Russia Nuclear "Threat" Is Crazy BUT Here's The Deal, Diddy Updates, Andrew Tate Wins & Today’s News
PDS Published 11/19/2024
-
The claim comes from a recent filing from prosecutors who say that Diddy has made:
"relentless efforts to contact potential witnesses, including victims of his abuse who could provide powerful testimony against him."[]
And this might have you wondering: how on earth is Diddy doing that while stuck in a New York jail cell?
Well, prosecutors say he has been using the phone access codes of other inmates to contact several people, including his sons, and that he has made three way calls to others.
Also accusing him of using a third party service to contact people who are “unauthorized.”
With the filing arguing that the calls to his sons and others:
"provides the clear inference that the defendant’s goal is to blackmail victims and witnesses either into silence or providing testimony helpful to his defense."
For his part, Diddy’s lawyers are fighting back against the prosecutors here, filing a motion yesterday saying that the information investigators obtained was “attorney-client privileged material.”[]
Further arguing that prosecutors violated Diddy’s fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment rights by seizing these materials.
And the timing of all this is very crucial, because this week a judge is expected to decide if Diddy should be granted a $50 million bail and be moved to home detention.
And obviously, if prosecutors can find evidence that he is witness tampering from inside the bars, that would really impact a judge’s decision to let him out.
With the LA Times speaking to a former federal prosecutor who said prosecutors do have reason to believe he is obstructing justice, and there is a good chance the judge does not toss out this evidence, adding:
“Inmates don’t have a Fourth Amendment expectation of privacy in prison. Guards can search his cell without probable cause or a warrant.”
So we will have to keep our eyes out for updates, especially if he gets granted bail.
-
And that is actually not even the only update we have on a high-profile trafficking case today.
With a Romanian court finding irregularities in the prosecutor's case against Andrew and his brother Tristan.
Meaning prosecutors now have by the end of the week to either amend the the human trafficking and rape case or withdraw it.
The court also ruled that some of the evidence has to be removed, this including statements from two of the main alleged victims, as well as testimonies from both Tate brothers that were deemed inadmissible.[]
With Reuters describing this as:
“a setback to the anti-organized crime prosecutors' investigation, citing flaws in the indictment and legal rights violations.”
Among the flaws, the court reportedly found improper descriptions of acts committed by the female suspects, missing details on the seizure of assets, and a failure to properly explain some of the charges.
And with this, there is no surprise that the Tate brothers’ lawyer celebrated this, giving a statement saying:
“This is a monumental victory for our clients, who have maintained their innocence from the beginning. The court’s decision to exclude key evidence and demand rectification of the indictment demonstrates the lack of substantiated claims against them.”[]
Andrew also celebrating by writing on Twitter:
“TATESFREE. Everything the enemies printed on MSM were lies. The prosecution knew they were lies. We knew they were lies. We were meant to die before we got here. They tried to break us. They wanted us destroyed, they wanted us afraid, but we fought back. It was a game of killing us with lies before a judge exposed the truth.”[]
But it is important to note that he is not totally free yet, Newsweek even having to do a fact check piece explaining his case has not actually been dismissed as tons of online posts of gone viral suggesting that the Tates are fully in the legal clear. [][]
But one, prosecutors still have until the end of the week to decide what is next.
And two, as the Associated Press explained:[]
“In August, [the anit-organized crime agency] DIICOT launched a second case against the Tate brothers investigating allegations of human trafficking, the trafficking of minors, sexual intercourse with a minor, influencing statements and money laundering. They have denied all of the charges. Tuesday’s ruling doesn’t affect this case.”
So even if one page gets turned, there still is another chapter to read.
-
Ukraine uses US-provided missiles in Russia, Putin issues warning by revising country’s nuclear doctrine, Russia suspected of sabotaging underseas telecom cables
And then, in a big update to yesterday’s news about Ukraine, American-made long-range missiles have now been fired into Russia for the very first time.
