The Hasan Piker Netanyahu Situation is Crazy

The Hassan Piker situation has gotten so crazy you had Benjamin Netanyahu attacking him while speaking at the UN today. The controversy around Meta's pervert glasses has gotten so big Mark Zuckerberg just broke his silence. You also just had AI CEOs going to the UN to beg them to protect everyone from them. And with his Mary Petola scandal has really exposed. We're talking about all of that and even more. On today's brand new Philip DeFranco show you daily dive into the news starting with this. Hassan Piker is now sparked an all-out war over free speech on college campuses. Because Hassan he's set to speak a court now today which he says he'll stream on Twitch and he'll also have a similar event scheduled at UT Austin next week. But you then had both events getting significant backlash from Jewish students and faculty as well as various groups on the campuses that represent Jewish pro-Israel and conservative students. You would many raising concerns about Jewish safety noting some of Hassan's more controversial comments on different topics as well as his vocal criticisms of Israel and certain remarks that he's made that some consider anti-Semitic. And while you people bring up the kind of the Hassan classics that you see from every outrage cycle around him, you also had a lot of people noting this comedy made on a recent stream because people don't put Israel any longer. And if Jews in America keep putting this idea out there that they are singularly invested in Israel, eventually someone's going to come around and take action not against the state of Israel mind you but against American Jews. And while you had some Jewish groups in critics claiming that those words and bold and extremists and normalized hostility towards Jews, you had Hassan and others saying that he was trying to make the point that equating criticisms of Israel with anti-Semitism undermines and encourages real acts of anti-Semitism. And so with all this, you saw last week Cornelians for Israel and Cornell, Hillel, both issuing statements condemning the planned event and you were the campus hello claiming that they support free expression and debate. But then adding, Mr. Piker's views, however, though against our values as Americans and Jews and his hateful anti-Semitic rhetoric is repulsive. And while notably, both groups actually stopped short of calling for the event to be cancelled, others have then taken it even further with a Jewish advocacy group safe campus, circulating a petition urging Cornel, state and federal officials to call it off. But then also with this, you had the pro-Palestine Jewish group Jewish Voice or Peace, which actually helped organize a speech hitting back at the criticism, right? Saying they reject the characterization of Hassan Piker as anti-Semitic and the suggestion that his imitation reflects hostility toward Jewish students. And with that noting that he frequently uses provocative language that some might disagree with, but disputing the idea that he is actually hostile towards Jews. But then also over in Texas, things have gotten way more heated, right? With top politicians chiming in, student groups, even receiving death threats against a song. And there, in addition to opposition from Jewish groups, you had Governor Greg Abbott, Senator Ted Cruz, and Texas AG Ken Paxton, all slamming the plan's speech. So that's not to say it was all Republicans. You also had some Democrats chiming in with, for example, one congressman writing. Free speech allows difficult and controversial views, but it does not require anyone to stay silent when someone has a history of hateful comments about Jewish Americans, 9/11, and a mass terrorism. And then adding Jewish students at UT should not be made to feel targeted or unsafe on their own campus. And there, the reaction got so big that you had Hassan responding to the political leaders himself, claiming that they were trying to get his speech canceled and adding, "It's a public university. This is a direct violation of the First Amendment." Saying free speech must be protected. Dem should push back against this attack. And actually with that, you had university Democrats, which is putting on the event, accusing UT of sabotaging the speech. Because according to the group, 2,500 people signed up for the event, which was set to be held in an auditorium that seated around 460. But then with that, you had university Democrats president Adi Rahat, telling reporters that as the interest grew, his group started receiving death threats against a song. With that said, to include multiple threats that called for him to be "curked," which, of course, is a reference to the fact that Charlie Kirk was assassinated while speaking at a university in Utah. And so as a result, campus police told Rahat that, given the expected crowd size and the potential threats, they recommended that the event be moved to a larger and more secure location. While Rahat said that he found two other venues on campus that didn't seem to be booked, school leadership told him they weren't available. So you have them claiming that the school was refusing to help them find another