- Y'all regardless of your opinion of Logan Paul,
you love him, you hate him, you barely familiar with him,
I don't know if you saw the news that broke
right before today's show.
Logan Paul got scammed for $3.5 million.
So long story short, but I'll link to Logan's video
down below if you wanna see it in its full context.
We have this guy, Matt, he's a collector.
He buys this case of Pokemon boxes for $2.7 million,
then sells that case to his buddy, Logan Paul
for $3.5 million.
Then I have to wonder if he mentioned this to Logan
before he sold it to him in the video that Logan uploaded
that Matt says.
- The reason why I was mostly concerned
was because the person who brought it to me,
he had so many inconsistencies,
so much inconsistencies on the stories.
It was like three, four different stories,
that was my issue.
- And while there were rumors that this could be fake,
there was a belief that there was at least
some level of trust here
because the BBCE said,
"Hey, this looks like a legitimate box."
And so in Logan's video,
they have someone come from the Baseball Card Exchange
to verify once again.
And once they opened this thing,
they realized some things are off.
They open one of the cases and they have packs of G.I. Joe.
- We all got duped.
Agreed?
- [Man] Yeah. - Yup.
- This is the biggest fraud
in the entire history of Pokemon.
- If Jacob knew where it was (censored)
- [Man] That's where it is (censored)
- That is where I'm at, right?
'Cause there's gonna be a whole nother process
that goes into this.
I would have never purchased this shit
If it wasn't BBCE rep.
We only buy it because of that.
But because of that,
I felt confident it was legit, it was good.
- And even though I know that Logan Paul
probably has just way, way, way, way more money
and this doesn't necessarily like devastate him,
It's hard not to get sick,
the thought of losing $3.5 million.
But here's the thing when a lot of tension
is gonna on Matt, on Logan Paul,
the other guy that they showcase
that like his story didn't add up,
people possibly most heavily hit from this
is gonna be the BBCE.
You verified something and it turned out to be a fraud,
which is why we saw the BBCE post
on their Twitter account today.
"On March, 2021, we were asked
"to provide our good faith opinion and verify
"that the Pokemon case had not been previously opened
"or tampered with.
"We evaluated it, and in our opinion,
"the case was in its original state.
"This past Saturday, we opened that case
'to verify our opinion and were extremely disappointed
"to learn it was inauthentic.
"We have authenticated tens of thousands
"of sealed card products for nearly 20 years
"and have meticulously developed a structure and framework
"to provide our expert opinion."
And then adding, "We are re-evaluating our approach
"to all sealed cases going forward."
And closing, "We have also decided to hold the review
"of Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh! cases or boxes
"until we assess and revise our process
"to avoid this happening in the future."
And so with all that, it would be understandable
if you have this community that's concerned
if they ever use the BBCE.
Okay, if we boil down your business,
it comes down to one thing.
You are in the trust business and I don't know
how you trust after seeing this.
Yes, it is very possible this is an outlier,
but it was a $3.5 million outlier.
To steal something from my seven year old,
this is a next level oof.
But on that happy note,
welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show.
Hey, hit that like button
if you want me to punch you in the throat.
And let's just jump into the rest of the news of the day.
And then, let's talk about why this Michigan judge
is under fire right now.
And so the way the story goes,
you have a 72-year old man by the name of Burhan Chowdhury.
He's a cancer patient,
and he was appearing in a hearing via Zoom on Monday
after receiving a citation for failing to maintain his yard.
And in that hearing, he tried to explain his situation
to judge Alexis G. Krot,
but take a look at how it went down.
(heavy breathing)
- [Chowdhury] I explained before,
I am a cancer patient, very old, ma'am.
And I am a cancer patient.
I was then very weak and-
- [Chowdhury's son] He was sick, he was sick.
- [Chowdhury] Very weak, and this time of rainy season,
I could not look after this thing.
- [Judge Krot] Be ashamed of yourself.
If I could give you jail time on this, I would.
The fine is $100, pay it by February 1st.
You've gotta get that cleaned up.
That is totally inappropriate.
- [Chowdhury] Oh my God.
- At this point, the man's son tries to explain
the situation himself saying
that he cleaned up the area since then,
but the judge seemingly has no sympathy and continues.
- [Chowdhury's son] I cleaned up the-
- [Judge Krot] Do you see that photo?