And specifically, Ukraine reportedly launched at least six US-provided ATACMS (Attack ‘ems) missiles at a weapons depot in a region bordering Ukraine and Belarus.
With the Russian Defense Ministry claiming five missiles were shot down and one was damaged – and saying there were no casualties or damage.
And then, Russia’s foreign minister claiming the attack is a “signal” that the US is the one seeking escalation.
Right, because of course, this attack happened thanks to Joe Biden authorizing Ukraine’s use of these weapons to strike inside Russia.
With this now actually leading some European allies to consider lifting restrictions as well.
The UK, for example, now expected to supply Ukraine with “Storm Shadow” missiles for striking inside Russia.
Though, Germany, on the other hand, is sticking with its decision not to provide its Taurus missile system to Ukraine.
And with all this, we now have Vladimir Putin signing a revised Russian nuclear doctrine that lowers the threshold for his country’s use of nuclear weapons.
And specifically, the new doctrine saying:
“Aggression against the Russian Federation and (or) its allies by any nonnuclear state with the participation or support of a nuclear state is considered as their joint attack.”
And what that means, in theory at least, is that a US-backed conventional weapons attack – like the one that literally just happened – could trigger a nuclear response…
That is, if Russia deems the attack a critical threat to the, quote, “sovereignty and territorial integrity: of Russia and its ally, Belarus.”
And on one hand, that might make you think people opposed to lifting weapons restrictions had a point.
And you know, maybe they do.
But on the other hand, this isn’t actually totally new.
Right, Putin outlined these new rules way back in September, he’s just making them official now.
And of course beyond that, he’s been brandishing Russia’s nuclear arsenal to discourage Western aid to Ukraine since virtually day one of this war (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
And actually, you had the Russian foreign minister saying today that Russia is strictly committed to a position of avoiding nuclear war, and that the weapons act as a deterrent.
Though, of course, none of this is to be taken lightly.
But with that out of the way, it’s not just nuclear attacks people are worried about from Russia.
Right, for example, we gotta talk about these two undersea fiber-optic communications cables in the Baltic Sea that have just been mysteriously severed.
With a spokesperson for the company that owns one of the cables saying:
"These kinds of breaks don't happen in these waters without an outside impact”
And with that, you had the the German defense minister saying:
“No one believes that the cables were accidentally damaged.”
“We have to state, without knowing specifically who it came from, that it is a ‘hybrid’ action…And we also have to assume, without knowing it yet, that it is sabotage.”
And of course, there, the prime suspect is Russia, which we know, one, is extra pissed off right now.
And two, is already accused of all sorts of sabotage in Europe.
Right, from spying, to arson, to assassination.
Though, to be clear, neither Germany or other countries are directly accusing Russia of destroying the cables.
Right, because at this point, we really have no evidence of exactly what happened or who is behind it.
But we’ll have to wait and see if some evidence turns up.
And beyond that, we’ll have to wait and see where things go from in terms of the war in Ukraine and Russia’s relations with the West.
Visit OZLO and get $10 off Ozlo sleep buds or use my code PHILD to get the best sleep of your life!
-
You people are increasingly turning to influencers for news.
That is something you probably already knew or have seen yourself, but is now backed up by a report from Pew, which found that 37% of U.S. adults between 18 and 29 say they regularly get information from news influencers online.[]
Which is significantly more than the average, with 21% of all U.S. adults saying the same.
Among Americans who get news from news influencers, 65% said influencers helped them better understand current events, and 70% said the news they get from influencers is at least somewhat different from the news they get via other sources.
But some of the most important information from this Pew study was not about news consumers, but about the news influencers themselves, with Galen Stocking, a senior computational social scientist at Pew saying in a statement:
“these influencers have really reached new levels of attention and prominence this year amid the presidential election. We thought it was really important to look at who is behind some of the most popular accounts — the ones that aren’t news organizations, but actual people.”
