The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.31 “I’M SO SORRY!” Cardi B Criminal Battery Investigation After Mic-Throw, Billie Eilish & Today’s News

Episode Date: July 31, 2023

Go to https://shopbeam.com/defranco and use code DEFRANCO to get 35% off your first month’s subscription and 20% off all your following orders. You can pause or cancel any time so there's no risk! Catch up on our latest PDS: https://youtu.be/jFVk5UA3jZ0 Check out our daily newsletter! http://dailydip.co/pds  Follow me on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/phillydefranco/?hl=en  –✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 0:00 - License Plate Mix-up Leads Police to Pull Over, Draw Guns on Innocent Family 01:33 - Cardi B Throws Microphone at Fan Who Chucked Their Drink on Her 03:19 - Ukraine Attacks Moscow Using Drones 04:57 - Judge Blocks Arkansas Law Banning Libraries from Giving “Harmful” Books to Minors 07:02 - Sponsored by Beam 07:53 - Republicans Divided About Trump PAC Spending Millions on Legal Fees 10:10 - Rich People Deemed a Flight Risk are Convincing Judges to Grant Them House Arrest  ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxx Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Star Pralle, Chris Tolve  ———————————— #DeFranco #CardiB #BillieEilish ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, we're talking about more celebrities getting stuff thrown at them, though Cardi B throwing her microphone back, battery charges now being investigated, police drawing their guns on a car full of criminals that turned out to be something else, Russia's threatening nuclear war. We're gonna talk about all that and so much more on today's brand new Philip DeFranco show, you daily dive into the news, so buckle up, you beautiful bastards, hit that like button, and let's just jump into it. Starting with this news about Texas police pulling over this family of criminal masterminds who were driving a stolen car and that leading to a standoff more intense than any of them expected that morning. Unlock your car, slowly exit the vehicle. Face away from us. Leave your hands outside the car. We know there is a gun in there.

If you reach in that car, you may get shot. So be careful. So the cops pull this family out of their car. They handcuffed the sixth grader. They threatened to shoot them. And then they realize, oh no, we made a mistake. This is the wrong car. Turns out when the officer ran their plate, she accidentally typed an AZ for Arizona rather than AR for Arkansas. And just coincidentally, happenstance like there was a stolen car in Arizona with the same make, same model, same color, same license plate and everything except for the state. With all that, then giving the cops the incredibly awkward job of trying to apologize for everything that just happened. Now, after all this, the police department opened up an incident review to figure out what actually went wrong and has so far chalked it up to an honest mistake. But mistake or not, for that family, it was an experience that left them utterly traumatized.

And then stop throwing things at people. Why have we had to repeat that sentence so much over the past year? If you're playing dodgeball, yeah, chuck that thing. If you're going to a concert and then throwing something at the person you paid to see, why? With the most recent example of this seeming to be Cardi B, but also now there's much more to the story. Because there's a video of Cardi B seemingly tired of the bullshit. The video going viral of Cardi chucking her microphone at a fan after they threw their drink at her this weekend. Though, I will say from the other angle, so funny.

You see who appears to be the fan apologizing after the microphone's hurled at her. With some seeing that apology as her fucking around and finding out and like not wanting any of the smoke, whereas you had others saying, oh, this shows that this was an accident or that there's something else going on. And actually with that, we've seen some outlets reporting that Cardi had actually asked the crowd to splash her with water to cool off in the heat.

But there, it isn't clear if that was before or after the fan emptied their drink onto the stage, or if there had been any thought into, oh, I'm not gonna get splashed with just cold drinks, but also pelted with hard ice. So you had TMZ reporting it was before the drink was tossed. But in general, a lot of the conversation has come back to fans throwing things at celebrities and the danger that presents. With other massive artists like Billie Eilish also speaking on this recently saying to The Hollywood Reporter,

I've been getting hit on stage with things for like literally six years. I don't know why this is like new. People just get excited and it can be dangerous. But also adding, I have mixed feelings about it because when you're up there, it blows. But you know it's out of love and they're just trying to give you something. You're in a vulnerable position. Right, and that really touching on, this is not a new problem, but something that's just gotten a lot of attention lately.