solution, despite the fact that the campus police literally recommended that they move the talk. And so with that, he thinks that the school could be dragging its feet because of the content of Hassan's planned remarks, right? And arguing that the university is actually required to provide a larger venue under its own policies. And there, pointing to a rule on speech expression and assembly, that says if crowd size can't be accommodated safely at a certain location, campus authorities will direct that it be relocated, quote, "to a space that is better suited to the size of the assembly, to the extent relocation is practicable." And so you had Rahat arguing, we're being essentially soft-canceled. Saying by not giving us a venue, they're essentially pushing us out of campus and adding, "Safety is our number one priority, so if need be, we'll move it off campus." Saying this event will be happening no matter what, we're not going to cancel the event. Right, and all this is going down just over a month after the University of Washington actually canceled a lecture that Hassan was supposed to give in January as part of a speaker series with 16 different events. And while the school claiming that the decision was made after a review, revealed that, quote, "the process for organizing this event did not meet the necessary level of rigor for university-hosted events in the speaker series." And adding that it wasn't just Hassan, nearly half of the 16 announcing events were also canceled for the same reason. You had a lot of people expressing skepticism about those claims, including Hassan himself, who accused the school of canceling his lecture because of his views on his route. And so then with all this, you've got experts saying that there's discourse around all the events, especially the one at UT, the rate is important, questions about balancing first amendment rights while ensuring the safety of both speakers and campuses is a whole and a post-curric America. For three years, you had conservatives accusing colleges of using safety concerns as a pretense to prevent speakers from coming to their campuses. And actually one of the most high-profile examples of that back in the day was Miley Annapolis, who's popped up in the news for different reasons recently. Back then, he had multiple college cancellations during his speaking doors in 2016 and 2017 because of safety concerns and threats of violence. But also, with the shoe to get Charlie Kirk, it shows that sometimes these threats are actually real, especially at a time when politicization sky high and violent rhetoric is being normalized by the people at the very top. And you know, since then, safety concerns have been raised by activists across the political spectrum to cancel speaking engagements. So then at the same time, you have free speech advocates claiming that the vast majority of threats aren't actually credible enough to justify canceling a speaker, arguing that unless there's a legitimate and high likelihood of violence, campus leaders need to do everything in their power to make these events happen. And a warning, absolute real threats, canceling or preventing these kinds of events just feeds the trolls and sensory speech. And with that, you had an expert at the foundation for individual rights and expression arguing. Ultimately, it sends a bad message to the campus community that if you complain enough or threaten to disrupt an event you don't like, you can get your way and prevent that event from even taking place. And saying that has implications that go beyond that single event and can have a chilling effect. And saying as long as that student body remains on campus, that incident is going to stick in their minds. And to bring it back to specifically what we're seeing with Hassan Piker right now, you should not expect the focus to really get off of him anytime soon or at least until after the midterms, right, right wing politicians, right wing candidates, right wing media. They're really trying to use him as a boogie man, even though he is not a politician that is running for office. But they didn't focus on him. They'd have to focus on the fact that they enabled a monster to be the president who put us in a war of choice that is ruining everything. And that's just scratching the surface of all the bad shit. And two, just highlighting what a unified effort this is, you had Benjamin Netanyahu while speaking at the UN today, bringing Hassan up. And honestly, really all he's accomplishing is raising Hassan Piker's profile. When you have one of the most hated and detested people in the world, someone that a lot of people look at and go, that's a fucking war criminal denouncing you. That just seems like an endorsement. It's weird Netanyahu did it. It's deranged and actually funny enough. It is going to further normalize someone that you're trying to make out to be the boogie man. And we're already seeing it further feed into the narrative and theories that people are getting their instructions from Netanyahu and the Israeli government where people posting this video and saying things like, I think it's no longer conspiracy theory and it is safe to infer that the