Pew looked at a sample of 500 popular news influencers, which was narrowed down from a review of 28,000 social media accounts.
And they defined a “news influencer” as someone who regularly posts about current events on social media and has at least 100,000 followers on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, or YouTube.
This can include independent creators as well as journalists affiliated with news organizations.
But it turned out that most, or 77%, had no affiliation or background with news organizations.
The report also finding that it is a very male-dominated space, as 63% of news influencers are men and just 30% are women, while the rest are either nonbinary or their gender was unclear.
And these creators also tend to have a conservative lean, with Pew explaining:
“Many Republicans have long believed that social media sites censor conservative viewpoints. But overall, more news influencers explicitly present a politically right-leaning orientation than a left-leaning one (27% vs. 21%) in their account bios, posts, websites or media coverage. About half of influencers do not express any clear political orientation.”
And among the news influencers Pew said they looked at, you had names that often come up when discussing news and politics creators, people like Hasan Piker, David Pakman, Jack Posobiec.
You also had politicians themselves like Stacey Abrams making the list, and former news anchors like Megyn Kelly and Don Lemon.
But perhaps the biggest creator listed was Joe Rogan.
And they didn’t do deep-dives into the content made by these creators specifically, but the report did start by noting how big a sway some influencers have, as some got to interview presidential candidates.
And that is obviously something Joe Rogan did before eventually endorsing Trump.
And you had CNBC explaining that some of this is actually very good for political candidates, because not only is social media a relatively cheap way to reach a large audience,[]
But these platforms and creators also make it easier to advance a straightforward message compared to an interview on a traditional news network, where journalists tend to be more combative.
With Syracuse professor Joshua Darr explaining:
“It’s probably good for the electorate to have a hard sit-down interview, but if it’s a series of rapid fire gotcha questions, I don’t know if that’s something campaigns are going to sign up for.”
But the one major con that comes up time and time again is how easy it is for misinformation to thrive on social media, especially as it pertains to politics and news.
With Columbia professor Basil Smikle telling CNBC that:
“There were standards that the networks used to determine what was true. Those guardrails are gone through social media.”
“When you’re getting information through social media, how do you know how original that information is? It’s very hard to verify that and unfortunately, the algorithm doesn’t care. It just keeps sending you the same kind of information.”
But I would love to know your thoughts on this one, one because I always like hearing your thoughts, but two because I know for sure you have some experience in this department.
I am a news influencer, at least according to Pew’s definition and probably most other definitions as well.
You are watching me deliver some news at this exact moment right now.
So I would love to know your thoughts on this report, its findings, whether it be about political or gender gaps, the pros and cons of this news format, anything at all, I would love to know.
-
Officials on every level - from local leaders to the President of the United States - are openly condemning the Neo-Nazi march we just saw in Ohio.
Right, you may have seen the video circulating online - showing a group of masked assholes waving swastika flags while marching down a street in Columbus. [B Roll 0:00-0:21]
There were reportedly about 10 people involved, 3 of whom were carrying the flags as they paraded past local businesses while shouting the N-word. []
According to the local authorities, the group was armed and there may have been a physical altercation before the police arrived. []
With one outlet saying that someone may have pepper sprayed them. []
But the police went on to say that while many of the Neo-Nazis were temporarily detained, no one was arrested. []
As you can imagine, this incident prompted an intense reaction.
On the local level, we saw community leaders do a march of their own in a demonstration against the Neo-Nazis and their hate. [B Roll 2:36-2:54]
Columbus’ mayor Andrew Ginther posted a statement on Twitter, condemning the, quote, “cowardly display” and adding,
“We will not allow any of our neighbors to be intimidated, threatened or harmed because of who they are, how they worship and whom they love.”
And the city attorney posted his own statement - saying that this is not who Columbus is and they won’t quote, “tolerate or normalize this disgusting ideology in any form.”
Adding,
“... take your flags and the masks you hide behind and go home and never come back. Your hate isn’t welcome in our city.”