I mean, it's been happening so long and it's been growing so much, it's forced artists like Harry Styles to develop superhuman-like powers to dodge and catch objects. And while many artists have reacted strongly to having things thrown at them on stage, in Cardi's case, there actually may be more to the reaction. Because according to TMZ,

the microphone hit both the fan who threw the drink and someone next to them. And reportedly, one of them actually went to the police, which makes Cardi B a suspect in a battery case. So with all that, I got to ask, what are your thoughts here? Do you see this as kind of more of the same? Is it a lot more messy? Also, what do you think should happen? A lot to talk about with this one. And then, over 500 days after Russia invaded Ukraine, the chickens are coming home to roost. Because early Sunday morning, three Ukrainian drones came in for an assault on Moscow with air defenses shooting down the first in the surrounding region.

But the other two breached the capital city's business district where they reportedly jammed and crashed into office buildings, with video even capturing the moment one of the collisions occurred. Ripping the face off this skyscraper and showering debris onto the sidewalk below.

Now reportedly just one person was injured. The airspace over Moscow was closed temporarily, but the main impact of this was symbolic, especially as we've seen a string of other attacks inside Russia during recent months, like when Ukraine allegedly struck the Kremlin with drones back in May. Right, well, Kiev wouldn't admit to carrying them out

and still hasn't for this one either. Zelensky has proudly claimed responsibility, with the president of Ukraine saying, Gradually, the war is returning to the territory of Russia, to its symbolic centers and military bases, and this is an inevitable, natural, and absolutely fair process. And Sunday's strike was the fourth on the Russian capital region this month and the third last week, with it signaling that Ukraine may be looking to send a message to the Russian people that not only does Putin lack full control over his own war, but that they're going to feel its effects back home if it doesn't end. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian counteroffensive is making slow but

steady progress on the home front, with forces clawing back less than six square miles of territory in the south and east over the past week, according to officials. Which doesn't sound like much, but it adds to the nearly 130 square miles the deputy defense minister claims have been recaptured since early last month. Though Russia says its forces have strongly resisted the Ukrainian push and it continues to fly its own drones deep into enemy territory. With two missiles flying into President Zelensky's hometown, reportedly killing at least six people, including a five-year-old girl and wounding 75. And yesterday, you had the deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council saying that Moscow would have to use a nuclear weapon if the counteroffensive is a success. And then, the war around libraries and books right now is getting kind of wild.

Right, just this weekend, we saw a judge in Arkansas temporarily block a law that would have made it a literal crime for librarians and booksellers to give minors what they referred to as harmful materials. And I use air quotes there because a law which was set to go into effect tomorrow vaguely defined harmful, saying it was anything containing nudity or sexual content, appealing to a lewd interest in sex, lacking serious literary, scientific, medical, artistic, or political value for minors, or just anything deemed inappropriate for minors under current community standards, which is incredibly broad or political value for minors, or just anything deemed inappropriate for minors under current community standards, which is incredibly broad. Which is why last month, a group of booksellers and libraries filed a lawsuit

arguing that the elements of the new law were just unconstitutional. The groups also claiming the law presented them with an impossible situation, forcing them to either remove all books that someone could just deem harmful to minors under the vague law, or create a separate and secure adult-only room for those books like it was an 18-plus porn room at the video store back in the day, or just ban all minors from even entering libraries or bookstores entirely. And if they didn't do that, they would be liable for criminal charges and fines. And so you had a judge agree, issuing a preliminary injunction where he argued the law would

