Hasan Piker Shock Collar Allegations, Katie Porter Interview Disaster, & Trump's Chicago Invasion
PDS Published 10/08/2025
-
Is Hasan Piker abusing his dog Kaya?
That’s the latest crusade against Hasan after this clipped went viral yesterday:
@03:21-03:35
The sudden yelp after Hasan seems to reach off-screen has led MANY to claim that he’s using a shock collar against his dog, with many also now demanding Twitch ban him.
To back up this claim, people have been pointing to a ton of “evidence,” such as zooming in on the collar to “prove” it’s not a normal one.
Like here’s xQc looking at old footage that apparently shows the collar “blinking.”
And even in the stream where this happened, @03:24
Others have gone even further back to find old clips of Hasan admitting he OWNS a shock collar.
And just reading the tweet it sounds like a slam dunk, but in it Hasan says;
[paraphrase: his old roommate had one for his dogs. Hasan says “I couldn't do it. I still have it.”] @0:01-0:24
But watching the clip it’s clear he says “I couldn’t do it.”
Obviously, things can change over time, so what else have people dug up?
Some of the clips people found aren’t about a shock collar per se, but instead about how tight it is like this one:
Because of all this, it wasn’t hard to find people calling Hasan every name under the sun,
And for a lot of those people, this was just another example of Hasan being the single worst human being of all time.
But a lot of people also took the opportunity to just make fun of the suation.
The streamer Destiny tweeted this out.
xQc compared this to when Alinity infamously threw her cat off of her and got banned for it.
While another popular tweet just said “release the hostages” and had a photo of Hasan holding his dog. []
There was also another angle people were critical of Hasan: they felt Kaya was being used as a prop and essentially “forced” to stay in frame.
But just scrubbing through his videos, you can see that there are large amounts of time when she isn’t there at all.
At the same time, there were also people defending Hasan by doing their own sleuthing.
For this group, the general consensus is that Kaya caught her dew claw on her bed and that’s what caused her to yelp -- and here’s the situation in slow motion.
And we also saw:
“She clips her paw. It's very obvious.
You are wilfully dumber than a dog if you choose to believe this. And care more about imagining the suffering of a single animal than millions of Palestinians.” []
But this had its own backlash, with Asmongold saying:
“You guys really need to stop invoking Palestine every time someone you like gets criticized. It doesn't help you, and it certainly doesn't help Palestinians It has nothing to do with this topic and you're effectively using their suffering as a shield for bad behavior.”
So how is Hasan defending himself?
Well, I slid into his DMs and asked him about it and this is what he said:
“Oh brother, I just woke up to a world of abuse. It’s one of the most insane brigades I’ve ever seen. I saw the clip, it’s unfortunate timing right as my stream crashed and I was ranting about the ISPS, but of course if you’re not familiar with me you’ll think i”m a monster.”
He went on to outline how Kaya has lots of time at the park before going on to say:
“Her ‘place’ command is there so she doesn’t lay on the hard ground and hurt her joints as a big dog -- but she is free to do whatever… As far as the collar, one I’ve seen people spread around is an airtag holdster. I have a bunch of different collars for her including a vibrating collar for communicating w/ her over long distance when she’s at the park… that collar can’t actually shock her.”
And he ended by saying that anyone who actually knows him is aware of how much he cares for the dog.
And even during the stream, he talked about Kaya’s “place” command and said essentially the same thing.
One thing that stood out is that Hasan said he “woke up to a world of abuse.”
But he already knew it was coming because by the time his stream ended, it was already going viral and he talked about it:
Obviously for Hasan haters, this isn’t enough and they continue to blast him, while others are still confused why Kaya has such a regimented life and why Hasan was so frustrated with her..
-
With him writing this morning that Chicago mayor Brandon Johnson:
“should be in jail for failing to protect Ice Officers! Governor Pritzker also!”[]
And this comes as Texas National Guard Troops have now arrived in Illinois after Trump authorized their deployment.
Which is just the latest stage of Trump sending the National Guard to cities with liberal leadership, claiming, often without evidence, that they are lawless, violent, and dealing with escalating crime.