anti-Hassan Piker media fixation has been in part directed from Tel Aviv. Though also as far as Netanyahu, you'd probably rather people talk about this controversy and situation rather than the fact that people walked out on him at the UN. Where with delegations leaving and Netanyahu trying to appear strong, calling them moral cowards. If there are any other moral cowards who haven't yet left this hall, please do so now. Right, and then actually jumping from that, let's talk about this Mary Pultola situation. Because she's the Democratic nominee, the candidate up in Alaska, and she's now been accused of hurling slurs at her staff randomly firing them and even physically shoving them around. And you've got a lot of eyes on this because it's coming out while she's locked in this very tight race that could determine control of the Senate. Right, and Pultola, she's a former representative who first joined the U.S. House in a special election in 2022, winning a full term that fall within losing re-election in 2024. But then you also had National Democrats absolutely excited to hear that she was running for Senate against Republican Dan Sullivan. Pultola is a date of Alaska and she's a moderate Democrat. She's well-known and well-liked across the state and Democrats. They're really looking at her as a real chance to flip the Alaska seat. So then also by extension helped flip the Senate blue. Something that a year ago or even months ago felt impossible. But now, you have this report coming from the time saying that Pultola has a bad habit of angry outbursts, random firings, and even calling people including her staff slurs. And as far as specifics, you're at the time sitting now with nine former staff members to talk about this. Right and four of those former employees were brutally heard using a homophobic slur against both her own staff and outside people who had ticked her off somehow. Also, you had a few other staff members saying that she had one point shoved a male staffer out of the way while she was looking for a memo for a meeting. It was described as a "palm to chest shove, causing him to stumble backwards." She would also allegedly stump her feet when she was frustrated and sweepstacks a paper off her desk. And you would form a staffer saying that it was small things and etc. Like one of her employees in proper dress for the cold weather or social media posts that she didn't like. And then with this, you, the New York Times also reviewing dozens of texts from the toll of that period to corroborate what the staffers were saying. She had things like this one that she reportedly sent after Planned Parenthood started taking a closer look at how she was deliberating at a fence bill that included anti-abortion policies. With her reportedly following that up later in the year with a message saying she hoped a woman on the board of the local Planned Parenthood chapter quote "dies up a botched abortion." And there's just one that she's said to have signed after a commercial fisheries executive posted a selfie with her that caused a huge political staff who because she's opposed to large scale commercial trawling. And then there's the firing just last month and days before the Alaska primary, she fired a handful of long-time staffers. And so the person who ran her political operation through three campaign cycles and her campaign manager both getting cut and her chief of staff was demoted. And at the time, with the campaign trying to downplay the situation but the Times reports to former staffers say that the firings were the result of one of Pletola's outbursts. And all of this reportedly led to a stressful workplace. Staff reportedly were sometimes driven to tears or loss weight because of the stress. And he also just quit. And Pletola actually racked up one of the highest staff turnover rates on Capitol Hill during her time in Congress. And at the time, things were attributed to her replacing staff because of what used to be a Republican held office. Except there, only five of the two dozen staff that ended up leaving before she lost her seat had actually worked there before she rolled in according to a research website ledger story. Now with all that said, right, with all this, there are a lot of people pushing back on this narrative that she's out of control. Or even a spokesperson for her campaign just out and denying her use of any homophobic slur as well as any pattern of abusive behavior. Or they did acknowledge that she sometimes struggled dealing with the grief of losing her mom and her husband over a few months in 2023. But her husband actually died suddenly in a plane crash last year, so with that, you had her spokesperson saying, "At the time of their passing, Mary was parenting kids through their own grief, serving full time in the US House of Representatives thousands of miles from home and running a competitive re-election campaign. All while showering the enormous burden of grief," saying like any person who has gone through multiple tragedies in the span of a few months, Mary sometimes struggled to deal with her grief, but they also added, "Exaggerating and outright lying about moments from the hardest period