- [Chowdhury's son] Yes.
- [Chowdhury] I'm very sick, ma'am.
- [Judge Krot] That is shameful, shameful!
The neighbors should not have to look at that.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
- [Chowdhury] Yes, I am sorry ma'am.
- The Chowdhury's son later trying
to give more context and background to reporters
saying that his dad was diagnosed with lymph node cancer
back in 2019, struggling with health issues
like high blood pressure.
Meanwhile, his mother faces health problems
after falling down the stairs and hurting her back.
With the son saying that he usually helps keep up the yard
for his parents, but he couldn't because he had to travel
to Bangladesh for three months.
Now the family has since paid the fine,
but the son told reporters that he was shocked
by the judge's remarks saying,
"That's ridiculous.
"You can't give a 72-year old person jail time
"for not cleaning an alley."
And he's by no means the only person frustrated.
People all over the internet,
labeling the judge is rude, heartless, unprofessional,
with many saying, "No, if anyone should be ashamed
"in this situation, it's her."
Others also arguing that she was too cruel
to be a fair judge in any circumstance.
You know, for me, I feel like if anything
this story shows me kind of like the other side
of, you know, every now and then you see on social media,
like some feel-good story, we try to attribute it to this.
It'd be like 72-year old cancer patient
can't do lawn, neighbors come in and help.
We all feel good for a second, feel like human beings
aren't just fucking horrible to one another.
But instead in this situation,
we see what happens when people aren't neighborly
and unexpectedly nice,
and they get thrown into a legal system with judge Karen
who seemingly wants to throw people in jail for a bad lawn.
I get that it looks bad,
but what a fucking weird shitty thing for a person in power
to go like, "You're gonna have
"to pay a hundred dollar fine,
"but I literally wish I could put you in jail."
If this case in this situation is any indication,
judges like Alexis Krot are the rot in our justice system.
And then, you know, new year, same shit, we have Joe Rogan,
Spotify and misinformation in the news again.
And this time that's because a group of 270 doctors,
scientists and other medical workers
have signed an open letter to Spotify,
urgently audio platform to implement
a misinformation policy with them specifically
citing the Joe Rogan experience podcast.
Well like I said, this is kind of just
the latest thing that we've seen.
Over the past year, we've seen a lot of backlash,
though also a lot of support.
But as far as the backlash over the last year,
you had people calling them out
for discouraging vaccinations
saying the young people really don't need a vaccine.
Mostly equating mRNA vaccines to gene therapy,
incorrectly stating the vaccines
cause super mutations of the virus.
With many, according to the Times,
he's repeatedly made other claims against the vaccine,
generally downplaying the severity of COVID-19.
Most recently, while I was on vacation,
he invited Dr. Robert Malone on the show
in an episode that's been widely criticized
by health experts.
With the doctor who signed the letter to Spotify,
noting that Dr. Malone is actually suspended
from Twitter for COVID-19 misinformation,
then adding that he, quote, "Used the JRE platform
"to further promote numerous baseless claims,
"including several falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines
"and an unfounded theory that the societal leaders
"have hypnotized the public."
And writing that, notably,
"Dr. Malone is one of the two recent JRE guests
"who has compared pandemic policies to the Holocaust.
"These actions are not only objectionable and offensive,
"but also medically and culturally dangerous."
We also have the medical workers in this open letter.
Yes, noting Joe's history of touting misinformation himself
and adding, "By allowing the propagation
"of false and societal harmful assertion,
"Spotify is enabling its hosted media
"to damage public trust in scientific research
"and sow doubt in the credibility of data-driven guidance
"offered by medical professionals."
And continuing, "We are calling on Spotify
"to take action against the mass misinformation events
"which continue to occur on its platform.
"With an estimated 11 million listeners per episode,
"JRE is the world's largest podcast
"and has tremendous influence.
"Though Spotify has a responsibility
"to mitigate the spread of misinformation on its platform,
the company presently has no misinformation policy."
So, looking through this and they're not necessarily asking
to remove Joe Rogan entirely
or even remove the episode with Dr. Malone,
but rather for Spotify to create, have,
and follow a misinformation policy on the platform
that their users have to follow.
With the letter, adding that the consequences
of this misinformation are real.