permit, if not encourage, library committees and local governmental bodies to make censorship decisions based on content or viewpoint, which would violate the First Amendment. And the injunction also going on to note that Arkansas already has a law that criminalizes providing obscene materials to minors. With that law specifically outlining long-standing exceptions that protect librarians from prosecution as long as they were acting within the scope of their regular employment duties. Beyond that, the judge also agreed with the plaintiff's argument that the law's definition of harmful was just too vague. And while for some it might be easy to go, well, this is just one state, this is Arkansas, it's important to understand this is just one state of many where

we're seeing conservatives trying to ban and restrict access to books. And in some places, they're finding really unique ways of doing this. Like recently, Texas's largest public school district in the state, Houston Independent School District, announced that it was eliminating school librarians at 28 schools and instead converting the libraries there to discipline centers for kids with behavior problems. And while this move is going to apply to 28 different schools, the district also said an additional 57 schools would be assessed on a case-by-case basis. And that plan, as you'd expect,

has already been criticized by top leaders in Houston. And among the critics, you have the city's mayor, Sylvester Turner, who called on education officials to reverse this decision. You cannot have a situation where you're closing libraries for some schools in certain neighborhoods, and there are other neighborhoods

where there are libraries fully equipped. What the hell are you doing? And then sleep. It is quite possibly the best thing ever, but only when you actually get it. You know, busy with work, kids, life's typical stressors. You know, I don't always sleep well. And that's even when I get to bed on time. But that's also where today's fantastic sponsor comes in, Beam. By now, you've heard me talk about Beam's delicious hot cocoa with five natural ingredients to put me right to sleep and help me wake up feeling amazing. And I love that they're always coming out with new flavors, like their

new mint chip dream powder. And not only is it delicious, it contains five powerful natural sleep promoting ingredients like nano hemp, reishi mushroom extract, magnesium, L-theanine, and melatonin. With a third party lab tested containing no THC and trusted by top athletes to help them get their best sleep and recovery. And if you're finding the sleep that you're getting to be lacking, Beam's dream powder is for you. Just go to shopbeam.com slash DeFranco and use code DeFranco to get 35% off your first month subscription. I'm hooked on it. I know you will be too. So remember, that is shopbeam.com slash DeFranco and use code DeFranco to let them know we sent you. And then, while it's been very documented that Donald Trump has a lot of legal

troubles right now, it's actually the money troubles connected to that that has a number of Republicans divided. Because as it turns out, Donald Trump's political action committee has spent more than $40 million on legal expenses for him and others just in the first half of 2023. But that first being shared by people familiar with the matter to the Washington Post, though sources have since relayed the same information to other outlets.

And according to the sources, Trump's PAC Save America is expected to report the expenses in an FEC filing today. Though as of recording, the disclosure has not officially been filed. But the Post says that this expected filing is more than any other expense the PAC has incurred during Trump's 2024 presidential campaign. And according to federal filings from earlier this month, more than Trump's campaign raised in the second quarter of 2023.

And the legal costs just for the first half of the year are more than double the $16 million the group spent on legal fees for all of 2022. Now, as far as who's receiving this legal aid, Trump advisors told the Post that the PAC is helping pay for almost anyone drawn into the investigations who requests help from the former president and his advisors. And a very key thing here is that most of the money that the PAC raises comes from small-dollar contributions by Trump supporters across the country, with the outlet also noting that much of the money it is using to pay for legal bills was raised on false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

But sources also say the legal financing has raised questions from prosecutors about possible conflicts of interest between Trump and witnesses. And beyond that, the Post has also previously reported that the fundraising and creation of the Save America PAC is under investigation. Though notably, it has not officially been accused of any wrongdoing yet. But again, to go back, this PAC, giving so much money, and especially money primarily raised from small dollar contributions, has divided conservatives. With some arguing, you know, this is just a concerted effort to drain money from Trump and his allies so that he has far less money to spend in 2024 than Democrats. But then you also had others hitting