Moving up a bit further, Ohio’s governor Mike DeWine said the same things in his statement and added,
"There is no place in this State for hate, bigotry, antisemitism, or violence, and we must denounce it wherever we see it."
And then at the top, we got a statement from the White House yesterday, also condemning the Neo-Nazi march, calling it a “sickening display” and adding,
"President Biden abhors the hateful poison of Nazism, antisemitism, and racism - which are hostile to everything the United States stands for.” []
Now, I wish I could say this was an isolated incident.
But I can’t even say this is the first time we’ve seen a Neo-Nazi demonstration this month.
Last weekend, a group of them gathered outside a local production of “The Diary of Anne Frank” in Livingston County, Michigan.
Also waving swastikas and shouting racist and anti-semitic slurs.
And there was another demonstration by Neo-Nazis in Springfield, Ohio back in September.
And the examples can go on and on and on - with the Anti-Defamation League reporting that the number of events organized or attended by White supremacists in the US last year hit a new high of 282. []
With the vice president of the ADL Center on Extremism saying,
“Over the past few years, hundreds of white supremacist marches and events have been organized around the country, aiming not only to instill fear and anxiety in the communities they target but also to serve as photo opportunities for these groups to use in their recruitment and online propaganda.” []
And adding,
“When white supremacists start competing for turf or visibility, the losers are the communities that are impacted.” []
That is where we are with this story and I would love to know your thoughts about this - especially if you’re from the Columbus area.
Let me know in those comments down below.
Go to HumanN and use code DEFRANCO to get 15% off and save even more on bundles!
-
Trump announces more controversial picks: Fox Business host Sean Duffy to lead DOT, and FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr as chair
Trump has nominated another Fox News host to hold a key position in his cabinet.
Though this one at least has experience in public office…
Right, yesterday, Trump announced that he has tapped former Wisconsin congressman and Fox Business host Sean Duffy to lead the Department of Transportation.
And Duffy seems to have the perfect mix of political and media experience Trump is looking for.
He actually first rose to prominence as a reality TV star in the late 90s, appearing on “The Real World: Boston” and then “Road Rules: All Stars.”
After earning his law degree, he worked as a District Attorney in Wisconsin before being elected to Congress, where he served from 2011 to 2019.
After leaving office, he did a brief stint at CNN as part of a slate of pro-Trump contributors, but he quickly left for Fox after facing backlash for comments questioning the loyalty of a key witness in Trump’s first impeachment.
And since then, he has been very vocal about his continued support for Trump.
Now, as far as how this man will run the DOT, that remains entirely unclear.
Right, he has very little transportation experience, but that also isn’t uncommon for the posting — Pete Buttigieg didn’t either.
And already, it doesn’t seem like Duffy’s appointment has been met with as much controversy as Trump’s other nominees.
Hell, some Democrats have even given him a fairly lukewarm response.
But what we do know is that the job he’s inheriting won’t be easy — it’s no secret our infrastructure is crumbling, and if confirmed, he’ll be the one responsible for deciding how to rebuild it.
Duffy will also be tasked with oversight of the Federal Aviation Administration — FAA — which continues to struggle with air traffic control and remains at the center of the hot-button air safety debate amid the ongoing Boeing scandals.
Beyond that, he will be in charge of the Federal Railroad Administration, which is under pressure to make safety reforms after the high-profile derailment in East Palestine, Ohio.
And then there’s the Elon Musk of it all.
Right, the DOT plays a huge role in regulating Tesla and SpaceX, and Musk has made his displeasure with the department very clear.
He has openly and repeatedly clashed with regulators at the FAA over its launch practices.
What’s more, the traffic safety arm of the agency is actively investigating Telsa over its “Full Self-Driving” system after the company reported multiple crashes, including one that killed a pedestrian.