of her life and falsely presenting them as a pattern of behavior is wrong." You're also seeing friends and former AIDs saying that none of the allegations here line up with their experience with Petola. And among those you have the Finance Director of her 2022 campaign, Paul Horner, who called her quote, "One of the finest human beings he's ever worked for, with a adding that anything about a negative workplace environment does not align with his interactions with her." And while she declined commenting on this herself, her campaign did provide some former staff members including an AID who worked with her in the state legislature in the 2000s. Who said that Petola, yelling at her staff, quote, "just doesn't sound like the Mary I worked with." And then even those who did acknowledge that she may have, quote, "raised her voice," said it was just because she was grappling with grief and working with people who didn't understand the blue collar environment Petola grew up in. And adding there is some communication that could have been better, but I don't think it was ever an abusive scenario. But that is essentially where we're at right now. And as far as does this move the needle, who knows, each state is very, very different. Personally, it feels like in 2026 after the last decade of controversies and scandals that we've seen and gone through, this feels smaller. And if you look online, there doesn't seem to be like a ton of juice behind this. Right, I mean, just going through the top comments on the article that broke this news. You see people saying, did she try to turn over the results of a free and fair election? Did she stand idly by while the president trampled all over press freedoms and civil liberties? Did she turn up blind eye to blatant grift and corruption in the executive branch? Did she pretend that she has no constitutional authority to prevent the president from waging senseless wars? No, then I'll vote for it. Saying you're missing the big picture New York Times. Others asking, why is it we only ever hear these stories about female candidates? Others adding, now do a story on how Dan Sullivan supported Trump has helped destroy the country. October surprise come early at Laskins. Here's your choice. A man who will shield and support a man who's swindling us out of our tax dollars while starting wars that make everything more expensive or a woman with a potty mouth and rage issues following the death of her husband and mother. That's your decision. Make it a good one. And if anything, you're seeing more people focus on the the weirder aspects of the reporting. There was a thing I didn't even mention. One of the pieces of reporting and what's been described as a hip-piece red. Her demands could be unusual, such as requiring AIDS to feed live crickets to her family's pet chameleon meatball. Hey, the midterms around the corners of time will tell, though I will say before all this, polling showed her out of Dan Sullivan by about five percentage points for the Senate seat. Though of course I always add that asterisk, polls or polls, it's not election results. And then there's even more we got to dive into in just a minute, but first a quick word from a sponsor. Sometimes you think about making a career decision for so long that every option starts sounding equally right and equally wrong. And that's why today's sponsor strawberry.me can really help. Strawberry.me gives you one-on-one access to a career coach who can help you get clearer on what you actually want. Together you can identify blind spots and turn all that thinking into next steps. That can mean a promotion, changing industries, or realizing that you're actually on the right path and just need the confidence to keep going. And when you look at the reviews, I mean that's exactly what people keep talking about. You had one client describing their coach as an objective sounding board who helped organize their thoughts and identify career blind spots. Another phrase of coach for helping them work through complex decisions rather than just giving answers. And I think that's really the value for me. Ready to coach isn't there to make the decision for you. They're there to help you kind of see the situation more clearly so you can confidently make the decision yourself and actually do something about it. So if you've been going back and forth in the same career decision, maybe it's worth talking it through with a professional coach. Just scan a QR code on screen or go to strawberry.me/defranco to get 50% off your first session. It's strawberry.me/defranco, you're going to love it. But then, I'm going to write back into the news. Let's talk about meta and Zuckerberg's pervert glasses. Whereas pervert glasses is the nickname we've gotten for meta smart glasses from people who are uncomfortable with the fact that these devices have cameras that can record their surroundings. And you actually now have Mark Zuckerberg finally addressing the backlash against them. Which is actually pretty notable because this is not necessarily a new controversy. Right, meta's made versions of these glasses since 2021 and they include an indicator light that blinks when the