First American Pope Sparks Backlash, AOC Bernie Sanders Hypocrisy Scandal, & Today's News
PDS Published 05/08/2025
-
It’s an American!
Right, today after just one day and 24 minutes, the Conclave to elect a new pope ended.[]
People in St. Peters Square got to see white smoke blow from the chimney of the Sistine Chappel, with that greeted by cheers equivalent to the Eras Tour.
And we later learned that 69-year-old Robert Francis Prevost will be the next pope and has taken the name Leo XIV.
He is from Chicago originally, but holds dual citizenship both in the states and in Peru, where he served for two decades. []
Back in 2023, he was appointed by Pope Francis to run the Vatican office in charge of selecting bishops.
And even though the headlines are running with the news that we have the first American Pope, according to the New York Times, he spent much of his life outside of the U.S. []
But his American roots are still significant, with NBC News explaining that:
“The decision to elect an American goes against conventional wisdom, which has held that the United States holds enough power in the world already.”[]
He spoke primarily in Italian during his first address, first saying “peace be with you” to the crowd, with reports noting that peace was a major part of his speech.[]
As for his politics, some outlets have referred to him as a centrist, but the AP also noted he was part of a “revolutionary” effort to add a few women to the voting bloc that advances bishop nominations to the Pope. [][]
Though, he also reportedly opposes ordaining women as deacons.[]
Regarding LGBTQ+ issues, his thoughts are potentially unclear as he has not spoken on the subject in a while. []
But, some believe he is less likely to curry favor with the LGBTQ+ community than Francis, though he is similar to Francis when it comes to the environment and migrant outreach. []
With the Times saying he is overall more discreet and reserved and will likely be a stylistically different pope than Francis was. []
So it’s kind of a vague and mixed bag there.
But of course, we’s only been the Pope for a few minutes so like, we will have to see what his papacy has in store for us.
But I would love to know your thoughts on this.
-
Bernie Sanders is not sorry for using a private jet on his Fighting the Oligarchy tour.
Right, conservatives have been up in arms since Fox News published a video showing Sanders Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exiting a chartered plane for several West Coast stops on their massively popular tour.
With the outlet claiming that the plane in question was the Bombardier Challenger private jet, operated by Ventura Air Services.
And according to their website, the jet can cost up to $15,000 an hour.
Beyond that, Fox also reported that FEC filings they obtained showed that Sanders’ campaign committee had spent, quote:
“over $221,000 chartering private jets during the first quarter of 2025.”
With the article then going on to accuse both Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez of being hypocritical for flying on private jets while championing the Green New Deal and what Fox called “aggressive” climate change policy.
And then specifically taking aim at Sanders, noting that he also spent a lot of money on private jets during his presidential campaign in 2020, writing:
“Sanders has long been ridiculed for relying on luxury private planes while crisscrossing the country, warning Americans about climate change and the threats of billionaires seizing political power. Despite his Democratic socialist platform advocating for universal healthcare, the Green New Deal and ending wealth inequality, Sanders flying private has become infamous.”
Right, and that sentiment was echoed by many others who claimed it was hypocritical for Sanders and AOC to be spending so much money on private jets to tour around the country talking about fighting corporate interests and the uber wealthy.
With lots of conservative media outlets publishing articles slamming the two, running headlines like: “Eco-warriors AOC, Bernie Sanders took $15K-per-hour private jet to attend ‘Fighting Oligarchy’ rally”
You also had many top conservative voices chiming in, calling them hypocrites.[][][]
Some, including Libs of TikTok, also pointing out that AOC has previously railed against CEOs and others using private jets.[]
With Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene writing:[]
“AOC is a hypocrite and a liar and Bernie is an old weak mainstream Democrat.”
And then going on to take personal shots at the two, calling Sanders “a joke” and slamming AOC for refusing to debate her, saying that her colleague a “little twit” who is “too scared and stupid.”
But the reason we’re talking about all this today is because Sanders has now clapped back in an interview Bret Baier on Fox News:
BAIER: “You’ve gotten criticized from other people. Free Beacon says ‘Bernie Sanders spent $221,000 on private jets [amid the] Fighting Oligarchy Tour, paid for by Friends of Bernie Sanders.’ That you’ve spent millions of dollars in campaign funds on private jet travel over the years. How do you push back on both of those things?”
SANDERS: “When’s the last time you saw Donald Trump during a campaign mode at National Airport?”