Trump has specifically compared Chicago to a “war zone,” but JB Pritzker said if the city is a war zone, it’s the fault of the Trump administration and federal agents, telling CNN earlier this week:
“They are raiding neighborhoods where, instead of going after the bad guys, they are just picking up people who are brown and black and then checking their credentials, are you a US Citizen?” (1:24-1:33)
“They need to get out of Chicago. If they are not going to focus on the worst of the worst, which is what they said they were going to do, they need to get the heck out.” (2:09-2:17)
He also denounced Trump’s move to send in troops, vowing to fight their deployment and accusing Trump of carrying out an “authoritarian march” in Chicago and other blue cities. []
And both the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago have now sued to block the troops, arguing that this tactic is unconstitutional. []
And that was not the only action taken against this Trump administration this week, right, we talked yesterday about Mayor Johnson signing an “ice-free zone” executive order in Chicago yesterday, which prevents the agency from using city-owned property in their operations.
With Johnson saying that:
“Chicago stands firm in protecting the Constitutional rights of our residents and immigrant communities and upholding our democracy.”
But then, of course, that just led to Trump’s comments this morning saying he should be jailed alongside Pritzker or not protecting ICE officers in his city.
To which Johnson responded that:
“This is not the first time Trump has tried to have a Black man unjustly arrested. I’m not going anywhere.”[]
Pritzker also continuing his stand against Trump, writing that:[]
“I will not back down. Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives checking his power. What else is left on the path to full-blown authoritarianism?”
With tons of people noting that the threat to jail the two of them comes as Trump has repeatedly threatened legal action against politicians and others who oppose him.[]
But we will have to see how things play out in Chicago, right now, a hearing for the lawsuit to block troops has a hearing set for Thursday.
And I would love to know your thoughts in the meantime.
You’re 30 seconds away from being debt free with PDS Debt. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you at PDS Debt
-
KatiePorter nearly walked out of an interview with CBS after being pressed about her campaign’s stance on Trump voters in the state of California.
Right, Porter is running for Governor, and Julie Watts, who covers the state of California for CBS, just sat down with the pool of candidates for the job to discuss issues in the state.
And things quickly got heated between Porter and Watts during this question:
“What do you say to the 40% of CA voters, who you will need in order to win, who voted for Trump?”“How would I need them in order to win, ma'am?"“Well, unless you get 60% of the vote? You think you’ll get 60%, all of the people who did not vote for Trump will vote for you? That’s what you’re thinking?”“In a general election? Yes. If it is me versus a Republican, I think that I will win the people who did not vote for Trump.”“What if it is you vs another Democrat?”“I don’t intend that to be the case.” (13:43-14:10)
Watts then asks her how Porter can guarantee she would be the only Democrat, to which she suggested she has the support and name recognition to pull it off, before adding:
“I represented Orange County. I have represented a purple area. I have stood on my own two feet and won Republican votes before. That is not something every candidate in this race can say. (14;26-14:35)
“But you just said you don’t need those Trump voters.”“But you asked me if I needed them to win.”“So you…”“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?”“The question is the same thing I asked everybody. This is being called the ‘Empowering Voters to Stop Trump’s Power Grab.’ Every other candidate has answered this question, this is not…”“And I said I support it.”“And the question is, ‘What do you say to the 40% of voters who voted for Trump…”“Oh, I’m happy to say that. It’s the ‘do you need them to win’ part that I don’t understand. Ask the question as you have it written and I will answer it.”“And we have also asked those candidates, do you need the 40% of voters to win, and you are saying no? You don’t?” “No, I am saying I am going to try to win every vote I can. And what I am saying to you is…
“So to those voters…”
“I don’t want to keep doing this, I am going to call it. Thank you.”“You’re not going to do the interview with us?”“No, not like this, I'm not. Not with seven follow ups to every single question you ask.” (14:40-15:37)
“Ms Porter, I am an investigative reporter.”“I have never had to do this before. Ever.”“You’ve never had to have a conversation? Okay, but every other candidate has done this.”“What part of, I’m me, I’m running for governor because I’m a leader, so I’m going to make…”“So you’re not going to answer questions from reporters? Okay, why don’t we go through, I will continue to ask follow-up questions because that is my job as a journalist, I will go through and ask these, and if you don’t want to answer you don’t have to answer. So nearly every…”“I don’t want to have an unhappy experience with you. And I don’t want this all on camera.”“I don’t want to have an unhappy experience with you either.” (15:52-16:29)
And CBS did note that she ultimately did stay and continue answering questions.[]
But this interview has taken off online, gotten a ton of attention.
Some calling it a total car crash and bad look for Porter, applauding the reporter for continuing to press on.[][]
And tons of people in the political sphere weighing in, too, with Elizabeth Ashford, who has been a strategist for several high-profile California politicians telling the LA Times:
“When you’re governor, you’re governor of everyone, not just the people in your party. It’s a bad look to say you don’t want or need votes from certain Californians, even those you really disagree with.”[]
“But, also, even good candidates have bad nights. This was a miss for Katie, but not every interview is going to go great.”