back at that, including big conservative names like Tommy Lahren, who responded to that post saying, I get it, but don't you find it a little worrisome? His campaign is using money from small dollar donors to fund his legal battles. This concerns me. Regardless of the opinions and feelings connected to that, that have people divided, what is clear is that many, many legal battles involving Trump and his cronies have put a massive strain on the pack. Because the same day the Post published its report on legal spending, the New York Times also reported that Save America has faced such staggering costs this year that it requested a refund on a $60 million contribution it made to another group supporting the Republican frontrunner. Just yesterday, the Times also reported that the

legal expenses here are so staggering that Trump's team is now creating a totally separate legal defense fund for him and his allies. That also makes sense because Trump's advisors told the Post that they expected the cost of providing legal help to keep growing as probes continue and trials begin. And then, you know, it's a generally understood thing that the uber wealthy live a completely different life. They have different opportunities, they have different punishments, and that's kind of like me reporting that water is wet. But when you deep dive into some of these specifics of certain situations, it's absolutely wild. For example, if you're arrested for a crime, you might be granted bail

unless the judge deems that you're a flight risk or a danger to the community. And even there, there are different lived experiences, whether you are poor, middle class, what the bail is. And if you don't get it, you're not able to make bail, you're gonna have to wait behind bars for your day in court. That is unless you're so filthy fucking rich,

you can actually transform your multimillion dollar home into a jail cell. Because then all you gotta do is persuade the judge and say, hey, I'm not a flight risk because I'm physically not able to leave my home. And we're not talking about a hypothetical situation. We're talking about what happened with defense contractor Leonard Glenn Francis, more commonly known as Fat Leonard. Because Leonard, he bribed Navy officials, not just with cash,

but also sex workers, cigars, even some Spanish suckling pigs. And in return, they steered their ships into ports managed by his company, where he overcharged them for refueling and other services, which made him millions of dollars. And all that, leading to 2015, where he pled guilty to his crimes, and while awaiting sentencing, he spent the first couple of years in prison. But then, in 2018, a kidney cancer diagnosis got him released on medical furlough, and he appeased the judge's flight risk concerns by paying for his own private security, who he promised would keep him confined around the clock with an ankle bracelet at a San Diego mansion, as well as two other luxury homes. And specifically with the most recent home, we're talking about a five

bedroom, seven bath fortress in a gated community where he lived with his family and an English bulldog. To give you some context about how he was living, at one of his places, according to a former guard, that Leonard's staff prepared so much food for him that uneaten meals filled two or three trash bags every day. Another former guard recalling he had packages coming from Amazon all day long. Sometimes it would be couches, all kinds of furniture, books. Every morning I would show back up at the garage and there would just be boxes in there. So unsurprisingly in this situation, he found ways to wriggle out of the court's security requirements. With him stationing his personal guards in windowless garages and ensuring that there were no night patrols and no visitors logs.

And then late last year, just weeks before his sentencing, he cut off his ankle bracelet and escaped. Fleeing to Mexico, then Cuba, then Venezuela where he was ultimately caught and arrested before he could get to Russia. And so in the wake of all this, you had people beginning to scrutinize his cushy, lax house arrest, and specifically his private guards. Right, one former guard said he was hired by one of Leonard's doctors for $10,000 a month, adding that he was initially rigorous about sticking to protocols, but after several months, he just stopped keeping logs of who came and when. Also, even though Leonard was prohibited from accessing the internet, he had an iPad and a computer. With it seeming like pre-trial services, officers just didn't care. Also, a guard was convicted of felony theft back in 2001, yet he told Insider no one asked

about it when he was being hired. And although Fat Leonard's the only one to have escaped, Insider counted at least 13 defendants who have been released on similar conditions since 2007. Specifically meaning they were a flight risk, but judges put them on house arrest anyway because they could afford private security. And if you look into this, you find that this whole trend began back in the 1990s, with that being around when the invention of ankle bracelets made house arrest a popular alternative to jail. The private guards often being ex-detectives or FBI agents who can cost as much as $200 per hour. And as far as how the judges justified this, you had one explaining, there are many defendants who are too poor to afford even the most modest of bail bonds or