And with Musk playing an increasingly larger role in the administration — not only being tapped to lead the DOGE commission but also just generally being very close to Trump — I would not wanna be the guy caught in the middle there.
But, on the note of Musk, we also saw Trump making another notable appointment that Musk stands to benefit from.
With Trump announcing over the weekend that he has chosen Brendan Carr to be chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.
Right, and for some context here, the way the FCC works is that there are five commissioners, and the president designates one to be the leader of the agency.
So Carr is already serving as a commissioner — a post that Trump appointed him to in 2017.
And unlike Duffy, Carr has made it abundantly clear what he plans to do with his new position of power.
Right, Carr has publicly said that he will fulfill Trump’s goals of slashing regulations, going after Big Tech and TV networks the president-elect views as biased against conservatives.
He is also yet another appointee who has deep ties to Project 2025, despite Trump’s repeated claims that the blueprint would not be the official policy of his administration.
But Carr literally wrote Project 2025’s chapter on the FCC.
And there, he argued that the agency needs to focus on reining in Big Tech, accusing the companies of trying to censor “diverse political viewpoints.”
Also, very significantly, his chapter supports a ban on TikTok — a move that Trump has flip-flopped on and now says he opposes.
Beyond Project 2025, Carr has also implied that he would take on TV broadcasters that Republicans view as politically biased.
Now, notably here, it’s unclear how much power he will really have in these areas — the FCC can’t punish TV or radio stations for editorial decisions unless they violate regulations on obscenities or children’s TV rules.
And experts also say the ability of the FCC to fully regulate Big Tech remains a legal gray area — though one that’s expected to be tested under Carr.
But he has many other tools at his disposal, and what we do know is that he can use his position to significantly benefit Elon Musk.
Right, Carr has repeatedly spoken out in favor of — and even actively vouched for — various companies owned by Musk.
Who Carr has aligned himself with and reportedly drawn closer to in recent months.
With Carr particularly speaking out in favor of Starlink, advocating for the company to receive nearly a billion dollars in FCC grants and throwing a major fit when the agency declined.
Accusing the Democratic majority of “regulatory harassment” against Musk.
But now that he is in charge and Republicans will have a majority on the five-person commission, Carr could help steer enormous, lucrative contracts to Starlink.
While also further benefiting Musk by going after X’s rivals.
So, it’s totally unsurprising that we saw Musk cheering the news of Carr’s appointment.
But for now, this is just yet another space we will be watching.
And on the broader note of Trump’s appointments, I’ll link some trackers down below so you can keep tabs if you want, because every time I finish a show we seem to get another huge announcement.
-
In other super interesting international news, we gotta talk about what may be the largest-ever protest supporting indigenous rights in the history of New Zealand.
With today, tens of thousands of people marching in the capital of Wellington, specifically against a proposed law that would reshape the country’s founding treaty.
Right, that’s a treaty that was signed by the colonial British regime and 500 Māori (LISTEN HERE - CLICK SPEAKER ICON - Ma-o-ree) chiefs in 1840.
And it basically laid out the principles guiding the relationship between the Crown and the indigenous population.
But notably, they signed two versions of the text – one in the local language and one in English – and that’s long sparked debate over how the treaty should be defined and interpreted.
And of course, as you can imagine, for a long time, the colonizers ultimately got their way.
But notably, over the past few decades, the country’s parliament and judicial system have come to interpret the treaty as promising Ma-o-ree significant decision-making powers and special protections.
And then, along came a man by the name of David Seymour.
Right, he’s the leader of one of three parties forming the count ry’s conservative coalition government,
And he introduced something called The Treaty Principles Bill.
With him and his supporters saying the way the treaty has been interpreted over the years has given indigenous people special treatment.
Though, notably, Ma-o-ree – who make up around 20 percent of the country’s population – are still behind when it comes to almost every social and economic metric.
Right, that’s despite attempts in recent decades to deal with inequities caused in large part by breaches of the treaty.