Other candidates in the race seeing this as an opportunity to speak out to the voters Porter dodged, with former health secretary Xavier Becerra (Ha-vee-air, like Javier, Bus-air-uh) writing:
“I’m not interested in excluding any vote. Every Californian deserves affordable health care, safe streets, a roof over their head and a living wage.”[]
California State Superintendent Tony Thurmond (Thur-mund) also writing that:[]
“This is a pattern for [Katie Porter]. No candidate for Governor should hide from the press or mistreat them — we owe it to the public to be transparent. If she can’t answer basic questions from a reporter, how can Californians expect her to stand up to President Trump?”
And this comes as you had outlets like CalMatters noting pretty recently that the race for Governor remains pretty open right now.
Saying that while Porter does have a slight polling edge, it is still anyone’s game.
Right the primary is not until June 0f 2026, so it’s not super far away, but still enough time for someone to hop in and jump to the top.
There are rumors about people like Senator Alex Padilla joining the race.
Though, for Porter, the fact that there is still time on the clock also could mean there is enough time for people to forget this interview, potentially.
But still, I would love to know your thoughts, especially if you are watching from California.
-
Several FBI agents have been fired for their involvement in a “scandal arguably worse than Watergate.”
At least, that’s according to Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, who along with other Republicans, released an internal FBI document suggesting that the agency analyzed the phone records of more than a half dozen Republican lawmakers back in 2023.
All as part of an investigation into Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
And with that, most of the lawmakers were among those who had planned to vote against certifying the election on January 6th, 2021 – including Josh Hawley, Lindsey Graham, and Ron Johnson.
And after the attack on the capital, some of them did end up voting to accept the results, but others STILL voted against certification.
But also, with that, it’s important to note that the records analyzed were only from a few days during the week of January 6.
And they only enabled investigators to see basic information about the date and time of the calls – NOT the content of the communications. []
Although that didn’t stop Josh Hawley from falsely claiming yesterday that the FBI document showed agents had actually engaged in wiretapping.
And adding to that, these records were obtained through a subpoena authorized by a grand jury – according to the Senators who released the document. []
And there has been no solid evidence that the Biden White House influenced the investigation.
Right, in the name of avoiding any kind of interference, former Attorney General Merrick Garland actually appointed Jack Smith as a special prosecutor to oversee criminal investigations into Trump in 2022.
And while the Supreme Court eventually ruled that presidents have immunity for "certain acts" while in office – leading the cases against Trump to be dismissed at Smith’s request – Smith did release his final report in January.
With him writing that “…nobody within the Department of Justice ever sought to interfere with, or improperly influence, [his] prosecutorial decision making.” []
As well as noting that he believed the evidence would have been sufficient to obtain a conviction.
But despite all that, Republicans used the phone records to argue that the Biden administration had politicized the department.
With Grassley saying the “weaponization by federal law enforcement under Biden was arguably worse than Watergate.” []
And then Trump himself writing on social media:
“Deranged Jack Smith got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. A real sleazebag!!!”
You also had FBI Director Kash Patelrepeating the claim that the Biden administration “weaponized law enforcement against the American people.”
And adding that they had fired “those who acted unethically”;
“dismantled” the agency group tasked with investigating public corruption that had been involved;
and launched an investigation into the matter.
With Deputy Director Dan Bongino adding:
“Under our leadership, the FBI will never again be used as a political weapon against the American people."
But of course, what you would have many arguing is that this is all actually being used to justify Trump’s own politicization of law enforcement.
Right, several FBI agents who worked on cases related to January 6 have already been fired since Trump returned to office..
Last month, three former top officials actually sued Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi – alleging that they had been retaliated against for investigating Trump.
And then there are all the ongoing cases against his perceived enemies – including, of course, James Comey, who we just saw making his first appearance in court today.
So we’ll have to see where all this ends up and what kind of situation it ultimately leaves us in.
-
But, on the note of Comey, we saw him officially pleading not guilty to charges of lying to Congress this morning while appearing before a federal court in Virginia.
Right, as we talked about earlier this week, a grand jury indicted the former FBI director on one count each of making false statements to Congress and obstructing congressional proceedings.
With this based on claims by federal prosecutors that Comey lied when he told members of Congress during a hearing that he did not authorize another person at the FBI to speak anonymously to the media about an investigation into Hillary Clinton.
Now, notably, the person Comey allegedly tapped for the leak isn’t named in the brief two-page indictment against him — they are listed only as “Person 3.”