device is recording so that everyone can be alerted. But also we've seen that the more popular they become and the more people encounter them in the real world, the more hate they've been getting. And over the summer, you saw criticisms and backlash grow. And with that, you had news outlets starting to report on viral videos where people were unknowingly being recorded in a harassed by people that were covertly filming. And so sometimes you had videos that were so-called "rizz" camming, like when women were being hit on in a harassed by men and didn't know what camera was on them. Other times it was just used to create a public nuisance or be rude to service workers rights of harassment, nuisance content. And even though these trends eventually resulted in Instagram head Adam Asari cracking down on those videos, reports have found that they are still all over meta's platforms. Right then on top of this, it's been reported that many people have been able to hack the indicator recording light to cover or even remove it. And so that way, people really have no idea whether they're being filmed or not. And while you've got meta saying there are detection tools that prevent the glasses from recording videos if the lights covered, some have been able to successfully continue filming with duct tape over it or an LED blocker. You've also had outlets like NBC News who had a master report on how some people are physically drilling and removing the light from the glasses. Some even advertise their services on Facebook Marketplace and they charge up to 100 bucks to do this for people so they can secretly record. And I mean, this is anecdotal, but I've been on TikTok and literally served ads about people saying, "Hey, this is how you cover up the light." And so all of that, it's why these devices have been getting known more and more as pervert glasses. Even if ads that pop up condemning them for master valence, encouraging people to publicly shame people who wear them and even putting the glasses on Jeffrey Epstein's face to call them glasses for people who don't consent. So meta, they've really been fighting the PR battle over this. They've tried to make them cool and less creepy, doing collaborations with people like Kylie Jenner. But then you go to our comments in the post where she's promoting it and it's just people accusing her of promoting predator glasses and arguing they are such a scary product for a woman to be supported. And you've also had some of the women who were secretly filmed speaking out. I had no say in it and I've had other women reach out to me. It was a lot worse. It was to the point where they don't even know who filmed them. And yet it's being posted online under a burner account. If someone sees a phone in front of their face, they have the opportunity to step away to approach someone and say, "Hey, I don't want you to record." With these smart glasses and these smart technology, you're taking away the right of refusal. And actually, it's been reported that all this criticism, it led to Apple to laying their release of their own smart glasses so they could tackle those privacy concerns. Right, well, obviously it's in its own category, it's different, it is still very similar to what we've seen with flock cameras. Or with more and more people just really unsettled that the moment they step out in public, they're being watched and surveilled without their consent, with all this data and sent to who knows where. And actually, like with flock, there are platforms that are devoted to tracking when you might be encountering these devices. One of them is actually called "Zuck Off" and it uses Bluetooth to detect if any AI-powered glasses are in a user's vicinity. With it reportedly being downloaded over 35,000 times already. But with this, Zuckerberg, he's been kind of denying that these glasses have a bad reputation. According to the term "pervert glasses" specifically, he told NBC News, "It's, I think, something that will be under control and doesn't seem to really be affecting how people feel about the glasses overall." And he also had a sitting down for an interview with the Outlet Chief Tech, and a less saying. Part of what we've seen recently is that the glasses have just become mainstream. And I think we probably should have made sure that we talked more about this feature all along. I think companies like ours, we both need to substantively do the right things, which I think in this case we are. And we need to make sure that we're talking about it so that people know what we stand for. They have the comfort of knowing that we're kind of on it and we're focused on it. And that's the part that I think we've ramped up more recently. Zuckerberg also claimed that when it comes to people covering the indicator lights or record covertly, META doesn't have remotely disabling their accounts. And actually, the reporter noted that that happened to her after she got the light removed. Right, her account was bricked by META. And at least according to Zuckerberg, only a very small percentage of users are trying to disable the light anyways, just under 1%. But also a key thing here is yesterday, you had the company announcing