BAIER: “No, no, no. It doesn’t. But he’s also not fighting the oligarchy.”
SANDERS: “No. You run a campaign and you do three or four five rallies in a week, the only way you can get around to talk to 30,000 people,” Sanders said. “You think I’m going to be sitting on a waiting line at United while, what, thirty thousand people are waiting around. It’s the only way you can get around. No apologies for that. That’s what campaign travel is about. We’ve done it in the past, we’re going to do it in the future.” 00:01 - 00:46
But, unsurprisingly, you had a lot of conservatives slamming that response, with “Bernie Sanders” trending on X this morning.
Many people accusing him of being a hypocrite and looking down on the Americans he claims he is trying to reach with the Fighting Oligarchy tours.[][][]
Writing things like:
“Bernie Sanders essentially said hes not a peasant like us, that’s why he flies on a Jet…”[]
But you also had some people defending Sanders, this including the likes of Andrew Yang, who wrote:
“Bernie Sanders is 83 and had to be in multiple states in the same day. In that situation you fly private.”[]
You also had Mark Shanahan, an expert in American politics at the University of Surrey, saying that the this is a matter of “principle v pragmatism,” arguing:
“Sanders would no doubt prefer to travel the country in a less gas guzzling manner but recognises the need for bespoke travel if he is to spread his message to the maximum number of people in the shortest time.”
And going on to note that he could could forgo in-person rallies for online engagement, but “his rallies are working,” adding:
“People want to see political figures on the ground, talking to them directly and answering questions - especially in this period of disruptive government.”
With him also noting that Sanders’ private jet use “pales into insignificance compared to the estimated $23m and risingh it has cost taxpayers to cover President Trump's visits to his golf resorts so far in his second Administration.”
Right, and that’s something that others have also echoed, saying that at least Bernie and AOC are getting important messages out and actually connecting with people on the ground.[][][][][][][]
And arguing that the conservatives who are railing against this don’t actually care about environmentalism or wealth inequality, they just want something to hold over Democrats.
But, on that note, I’d really love to know what your opinion on all this — where do you fall on this debate?
-
Then I have two pieces of news related to UnitedHealthcare and Luigi Mangione.
First up is the news that investors are accusing UnitedHealth of misleading them and concealing how the business was being damaged by backlash following the killing of CEO Brian Thompson.
That’s what is being alleged in a new class action lawsuit brought against the company.
And specifically, the investors claim that UnitedHealth “artificially inflated” its stock price by refusing to change its 2025 net earnings forecast to factor in how its operations would be impacted by Thompson’s killing and the controversy around it.
Right, according to the suit, the day before Thompson was killed in December, the company had initially forecast earnings per share of $29.50 to $30.
But in January — a full month after his death — UnitedHealth refused to change the forecast and stuck by their initial projection.
But the investors say that the projection should have changed because, before Thompson’s death, the company used a strategy that allowed them to deny more claims than their competitors in the industry.
So in response to the widespread public outrage and scrutiny following his death, UnitedHealth shifted its strategy so it was denying fewer claims.
BUT the plaintiffs say that the company failed to disclose those changes, which they argue would have also impacted the earnings projections.
Arguing that the initial forecast was based on the use of “aggressive, anti-consumer tactics” that the company was no longer deploying, but that were necessary to achieve their original earnings goal.
Then, last month, UnitedHealth finally revised its 2025 outlook, cutting the forecast for adjusted profit per share to between $26 and $26.50.
A move that caused their stocks to tank by over 22%, wiping out nearly $119 billion of market value.
With the shareholders alleging that they “suffered significant losses and damages” as a result of the company's “wrongful acts and omissions,” which ultimately led to “the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities.”
Now, as far as how UnitedHealth has responded, a spokesperson told reporters that the company “denies any allegations of wrongdoing and intends to defend the matter vigorously.”
And that brings us to the second piece of news I want to hit on, which is that organizers for Luigi Mangione’s legal defense fund announced that donations have now surpassed $1 million.
With that milestone being driven in part by a surge of supporters who gave money on Mangione’s 27th birthday this Tuesday.
And in a statement, the organizers said these contributions represent “a step forward in pursuing justice for Mr. Mangione.”
Noting that the fundraiser — hosted on GiveSendGo — has received over 28,000 individual donations with an average contribution of $20, and adding:
“The milestone was reached because of the continued resonance of Mr. Mangione’s story.”