Noting that the average Joe Rogan listener is 24 years old,
which puts them in a safer group
but still puts them in an age group
that is 12 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID
if they're unvaccinated.
And with all this, you have one of the doctors
who signed this letter, Dr. Katrine Wallace,
an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois Chicago,
telling Rollingstone that Rogan is a quote,
"Menace to public health."
And adding, "These are fringe ideas not backed in science,
"and having it on a huge platform
"makes it seem there are two sides to this issue,
"and there are really not."
But I'll tell you that is where we are
with this story right now.
I mean, we can wait and see what happens,
but like I said, I think it's a new year, same shit.
Because I really don't think we've seen anything
from Spotify that seems to signal anything other,
we're going to let the market decide.
Depending on where people stand,
people are going to attribute all reasons
to why Spotify is doing that.
Some that support Rogan, and/or just Spotify doing this,
are gonna say, "Hey, they're defending free speech."
Whereas others are gonna say,
"Well, it's just a business showing
the dollars lead the day."
That they don't care about the impact
that misinformation has in the real world.
It all comes down to a return on their investment
which they have a massive investment in Joe.
Now that said, there's a story
and of course, now I'll pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts here regarding that last part?
Like where do you stand?
One side, the other, somewhere in the middle?
Why, why not, let me know.
But from that, I wanna take a second
to thank the sponsor of today's show, Noom.
Personally for me, using Noom has been less
about like some sort of a diet
and more about helping me develop healthier habits
and holding myself accountable
for my food and exercise choices.
And using that as an excuse with a new year ahead,
one of my goals is to stay hydrated,
and Noom helps me track my water intake which is work.
And instead of just not drinking water
until I really need water, and then I get a taste of water,
and then I drink an entire liter of water
which isn't the way to do it, I've got Noom helping me.
Noom is disrupting behaviors and routines
using proven psychological
and cognitive behavioral therapy practice
like suggesting little changes
that turn into huge health improvements in my lifestyle.
For instance, Noom suggested adding more
of my favorite greens to my meals.
I mean, I knew I like broccoli,
but let's say recently I found at my age
it is very important to have foods with fiber in my diet
just for a general stomach reason.
Plus yeah, I'm making healthier choices.
I'm also hydrating myself with water-based veggies.
So then full circle, I'm on track with my hydration goal.
So any day can be your day one
if right now you're looking for a start
on your 2022 health and wellness goals,
go to Noom.com/PHIL and take Noom's 30-second quiz for free.
That's Noon.com/PHIL.
And then, looking overseas,
we should talk about Prime Minister Boris Johnson
being just under fire right now.
So to bring you up to speed,
for the past month and a half,
Johnson has been facing severe criticism
after it was revealed
that he and other Downing Street officials
attended parties during the mandated coronavirus lockdown.
And specifically, Johnson attended
and maybe even hosted a party in May of 2020,
right when the lockdowns began.
For those who don't remember, during this time,
there were no gatherings allowed
and people were only allowed to go outside
for things like grocery shopping, working out,
allowing your silly hair to flutter in the wind.
But on a serious note, no matter how you try to spend this,
it's a bad luck to be partying
right after you told the entire nation to stay home.
But like any seasoned politician will tell you,
it's not always necessarily this scandal
that will take you down,
but rather the attempt to cover it up.
The reason this could really be a problem for Johnson
is that after the UK's cabinet office
launched an investigation into this matter,
staff at Downing Street were allegedly told
to clean up their phone just in case
and told to get rid of anything
that could look bad, according to the Independent.
And according to a statement
from the Information Commissioner's Office,
that alone could be a crime depending on the circumstances.
With the spokesperson for the agency
telling insider, "Relevant information that exists
"in the private correspondence channels
"of public authorities should be available
"and included in responses to information request received.
"Erasing, destroying or concealing information
"within the scope of a Freedom of Information request
"with the intention of preventing its disclosure
"is a criminal offense under section 77
"of the Freedom of Information Act."
So, Johnson's office purposefully hid information
from an investigation or FOIA requests,
that could be a serious issue.
But also even if the cabinet inquiry
does not find anything wrong with the party itself,
there is a chance that an agency
like the Information Commissioner could crack down
on the alleged efforts to hide information.
And hell, let's say somehow these investigations
are never conclusive.