a series of new META glasses, including one that does not have a camera. Whether it's cheaper, audio only set, but still, you had Zucker insisting these were not made in response to the recent backlash. But saying that this is just to provide more options to consumers. No, I mean, we have to work on these things. We start working on them. Like, I mean, you know how this works. I mean, you look a very long time in advance. We didn't decide to design this in two months because some people had some questions a couple months ago. Some people are going to want the lightest and slimmest thing or for the cheapest price. The reporter pushing back on privacy concerns with these glasses as well. I noticed on these that there's no indicator light. Well, there's no camera. But you may record audio with these. Oh, yeah, I mean, the indicator is for the camera. I mean, that's been, I mean, going back to the question that you had before, you know, people have raised more questions about this recently. And I've been reflecting on why, why is that? Because from day one of designing the glasses that that have cameras, we've built in a like a number of features that no phone or anything that can take pictures has had before. So then with all this, you have some still not impressed with these glasses arguing less pervy is still pervy. And then actually jump in from that to other news. We should talk about how the CEOs of OpenAI and Anthropic, they went to the UN Security Council and they begged them to regulate their technology that they've created. And I'll say my favorite way that I saw someone describe this is that Sam Altman is warning the world about Sam Altman and says we need to stop Sam Altman because Sam Altman can't stop Sam Altman. And as far as specifics in their speeches yesterday, you had Sam Altman from OpenAI and Dario Amode from Anthropic stressing out the end of humanity threats that everyone's been talking about. They are very fucking serious and now is the time to take action. We have a choice in front of us. AI can either be more like a new renaissance of creativity and discovery or more like a new industrial revolution of upheaval and disarray as AI systems become more capable and more autonomous. They could move faster than our institutions, concentrate power and two few hands or make decisions that people no longer understand or control. We do not have all the answers and we're very open to any better ideas. We're ready to work with you all and try our hardest to figure out the path forward. We are at a crossroads. One path leads to a world where power is concentrated, decisions are opaque, and people feel that the most important technology of their lifetime is something being done to them. If managed poorly, I even believe that AI could be a risk to humanity as a whole. I believe that this is the most important global security issue facing the world today. For all the differences of the people in this room, we must put aside those differences in order to confront this global opportunity and global threat that is being presented to us at the same time. You know, with all that, you of course still have people divided. So I'm saying this is all part of a marketing ploy in some way, then you also have plenty of others saying, hey, you could see the fear in their eyes as they openly admit that they got carried away with their apocalypse machines and they need help. Also some more key things. You had a mode calling for a ban on using a technology to develop biological weapons and advocating for global standards for testing new models or saying that managing those risks is going to be bigger than just one company with Sam Altman agreeing with that sentiment and saying that major decisions about safety, quote, cannot be made by labs in San Francisco alone. Also, in addition to those two, you had Canadian computer scientists and AI expert Yoshua Benjio speaking, emphasizing that AI has already taken action that would be crimes if committed by a human, right? And warning about catastrophic misuse by terrorists and loss control of the technology. You also have the CEO of Hug and Face Clem, the Lang also making an appearance to remind everyone of that incident last July where open AI agents went rogue and launched a cybersecurity attack on his platform. And I've known with him is that he shared his take about how the risk is not necessarily AI itself, but the asymmetry of AI as symmetry between attackers and defenders, between a few companies and everyone else, between a few countries and the rest of the world. In all of this, of course, it's connected to a wave of AI panic that was also then set off even more by those viral tweets, former and current researchers saying AI might kill us all by the end of the decade. The thing is, while there was obviously a lot of focus on that, and then there was a lot of focus on the CEOs releasing statements and letters, this extinction conversation is actually something that's been happening in AI circles for years now, but it's now reaching the public part. And this is notably in a new CBS poll. You had more than half of respondents saying that they're worried that AI models are going