And that’s actually important to keep in mind, because I’m going to come back to it in just a minute.
But, with all this, you have legal experts, career prosecutors, Democrats, and many others all slamming the indictment, arguing that the charges are clearly trumped-up — both in the sense that they are bogus, and that they were only filed because of Trump.
With the president launching an intense public pressure campaign demanding that his Justice Department go after Comey — a man he perceives to be a political enemy and blames for the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
So, as a result, you have tons of people arguing that this is an extraordinary attempt by Trump to weaponize the DOJ for his own personal revenge — and there is a LONG list reasons to back this up.
Like the fact that the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia — who Trump himself had literally appointed earlier this year — declined to prosecute Comey after career prosecutors reinvestigated the allegations.
Or how Trump was only able to get an indictment because he forced that attorney out just days before the deadline to charge Comey and installed his own personal lawyer, Lindsey Halligan.
A loyalist who has zero experience as a prosecutor, but who was willing to bring the indictment before a grand jury even though career prosecutors in Virginia who reviewed the case had advised her not to, arguing that there wasn’t enough evidence to support the charges.
And then there’s the fact that Halligan BARELY got this past a grand jury — with just 14 of the 23 jurors reportedly voting that there was probable cause to charge Comey.
And in the last few days, there have been two separate reports from ABC News that appear to cast even MORE doubt on the indictment.
Right, the other day, you had sources telling the outlet about an absolute bombshell from John Durham — the ex-special counsel who Trump himself appointed during his first term to investigate the origins of the Russia probe.
And specifically, the sources said that Durham told Halligan’s team of prosecutors in Virginia they he was unable to find evidence that would support false statements or obstruction charges against Comey.
But it wasn’t just Durham — a SEPARATE team of D.C. prosecutors who investigated Comey for years ALSO allegedly told the Virginia team that they hadn’t uncovered any chargeable offenses.
So, in case you’re having trouble keeping track, that means that there were THREE different investigations that ALL declined to bring charges against Comey — one from an ex-special counsel and two from prosecutors in both D.C. and Virginia.
But, beyond that, you also had ABC News reporting that Halligan’s already fragile case has been undermined even MORE by a key witness who is believed to be absolutely central to the prosecution’s allegations.
And when I say absolutely central, I mean central enough to potentially undermine the case ENTIRELY.
Right, as I mentioned before, Halligan’s indictment does not name the person whom Comey allegedly authorized to speak anonymously to the media about the Clinton probe — aka, “Person 3.”
Hell, even Comey's lawyers have said Halligan's team hasn't even told the defense who Person 3 is.
But it has been widely speculated that the person is Daniel Richman — a law professor and friend of Comey’s who acted as an intermediary between the former FBI director and the media.
But now you have ABC reporting that sources say Richman explicitly told investigators that Comey NEVER authorized him to provide information on the Clinton probe to the media.
In fact, he allegedly said that Comey actively instructed him NOT to engage with the media AT ALL on at least two occasions.
What’s more, investigators who reviewed material from Comey's emails — including his messages with Richman — reportedly failed to find any evidence of Comey authorizing leaks.
So, as a result, prosecutors who investigated Halligan’s allegations reportedly said that she would face “likely insurmountable problems” if she tried to use Richman’s testimony to prove that Comey lied to Congress.
So unless there’s some secret piece of evidence against Comey, it really seems like this case will likely fall flat.
But, as far as what happens next, you had the judge overseeing the case announcing today that a trial has officially been scheduled for January 5th.
But we also saw Comey’s lawyer saying that he will be filing a motion to dismiss the case.
Accusing the DOJ of engaging in vindictive and selective prosecution based on Trump’s demand to prosecute a perceived enemy, arguing that the grand jury process, and claiming that Halligan had been appointed illegally.
So for now, we’ll have to wait and see how all this plays out.
Go to MeUndies and enter promo code philipdefranco for deals up to 50% off.
-
China is now punishing negativity on social media.
And everyday users, bloggers, and influencers – at least two of whom had tens of millions of followers – are getting their accounts suspended or even banned.
Right, because last month, the country’s Cyberspace Administration launched a two-month campaign aimed at, among other things, purging content that incites “excessively pessimistic sentiment” or promotes defeatist ideas like “hard work” being “useless.” []
And this seems to take aim at growing dissatisfaction among many young people who have been hard hit by a slowing economy, property crisis, and high rates of unemployment.
Right, because with that, an increasing number of young people have taken to social media to say they've given up on getting ahead.