financial conditions of release. This is a serious flaw in our system, but it is not a reason to deny a constitutional right to someone who, for whatever reason, can provide reasonable assurances against flight. And basically with that saying, the real injustice here isn't that rich people get released, but rather that poor people don't. And so you have others arguing if rich defendants are willing to foot the bill for their own security, then the public should be happy that it saves them money. Plus, defenders of the system point out that when it's done right, these defendants aren't exactly living a life of luxury. For examples there, you just have to look at Mark Dreyer. He was arrested in a $400 million fraud case in 2008 after he sold fake debt to hedge funds. And so with that, most of his assets were seized or

frozen by the government. He didn't even have the cash or property to post bail. But his lawyer got him a deal where he could be released into the custody of private guards paid for mostly by his family at his 3,000 square foot Manhattan apartment. At over $70,000 a month, he hired a security firm to impose a 24-hour lockdown on himself, cutting off access to the balcony, internet, and cell phones, enforcing a highly restricted visitors list, and using reasonable force if he tried to escape. And to do all this, they disabled all his locks, installed metal contacts on the front and balcony doors, tapped his computers, screened his mail, severed his home telephones, and dismantled his home entertainment system. They also set a midnight curfew, and for good measure, they tossed out anything sharp,

be it steak knives, razor blades, or scissors. And so for Dreyer and a number of these other white-collar defendants, they essentially watched their castle turn into a dungeon, where you have staff who are watching you instead of serving you. And so with that, you had a managing director at one of these security firms saying that homeowners often lash out, and adding that ugly scenes at kitchen tables are not uncommon. Reportedly, Dreyer was driven half-wild over his five-month confinement by the federal agent in his living room, who spent most of his shift just talking loudly on his phone. And so with that, it's not really a surprise that many of the guys try to manipulate the system with their resources. For instance, one of the off-duty

cops guarding Samuel Cohen reported that the tech executive tried to bribe him with $10,000, something that also got Cohen sent back to jail. Or in another case, a woman was caught trying to smuggle heroin to Cameron Douglas, the son of actor Michael Douglas, inside of an electric toothbrush. But the chief investigator there recall Douglas, the son of actor Michael Douglas, inside of an electric toothbrush. But the chief investigator there recalling, the minute we brought him back from meeting with the DEA, I think, or the prosecutors, he starts saying, I want to brush my teeth, I want to brush my teeth. It was pretty obvious. But in other cases, the defendant's money buys him exactly what they're looking for. Like with one real estate billionaire who bribed two UN officials and whose guards improperly let a masseuse visit him several times and drove him to Chinatown to get dinner.

Or like this guy who helped funnel millions of dollars in drug money through the U.S. banking system, then using his guards as character references during sentencing, with him sending flattering letters about him to court saying things like, he knows each and every one of us and asks how we are and how our families are and if we need anything. Or it was natural to strike up a bond with Mr. Wiegand, which is why in these and other cases critics say that it's unclear who the guards are actually serving, the judge who granted the release or the defendant who pays them. With, for example, the monitor who kept an eye on Bernie Madoff saying it's a complex issue. Would you, as a bail guard, reprimand the man who signs your paychecks, lock him in the bathroom, tackle him if he ran out the door? But also, just to kind of

bring us back to reality for most people, we've only been talking about people deemed a flight risk. But for the majority of defendants who are not and only need to pay a bond for their release, we see a much more simple inequality, or a situation where the rich can afford bail and the poor cannot. So two people charged with the same thing, one group goes free while the other languishes in jail before even being found guilty, which is also exactly why we've seen activists

pushing for bail reform, and some even seeking to abolish cash bail for nonviolent offenses altogether. And that's where your daily dive into the news ends for today, but for more news you need to know, I got you covered with new videos like this. You can also click those links in the description down below.

But as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.