“He has become a contemporary folk hero, understood by millions to be a brave, righteous American concerned with the lived experience of the common man.”
With the organizers also noting that they hope to continue until they reach $1.5 million.
But it doesn’t seem like any amount of money will likely change the material circumstances for Mangione, who faces both federal and state charges and the potential of the death penalty.
But, I mean…. I guess you never know…
-
Political content on streaming platforms is growing fast.
That is what we learned from a new report titled “Politics in Livestreaming,” which saw that this kind of content had a 56% spike in yearly viewership in 2024.
And while last year’s election was a major catalyst for this bump, a lot of that growth has sustained into this year.
According to the report, in the first quarter of 2025, “political content nearly matched the volume of gaming streams on Twitch” accounting for over 11% of all content watched.
And if you look at data over time, you can see that in the first quarter of this year, political content was watched for 3.4 billion hours, which yes, is a slight dip from the previous quarter when the election took place.
But if you compare it to the Quarter One of 2024, there were only 2.6 billion hours watched, so it is a pretty substantial jump year over year.
And it is interesting to see where people are watching this stuff, right, because at least so far in 2025, Twitch had the largest share of political streaming channels, followed by YouTube, then Kick.
But YouTube dominated hours watched, taking up nearly 98% of that pie.
And as the report explained, this is because different platforms attract different kinds of streams, adding:
“At first glance, this imbalance might seem odd, but it actually makes sense. The vast majority of political content on YouTube is produced by major news outlets that often broadcast 24/7 and regularly attract thousands (sometimes even hundreds of thousands) of viewers.”
“Twitch, on the other hand, lacks these heavyweight viewership drivers. Instead, it’s home to hundreds of passionate creators who occasionally dive into political discussions, more like passerby commentators than deeply engaged political voices, but active nonetheless.”
Right, so YouTube is getting a massive lift from mainstream news outlets that livestream their broadcasts or presidential press conferences and other major events.
Whereas Twitch hosts more of an independent creator-led charge.
So it also made sense to see that the biggest streaming channel on YouTube Live was Al Jazeera
But then when you hop over to Twitch, Hasan Piker is the most-watched political creator there.
Meanwhile on Rumble, the crown went to Right Side broadcasting Network,
With the report kind of noting that, while there are exceptions to every rule, you can sort of see a political divide among platforms, with Rumble specifically popular on the right and among alternative political bloggers, while Twitch does have a bigger segment of those who lean left.
And because, when it comes to individual political creators, Hasan stood out so much, the report actually analyzed some of his viewership data specifically to sort of paint a picture of a left-leaning American news streamer.
And while Americans make up the biggest chunk of his viewers, they still account for less than half of those who watch him.
Right, taking up around 48% of the share, while Canada comes in at 9%, the UK and Germany at around 5% each, then followed by many other countries that contribute to a pretty large overall international audience.
But it also makes sense that international viewers are flocking to American creators because, well, Americans have a large presence on these platforms, accounting for 23% of channels, followed by India at under 11%.
And as for why there has been such a substantial increase in people streaming political content, the report noted:
“As global tensions rise and political discourse becomes increasingly polarized, the demand for real-time information and commentary has never been higher. Livestreaming platforms have emerged as crucial spaces for audiences seeking not only news but also interpretation, debate, and a sense of connection.”
And this is something politicians are at least kind of leaning into.
The likes of AOC and Tim Walz partnering together for a stream during the election to appeal to young men, knowing that’s where the audience was.
Then right now, you have the White House allowing “new media” into the press room.
And that has largely been used to allow right-wing streamers in, people like Tim Pool, it still shows a shift in who is covering the White House and how it is being covered.
And so I would love to know your thoughts on this, especially since you are watching me, and while I’m not a streamer really, I am making news and political content on these platforms associated with streaming.
So any thoughts you have, I want to hear.
Go to Ground News to see beyond the headlines and stay fully informed without feeling overwhelmed. Subscribe today through my link for 40% off unlimited access.
-
Crypto has been described as the “Wild West” of the financial world… and that might be true in more ways than one.
I’m talking about the growing trend of ransoms and kidnappings of crypto people across the globe.
The latest examples come from Paris, where there’s been a string of crypto-related kindappings.
And on more than one occasion the kidnappers cut fingers off to prove they were serious.