With the so-called “lying flat” trend kind of being about doing just enough to get by – while the “let it rot” trend is basically just about abandoning certain goals entirely because they feel impossible.
And with that, you have outlets like the New York Times arguing that the Chinese government is worried not only about people being less productive members of society – but also becoming more critical of the ruling Communist Party. []
With one researcher saying:
“The root cause is deteriorating economic and social prospects for many Chinese, which has led to what for any country would be a natural social response — the expression of anxiety and misgiving.”
“Such sentiment, the leadership worries, might be infectious.” []
And so now what we’ve seen are viral videos showing young graduates working as delivery drivers or sleeping in dormitories among those getting removed for "spreading negative emotions."
Officials in one city in central China said two social media account owners were investigated for portraying the city in an unflattering light.
You had the local internet regulator in another city saying it punished five social media accounts for “spreading false information” about housing prices and real estate regulations. []
And Weibo (way-bo), one of the country’s biggest platforms, said last week that it had removed over 16,000 pieces of violating content and suspended more than 1,200 accounts that it said “spread rumors” about the economy and government welfare programs.[]
So with all that, it’ll be interesting to see how this whole effort plays out – and if and what kind of impact it actually has while the concerns that have people being negative on social media aren’t addressed.
-
But that brings us to the final thing today.
And that is this is a snippet of me crashing out
because, well, in episode two, we dove into just so much.
It was just part of me
that felt like I needed to vent a little about this Taylor Swift MAGA controversy.
And this is just a small piece of a larger conversation.
I'm crashing out because apparently, like about things that matter and things
that don't matter, one of the things I would say that
does not matter is that apparently, Taylor Swift's new album,
The Life of a Show Girl, it's her MAGA coming out party
that, she's this is her MAGA anthem that she's just released.
This is there's a growing voice online that that is saying this, and it is mind
bogglingly stupid.
And I know to get shit for that because I'm talking about
an area of the internet right now that is run by cults,
and then just some people in the middle that kind of just listen to music.
There's people that like love, hate everything.
Taylor Swift, she can't do anything wrong.
And then like, fuck
Taylor Swift, everything she does is trash or has like some incendiary motive.
And hey, I want to say, I understand when you're, sing sorry song.
Thoughtful poet slash, Zodiac killer,
riddle maker clue
lever that you're fostering an environment where everyone's going
to dissect every single thing to to the craziest, craziest degree.
And they are going to find things that are breadcrumbs that you left,
and then they're also going to find things that just aren't there,
and they're gonna
they're going to push along with whatever they want to think or whatever
kind of work.
So, we see this and all these different, Conspiracy,
Enclaves online.
And I'm just like, I'm like the, the one of the biggest artists
in the world who and like, this is there's there's a lot of stuff.
There's a number of things that I don't agree with that
Taylor Swift does that rubs me the wrong way.
But you're going to think one of the biggest stars in the world
who multiple times in different election cycles, has gone out of her way and risked
alienating a big portion of her audience and money, and is marrying Captain Fiser.
In the face of of.
Of the fucking Covid.
That he's a kid. The Covid shot himself.
That that she's it.
You can have your opinions on it.
And like on the album, I get it.
Like I listened to it and I was like, okay, I kind of like 3
or 4 songs and then like the ones I don't like, I skip.
I know that's a crazy thing.
And I'm also open to the idea
that when you have an artist that has so many different out.
She had a tour that highlighted that so many of her releases are different
thing, like different moments of her life where she was feeling different things,
going through different things, and even that concept, it's
not going to hit every single person the right way the first time.
I know so many people
that are talking about like they don't like this album,
but then they'll also concede that they didn't like a certain album and then,
they, you know, they went through a different period
of their life and all of a sudden they went back and they loved it.
Great. That's cool.
But like, this is too this has become too big of the news cycle,
even though it's probably gonna be the thumbnail of when it's like the 187th
most important thing that's happening right now.
Well, can I tell you, Phil?
First thing, I am shocked.
I am shocked that you like 3 or 4.
I only like, like one song.
I think when I listen to the whole album, you.
Just listen to it, that you're just listening to wood on Loop.
You're like, yes.
I was like.
Give me more new heights of manhood.
Okay, well, that it brings us to the end of this video.
Of course, you got even more just to click away.
You got the full 80 minute episode of Crashing Out that just came out.
I really highly recommend it.
And or you got the newest Philip DeFranco show. You haven't seen it right here.
And I've also got links
to both on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and YouTube in the description down below.
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 tomorrow.
Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “DEFRANCO” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! SeatGeek