And with that, you have people like, Margaret Mutu (Moo-too), a professor of Ma-o-ree studies, saying:
“It denies the fact that the statistical reality of Ma-o-ree is that we are way behind the rest of the population because we have been colonized, we’ve had everything taken off us.”
With another Ma-o-ree legal expert saying:
“If those principles are redefined – and significantly weakened – [there] will be fewer legal mechanisms for Ma-o-ree to have their rights recognised.”
And that’s why the backlash has been so strong.
Right, before today, you may have seen this viral moment from a session of parliament last week.
With a Ma-o-ree lawmaker symbolically ripping up the controversial bill and being joined by some of her colleagues in a traditional dance called a haka.
And actually, it was also last week that a nine-day march on the capital began.
With an estimated 10,000 people passing through one town almost 300 miles north of the capital on Friday.
And then finally reaching Wellington today having grown to more than 40,000 strong (BROLL:0:11-0:19).
And with all that, the bill actually has almost no chance of becoming law.
Right, it’s even opposed by most people in the conservative governing coalition.
But notably, people’s anger may be about more than just this one bill.
Right, since coming to power, the conservative government has implemented other policies that critics say threaten Ma-o-ree rights –
Including, for example, a directive that public agencies should no longer target policies to specifically address racial inequities.
Also abolishing a health body dedicated to indigenous health, challenging their protected representation in local governments, and discouraging government departments from using the Ma-o-ree language.
Right, there’s a lot more going on with this issue, and we’ll have to wait and see where things go from here.
-
It looks like Chrome is on the chopping block in Google’s monopoly case.
Right, you may remember back in August when federal judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google illegally monopolized the search market. []
Saying that the $26 billion that they paid to make their search engine the default option on smartphones and web browsers effectively blocked their competitors from success in the market. []
And by securing that monopoly, the judge said that Google was able to hike online advertising prices without consequences. []
Now, when this ruling first dropped, we didn’t know for sure what the DOJ was going to ask regarding changes to solve this problem.
But we may finally have an answer to that question.
With Bloomberg reporting that the Justice Department plans on asking Mehta to force Google to sell off Chrome. []
A sale that reportedly could fetch as much as $20 billion.
As for why Chrome, Bloomberg cites sources saying that the DOJ knows Chrome is a key access point for people to use the Google search engine. []
And losing Chrome could be a serious hit for Google - it is the world’s most popular browser and owning it is a key part of Google’s ad business.
Through Chrome, the company is able to see activity from signed-in users and use that data to more effectively target promotions - which makes up most of its revenue. []
Not to mention that they’ve been using Chrome to direct users to its AI product, Gemini.
Now, Google has already promised to appeal and certainly doesn’t have anything positive to say about this latest development.
With their vice president of regulatory affairs saying that the DOJ, quote, “continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case.” []
And adding,
“The government putting its thumb on the scale in these ways would harm consumers, developers and American technological leadership at precisely the moment it is most needed.”
But it’s important to note that this isn’t a diddly-done deal yet.
This is just one of several recommendations from the DOJ that Judge Mehta will be considering.
And there’s also the matter of finding a buyer from Chrome - not a lot of companies have $20 billion lying around.
And the companies that could afford it and would want to buy it, like Amazon, are already facing their own anti-trust scrutiny. []
With a Bloomberg analyst saying he thinks Chrome’s sale is, quote, “extremely unlikely” but that maybe OpenAI could take an interest, saying,
“That would give it both distribution and an ads business to complement its consumer chatbot subscriptions.” []
Anyway, it’s going to be a while yet before we know exactly what the future of Google looks like.
With Judge Mehta scheduling a hearing in April of next year to decide what changes will be required and planning to issue the final ruling next August. []
But I would love to know your thoughts about this in those comments down below.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(760x360:762x362)/sean-diddy-combs-pre-grammy-gala-052924-1-1b160e265c374696881d1493f07b19a6.jpg){kind=link}