The Labor party is already trying to use this as a chance
to try and oust Johnson.
I mean take yesterday, for example.
You had Johnson trying to apologize for going to the party,
only for Labor party leader, Keir Starmer
to ask if Johnson would resign.
- The party is over prime minister.
The only question is, will the British public kick him out?
Will this party kick him out,
or will he do the decent thing and resign?
- And so as far as what is going to happen with Johnson,
we're gonna have to wait and see.
I mean hell, even before all of this,
he and a large number of members of his party
not seeing eye to eye on a number of issues.
For example, back in December,
almost a hundred members of his own party
voted against a Bill that he was pushing through
regarding COVID-19 mandates.
Yeah, for now we're gonna ultimately have to wait
and see what happens.
Though in general, of course,
I'd love to know your thoughts,
but especially if you live in the UK,
I'd love to know your thoughts around Johnson
and everything that's happening right now.
And then Prince Andrew's no good, very bad week
just got even worse for him.
Yes, because the news broke today
that he been stripped of his military titles
and his affiliations with numerous charities
and organizations.
And that announcement regarding Queen Elizabeth's son
came just one day after a judge in New York ruled
that a sexual abuse lawsuit against him could proceed.
With Buckingham Palace saying in a statement this morning,
"With The Queen's approval and agreement,
"the Duke of York's military affiliations
"and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen.
"The Duke of York will continue not to undertake
"any public duties and is defending this case
"as a private citizen.
With Royal sources also telling reporters that,
"Andrew will no longer use the title,
"His Royal Highness in any official capacity."
Which sounds like if anything inside the palace,
they're probably calling him,
"He who should not be named."
Hell, by next week, maybe Buckingham Palace
will be like, "Prince Andrew, it sounds familiar,
"maybe he got a coffee for someone once."
But as far as the case at hand,
as far as like, you know, the most recent developments,
you had Andrew's legal team previously filing a motion
to dismiss the civil suit filed against him
by Virginia Giuffre, who claims that she was trafficked
by Jeffrey Epstein and repeatedly forced to perform sex acts
with Andrew at the age of 17.
Now Andrew for his part has denied those claims
but the most recent thing is that on Wednesday,
a judge rejected his team's argument
that he was protected from legal jeopardy
by terms of a $500,000 settlement
between Giuffre and Epstein.
Which some could say is a weird defense
for someone that's like, "That didn't happen."
Yeah, I imagine the pressure on Buckingham Palace
and The Queen right now, it has to be massive.
The Queen has resisted pressure for years now
to make such a move.
But it appears that it's finally at a point
where there's not much to do.
I mean, even hours before this bombshell announcement,
The Queen received a letter from more than 150 military
saying that it was inconceivable
that Andrew maintained his military titles.
Yeah, this whole situation and case
is gonna be important for us to keep our eyes on.
And then, the Supreme Court dealt a massive blow
to Biden's vaccine mandates today.
Oh yeah, the Biden administration trying to use OSHA
to push through a mandate for large employers.
With the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration's emergency measure
going into effect on Monday,
saying that employers with more than 100 workers
must require their workers to either get vaccinated
or tested every week.
And ultimately today, in a vote of six to three,
the Supreme Court said, "Nah,"
or rather, "Although Congress has indisputably given OSHA
"the power to regulate occupational dangers,
"it has not giving that agency the power
"to regulate public health more broadly.
"Requiring the vaccination of 84 million Americans
"selected simply because they work for employers
"with more than 100 employees,
"certainly falls in the latter category."
But it also was not a complete loss
for the Biden administration.
Because Axios explained,
"In its second ruling, the court said
"that the Biden administration has the authority
"given by Congress to issue a vaccine mandate
"for healthcare workers at facilities
"that receive Medicare or Medicaid funds."
With the court saying of these two decisions,
"The challenges posed by a global pandemic
"do not allow a federal agency to exercise power
"that Congress has not conferred upon it.
"But at the same time,
"such unprecedented circumstances provide no grounds
"for limiting the exercise of authorities
"the agency has long been recognized to have."
Ultimately, that is where that story and today's show ends.
As always, thank you for watching, liking, being subscribed
to these daily dabs into the news.
My name is Philip DeFranco.
I love your faces and I'll see you next time.