One of the most recent examples happened late last week -- although it takes a bit for English-language sources to start trickling these stories out.
Police say an older man was grabbed off the streets of Paris and that "The victim turned out to be the father of a man who made his fortune in cryptocurrencies, and the incident was accompanied by a ransom demand.”
Due to privacy laws they didn’t release the name of the victim or his son.[]
But we do know that the hostage was taken about 35 miles outside of Paris.
Local media reports that he was held there for about three days, during which he had a finger cut off.[]
However it looks like his son didn’t pay the ransom and instead went to the police who acted pretty quickly.
Because they conducted a raid on the place and rescued the man.
In total five people were arrested in connection with this case, and the suspects are likely going to be charged with kidnapping and “with torture or a barbaric act.”[]
All of which could land them a ton of years in prison depending on a lot of factors.
But this is just the latest crypto-kidnapping in France.
Back in January David Balland -- who co-founded the crypto-wallet Ledger -- was also kidnapped alongside his wife.
There were then attempts to extort the other co-founders of Ledger for their release.
Across two days the famous French GIGN -- which is a police group well known for rescuing hostages -- liberated Ballard before finding his wife tied up in a car the next day.
Thankful she was alive.
However in that case it looks like Ballard also had a finger chopped off and sent as “proof” the ransomers were serious.
It’s not just happening in France either.
Late last year Dean Skurka -- the CEO of a crypto holding company -- was kidnapped for ransom in Toronto before being freed.
Either way this begs the question: why go after crypto people?
Probably because they’re nerds and easy to pick on.
Or, equally as likely, it’s ‘cause they can have lots of money,
But another possible reason is that this is money that is relatively “easy” to get a hold of.
Right, in a traditional ransom you’d either need to get it paid in cash -- which has risks of being caught.
Or have a bank wire you the money. And with today’s modern banking system it wouldn’t be hard for them to claw that money back eventually if they wanted to. []
Crypto doesn’t have to deal with that.
Instead would-be ransomers need to just “wash” the assets by putting them in one of the various services that tries to scramble where tokens are going.[]
This makes it EXTREMELY difficult to track which token went where -- which is supposed to be one of the "accountability" features of crypto.
However it doesn’t make it impossible if a team really wanted to dedicate itself to figuring it out.
This is a big enough problem that companies like AnchorWatch -- which is a Bitcoin insurance company -- offer policies against so-called Wrench attacks.
In the case someone has their money stolen because of an attack like this they offer upwards of $100 million in coverage.
Although that’s only helpful after-the-fact and it won’t stop someone from getting kidnapped.
That would probably require security, and considering that’s what “Traditionally” mega-wealthy people do it’s maybe time the crypto crowd starts doing the same.
So if you got a ton of crypto my advice is send it to my wallet… or else you better start learning how to type with a few less fingers.
-
Texas AG Ken Paxton just busted an illegal “vote-harvesting” scheme in Frio County.
At least that’s what he’s saying, but notably, local activists? They beg to differ.
See, Paxton, who is now actually running for Senate, has long echoed Trump’s baseless claims of widespread election fraud.
And with that, he has aggressively prosecuted alleged violations, upending lives in the process and ultimately getting very few convictions.
Notably, with Latino civil rights groups claiming the crackdown is political – pointing to the fact that raids have often targeted Democratic Black and mostly Latino voters and volunteers, even some who were in their 70s and 80s.
And saying, as a result, there’s been a chilling effect on volunteers and community groups that for decades have struggled to increase election participation in a state that actually has one of the nation’s turnout rates. []
But on the flip side, you have Paxton saying:
“The people of Texas deserve fair and honest elections, not backroom deals and political insiders rigging the system.”
“Elected officials who think they can cheat to stay in power will be held accountable. No one is above the law.”
And with that, he announced that six individuals — including a county judge, two City Council members and a former county election administrator — had been arrested in connection with this alleged vote-harvesting scheme. []
Right, one individual is charged with tampering or fabricating physical evidence. []
And five, all with ties to Democratic candidates, are being directly accused of illegal vote harvesting –
Which usually involves knocking on doors and asking if volunteers can deliver completed absentee or mail-in ballots to voting centers or ballot drop boxes. []
With a key thing being that this isn’t something that’s illegal everywhere.
Right, some states allow voters to give their ballot to a spouse, neighbor or volunteer to submit it on their behalf.
