessment made by Mike Pompeo when he was director of the CIA that WikiLeaks is a hostile intelligence service. And Mueller responds, absolutely. Quickly then reads some statements Trump has made in the past about WikiLeaks. This just came out, WikiLeaks. I love WikiLeaks. Donald Trump, October 10th, 2016. This WikiLeaks

Starting point is 00:18:16 stuff is unbelievable. It tells you the inner heart. You gotta read it. Donald Trump, October 12, 2016. This WikiLeaks is like a treasure trove. Donald Trump, October 31, 2016. Boy, I love reading those WikiLeaks. Donald Trump, November 4, 2016. Will any of those quotes disturb you, Mr. Director? I'm not certain I would say. How do you react to that? Well, problematic is an understatement in terms of what it displays, in terms of giving some, I don't know, hope or some boost to what is and should be illegal activity. And one of the last things we'll mention here regarding the testimonies is Russian interference in the election. One of the most talked about interactions

Starting point is 00:19:08 in the Intelligence Committee hearing was the one with Chairman Adam Schiff. Dr. Mueller, your report describes a sweeping and systematic effort by Russia to influence our presidential election. Is that correct? That is correct. In fact, the campaign welcomed the Russian help.

Starting point is 00:19:22 Did they not? I think we have, we report in our, in the report, indications that that occurred, yes. The President's son said when he was approached about dirt on Hillary Clinton that the Trump campaign would love it? That is generally what was said, yes. The President himself called on the Russians to hack Hillary's emails? There was a statement by the president and those general lines. And numerous times during the campaign the president praised the releases of the Russian hacked emails through WikiLeaks.

Starting point is 00:19:53 That did occur. Then a bit later Schiff asks. And when Donald Trump called your investigation a witch hunt that was also false was it not? I'd like to think so yes. Well your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? It is not a witch hunt. When the president said the Russian interference was a hoax, that was false, wasn't it? True. When he said it publicly, it was false? He did say publicly that it was false, yes. But to that note, we also saw Republicans arguing that Mueller's team was full of people who did not support Trump or had some kind of connection to Hillary Clinton, either in their past work or their campaign contributions.

Starting point is 00:20:29 Representative Kelly Armstrong brought a number of these questions up and specifically asked Mueller about the former FBI officials who had been let go because of anti-Trump text messages that they sent while working on probes of Trump and Clinton. Aaron Zelbley, the guy sitting next to you, represented Justin Cooper, a Clinton aide who destroyed one of Clinton's mobile devices. And you must be aware by now that six of your lawyers donated $12,000 directly to Hillary Clinton. I'm not even talking about the $49,000 they donated to other Democrats, just the donations to the opponent who was the target of your investigation. Can I speak for a second to the hiring practices? Sure. We strove to hire those individuals that could do the job.

Starting point is 00:21:08 I've been in this business for almost 25 years. And in those 25 years, I have not had occasion once to ask somebody about their political affiliation. It is not done. What I care about is the capability of the individual to do the job and do the job quickly and seriously and with integrity And then finally one of the most notable things said right one of the most notable sound bites I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican This is something that we just all need to understand and it relates to Russian interference and just foreign interference Is this in your investigation?

Starting point is 00:21:39 Did you think that this was a single attempt by the Russians to get involved in our election, or did you find evidence to suggest they'll try to do this again? Oh, it wasn't a single attempt. They're doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it during the next campaign. I think it's really important to hit on this because I've been talking about the news for a long time. I know that going into this story,

Starting point is 00:21:59 a ton of people are already locked into their point of view. Right, a number of people are already walking into this as either a never-Trumper or you're on the Trump train. Please understand, while there are accusations where several are crossing, there are three situations. You have the obstruction situation and allegations, the collusion situation and allegations, and the Russian interference situation.

Starting point is 00:22:18 It is happening, and this is not a revelation that came from the Mueller report. This was coming already from intelligence agencies. And to deny that, in my opinion, it is complete lunacy. But ultimately, that's where we are. Like I said yesterday, once again, I feel like the the the squished down version just as valid. And this far goes back to the obstruction, where we're separate from the Russian interference. We ended up seeing Democrats getting Mueller to openly and verbally confirm things that were in the report, and Republicans trying to discredit Mueller and his team

Starting point is 00:22:45 because of what was in the report. Ultimately, with all that said, I don't think any of it actually moves the needle. I think the biggest one that you might have potentially seen was when Mueller gave his press conference. Right, because that was short, concise, it completely characterized the report in a different way than what Barr had.

Starting point is 00:22:58 And then with this, we get seven hours, which most people are not going to watch through the whole thing because it's not their job. So they're just gonna listen to the same talking heads that they always do, break down the situation. But hey, that also might just be my cynical-ass point of view. Of course, like with everything on the show,

Starting point is 00:23:11 I'd love to see your thoughts in those comments down below. But also today, we're gonna test it out. You can click right there to take part in polls connected to today's stories. Now given the polarizing nature of some of today's topics, it's very possible that people are gonna kind of poll bomb. But in general, this is the thing

Starting point is 00:23:24 that I kinda wanna test out. And that is where we're going to end today's show. And like I said, people are gonna kind of poll bomb. But in general, this is the thing that I kind of want to test out. And that is where we're going to end today's show. And like I said, we're doing something a little bit different. Of course, as always, if you liked the video, yes, hit the like button. If you're new here, subscribe. If you want to comment on something, comment.

Starting point is 00:23:34 But also, if you would like to take part in a live poll, boom, right there. Should be popping up on your screen right now, unless you are watching on a TV. It's all about opinions and reactions to today's stories. But yeah, also, if you're not 100% filled in, we have an extra bonus news video, deep dive that you can check out right now.

Starting point is 00:23:49 Or if you're looking for something less newsy, I posted a different kind of video right here. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you next time.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.25 Suing Google For $50 Million, BTS vs VMAs, Implant Recall, Trump Veto, Mueller, & More

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