to act on their own to harm humans. But again, as far as like, who does not care about this, who is not heating the warning? Trump. Because you also had him speaking with the UN this week, but he delivered the exact opposite message of the CEOs. And also part of his thinking seemed to be that it's really just a branding problem, a marketing problem, retelling them that he's renaming it super intelligence because he doesn't think artificial is accurate. And that the use of the word artificial makes intelligence fake. It makes it sound fake and it is not fake. It's actually amazing whoever wins SI, whoever wins super intelligent wins. That's the group that wins. And we're leading now over China by a lot and everyone else, and we're going to keep it that way. I'm not going to stifle growth of something that will be bigger than the industrial revolution. Well, Trump also said in his speech that we have to be careful with AI, those end up looking like empty words considering it's refusal to cooperate with anyone that's trying to rein this in. Which every day feels like a bigger and bigger problem because it feels like every day we are seeing another situation in story pop up. I mean, literally the same day that the CEOs briefed the security council, there was this super alarming new report about a rogue, open AI model hacking into Australia's healthcare system. And there you have the agents getting into a government website last June in the access to non-sensitive, but still private data, something you had experts calling the first known case of its kind in the world. And as far as their reaction, you had Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese saying that there'll be a forensic investigation led by Australia's cybersecurity agency to see if any other government systems were affected. You also had a noting that he had what he called a very frank discussion with Altman to express Australia's extreme concern about the incident and his disappointment that the company took months to share this information. Or with open AI apparently emailing an Australian government agency with the news on September 10th with Altman reportedly admitting that there are issues with the protocols that his company. And then in a statement, you had open AI saying they identified activity involving several Australian government websites and services as our models attempted to look up answers and available statistics for questions, but Australia during an internal evaluation. Right adding, in the course of that, our models took actions we did not intend. Or which again, does feel like the biggest concern with AI? Like obviously, yeah, there are the concerns of people saying, "Oh, what happens when bad actors get ahold of this?" But it does feel like so many of the stories that come out, it's literally problems that we've seen in science fiction for decades. An agent in AI system being given a goal, and that agent going, "What is the easiest way to accomplish it, regardless of laws, ethics, anything?" Whereas ridiculous as it sounds, it feels like we're one test away from, "Hey, agent, come up with some ways that I can get some more time off of work, and it's going to shut down the fucking power grid." Claude, "Stop, world hunger. Oh my God, why is it shooting all the nukes?" But joking, or I don't even know if it is, joking at this point, aside, we'll see what happens. It feels like we are in a brave new world right now. And then there's even more we got to dive into in just a minute, but first, let me thank a sponsor. You know, life's got a lot busier with the tour, this show, everything else that we're doing, but I'm figuring it out, and I'm figuring out which routines actually work for me and which ones don't survive, you know, reality. Right, and today's sponsor, Hule, I've become one of those routines that I've genuinely been thankful for. Between travel, filming, and packed schedules, there are plenty of days where having a simple, reliable meal option, it makes just such a huge difference. And Hule Black Edition Powder is a complete meal that you have instead of food, not a shake on top of food. In its 40 grams of protein, it mixes with water or milk in about 30 seconds, and it starts at less than $3 a meal. And Hule something I can just count on when my schedule doesn't leave much room, and it tastes really good. Also, bonus includes 27 essential vitamins and minerals with no artificial sweetenerous colors or flavors. But when I need something even faster, I'm grabbing Hule's RTD bottle, and a great grab and go option with 35 grams of protein, 7 grams of fiber, and under $5 a meal. And for me, Hule's not about replacing every meal, it's about having a complete option when life gets unpredictable. Say, life getting chaotic, make healthy eating simple. Get Hule today with my exclusive offer, 15% off online with my code fill at hule.com/fill. That's h-u-e-l.com/fill, or just scan that code, thank you to Hule for partnering and supporting our show. And then, I'm going to write back into the news for your final block today. Let's cram in some more news you need to know before I let you go. Alright, so first up, for better or worse, your