Spurred by Trump, however, many Republicans have started increasingly attacking programs that allow voters to give their ballots to anyone other than election officials.
Even though supporters of those programs say they make voting easier, especially for elderly and disabled voters.[]
And in the case of Texas, in 2021, Governor Greg Abbott signed an overhaul of the state’s election laws that included new restrictions on vote harvesting, making it illegal to deliver a ballot for a third party.
And so, ultimately, even if the charges against these individuals lead to convictions – which, again, had been rare so far – they may not actually be what normally comes to mind for a lot of people when they think of voter fraud.
-
Nintendo isn’t helping their reputation right now after the game Palworld revealed that it was being forced to change MORE things in the game in response to a Nintendo lawsuit.
We’ve actually talked about this lawsuit before, it’s just been going on for years now.
The short version is that Palword was a new game that mixed survival games with “monster collecting.”
Going to call a spade a spade here, it very much felt like Pokemon was a massive influence.
But calling it a Pokemon ripoff doesn’t make sense either because it’s also a fundamentally different game.
Either way, Nintendo sued them.
Considering both are Japanese studios, this means it’s been playing out in Japan which is not great for Palworld.
Japanese copyright and patent law is EXTREMELY strict, not to mention that Nintendo and the Pokemon company are all massive companies there.
Palworld promised to fight the lawsuit while at the same time changing aspects of the game -- such as removing the whole Pokeball-esque mechanic.
Now you just “Summon” your pals next to you.
At the time it was widely speculated that this change was in response to Nintedo’s lawsuit, but Palworld was silent… until this morning.
They released a massive tweet that not only admitted they changed stuff because of the lawsuit, but that they’d also be changing even more.
Like they admitted that “On November 30th, 2024, we released Patch v0.3.11 for Palworld. This patch removed the ability to summon Pals by throwing Pal Spheres and instead changed it to a static summon next to the player. Several other game mechanics were also changed with this patch. As many have speculated, these changes were indeed a result of the ongoing litigation.” []
They went on to say they weren’t happy about the changes but warned that not changing things would’ve led to an even worse player experience.
Then came the even worse news:
“Furthermore, we regret to inform our players that… we must make yet another compromise. From this patch onward, gliding will be performed using a glider rather than with Pals.”
That might seem like such a small change but gamers were not happy.
Lots of people saying things like “fuck Nintendo” and “Pokemon, yall are just weird at this point.”
Or even claiming that instead of making a good game, Nintendo/Pokemon are just using their patent to stifle competition.
Which was at the heart of a lot of criticism, with takes like:
“I don’t understand how this is only a Palworld thing. I can play ark and glide with a Dino across the map. No way this is patented right?” []
And the streamer Pirate Software -- who has a fairly successful game of their own -- tweeted:
“Game Mechanics should never be patented. All it does is bring down both developers and players for the sake of greed.
Nintendo isn't protecting Pokemon here, they are crushing any possible competition.” []
Some have come to Nintendo’s defense and claimed that Palworld is just a ripoff or that Palworld is getting way too close to Nintendo’s copyright and patents. []
But to that Pirate Softwarer said:
“Notice the entire post. They are going after them for gliding using pals as the glider and also bringing a pal out using a sphere.
Copyright the look of the pokeball, the sound it makes, the pokemon that come out of it, etc.
The moment you allow patenting game mechanics you get the removal of any companion in any object that is summoned from said object. You also get the removal of mini-games during loading scenes. You also remove features like the nemesis system from being anywhere else.
Game mechanics patents destroy creativity.” []
And there he’s referencing a few other copyrights companies have made within the gaming space that are similarly criticzed for being super lame since they don’t allow other developers to use them.
For example, the Shadows of Mordor games used a widely-regarded system that allowed monsters to “remember” you and change their behaviors, etc. the more often you encountered them.
Warner Bros. shut that studio down and now the mechanic is stuck behind a Warner Bros. patent until 2036.
Despite all the outrage I think this dude had it right when he said:
“So many people will say "Fuck Nintendo" but won't cancel their Switch 2 preorder.” []
So what do you think?
Should game mechanics be patent-able?
On the one hand they do have a technical aspect that legally falls under copyright.
But on the other gaming is an interactive artistic medium, so should that change how patents in the space are approached?
And could NIntendo ever be a big enough bully for you to cancel a Switch 2 preorder?
Use code DEFRANCO at Incogni to get an exclusive 60% off.