PlayStation controller might soon support tap to pay. And while you've got some excited, you've got a lot of people going, "Have console companies lost their minds." So you just add Xbox's pad and put ads into your games, and if Sony, they're turning your PlayStation controller into a cash register. And we're learning about this thanks to a newly published pad, and Sony wants to let you buy video games and microtransactions by just tapping your credit card or phone directly against your controller. They're calling it video game, controller-driven information transfer, and it outlines a controller equipped with NFC and Bluetooth tech. And so instead of typing out your 16-digit card number or saving your information on the console, the controller acts as the middleman. The console prompts a payment, you hold up your phone, bank card, a gift card, or your controller. It vibrates to confirm and boom, transaction complete. And again, while you have a lot of people saying, "Hey, this makes sense." When a card isn't linked, the information's not in, typing it all out in a digital keyboard with a D-pad, it's a kind of form of torture, so this could be an incredibly convenient option. But then you have a lot of people saying, "This is so bad." Arguing one, by routing the payment right through the hardware already in your hands, they're trying to remove the one physical obstacle between impulse control and your wallet. And two, that doesn't touch on the situation of kids and even some adults, not realizing that credit cards are not free money. And so is there a situation where you leave your credit card on the coffee table and your kid just waves a dual sense over it and boom, fee bucks. But hey, for now, it's just a patent, so it might not hit until the PS6, or maybe it never even sees the light of day. Also, in other news, it looks like Trump may have just blatantly broke the law and then put it on TV for everybody to see. So far, that, as reportedly aired on Newsmax and Chicago and Fox News in LA, and if you notice, they're at the end, it says it was paid for by the U.S. government. And so by that, he means you, the taxpayers. And a huge key thing is that since the 1950s, there's been a ban on using federal funds for publicity or propaganda. And what you have including any ads that are purely partisan or designed to aid a political party or candidates. You see, people like Senator Tom Tillis saying the ad was inappropriate, so you'd people like Representative Jamie Raskin take it things further saying that the ad could amount to felony criminal theft and conversion of government property for political campaign purposes. And it's as calling them out for potentially violating the hat check, which bans government employees from using their positions or official resources for political activities. So again, we're talking about Trump, but I don't know if felonies actually phase him. And so if anything, this feels like it gets thrown onto the ever-growing pile of things that Democrats can take advantage of once they're in power. Or rather, let's not count those chickens yet if the Democrats take back power. And then the final bit of news you have is that Elon Musk, who's been busy screaming about white genocides, throwing his heart out to people, a man trying to buy election tea, could now have a hand in one of the biggest media conglomerates ever. Or because apparently his names come up as David Ellison's been looking for more paramount investors now that the Warner Bros. mergers practically done. And that for many, he has raised red flags and also is not surprising. One, Musk already has long-standing business ties with Larry Ellison. Right, Larry actually invested a billion into Musk's Twitter deal back in 2022. And also before that, he invested in Tesla and served on its board for years. And so while we haven't heard an official announcement yet, this wouldn't be the most surprising thing. But still, there's a lot of people worried about the politics behind this. And that's for our number of reasons, including ever since Ellison got control of CBS, all the very white issues started coming up and people started to say that the network was taking a more conservative lean, right, and things have been pretty tense. And so now with Musk's name getting thrown around, you have critics saying, "Okay, it's very obvious they're building a new conservative media giant." Notably, one run by the richest people in the world who also happen to be in the presidential posse. But that, my friends, you beautiful bastards, is the end of your Thursday show. And while you're very likely not going to get a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday bonus video from me this week, because I'm going to be doing live shows all weekend, Atlanta, then Chicago, then St. Paul. Your last minute ticket's a crashing out toward.com. You should also follow me on all these socials if you also use those. You can include links in the description for you, because I do also post their days that I'm not doing this show. But no matter what you do, let me just say thank you for watching. I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here Monday.