Public Indictment Podcast
The Public Indictment Podcast hosted by Patrick Williams is where Law, Sports, Music, and Entertainment meet the verdict of public opinion. Join in the discussion with Patrick who always brings legal analysis with a dose of cynicism relating to current events in the culture.
Public Indictment Podcast
Public Indictment Ep. 5 - Diamonds from Sierra Leone
What happens when a rapper's right to artistic expression is placed under federal scrutiny? We tackle this provocative question as we examine the unique parole conditions facing BG, who must have all his songs reviewed and approved by the federal government. Listen as we explore how these restrictions, alongside a ban on associating with convicted felons, complicate his return to the music scene and stir up broader First Amendment debates. We weigh in on what types of lyrics might pass government scrutiny, using BG's hit "Bling Bling" as a focal point.
Ever wondered if vague statements and lyrics have a place in courtrooms? This episode's "Rush Judgments" segment delivers quick takes on trending legal topics, from the portrayal of characters in Apple TV's "Presumed Innocent" to the Supreme Court's latest ruling on presidential immunity. We also highlight the enduring impact of online actions through the lens of Ryan Garcia's recent racist comments, stressing the importance of managing one's public persona in today's digital age. These snippets are designed to spark curiosity and keep you informed on pressing legal issues.
Finally, Sydney Batch joins us to shed light on the contentious debate around the age of consent to marriage in North Carolina, revealing the legislative hurdles in raising the legal age from 16 to 18. Transitioning to NBA free agency, we use Kendrick Lamar's insightful lyrics to critique strategic moves and team dynamics, from the Philadelphia 76ers' reliability issues to the Los Angeles Lakers' financial woes. This episode is packed with compelling discussions and insightful analyses that you won't want to miss.
Contains excerpts from:
THE GET DOWN - Khrysis
MSG Instrumental - Khrysis
MellowSmoove!!! - 9th Wonder
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/publicindictment
Instagram: @public_indictment
X/Twitter: @pubindictment
Web: https://publicindictment.buzzsprout.com/
Welcome to Public Indictment, episode 5. Sorry we're late but unfortunately your boy has some security leaves set up over in the Dominican Republic. But I am back and there's plenty to talk about, so I'm glad you guys are listening. If you haven't already, please take the time to follow us on social media at public underscore indictment on Instagram. At pub indictment on X slash Twitter and that's pub indictment. We are available wherever you get your podcast. We appreciate any subscriptions or follows on spotify, apple music, iheart radio. Tune in whoever uses that. We appreciate all the support. Here we go getting started, and this somewhat expands on my previous podcast talking about what people say in their rhymes and how that can get you in trouble and be used for a criminal conviction.
Speaker 1:The boy, bg, made the news in an interesting case involving some free speech and how it applies to individuals who've been released on parole or supervision following a prison sentence. So for those who don't know, bg stands for Baby Gangster. He's a rapper from New Orleans. He was signed to Cash Money Records. He was part of the Hot Boys crew, so he was with Lil Wayne, juvenile, birdman Turk and Manny Fresh. The biggest song that he had was Bling Bling.
Speaker 1:Bg recently was released after serving 11 years in federal prison for possession of a stolen firearm and conspiracy to obstruct justice, and one of the conditions of his parole was very unique. One of the conditions of his parole was that all songs released while he's out on parole must be reviewed and approved by the federal government, and the reasoning for this is they want to make sure that his songs are consistent with the goals of his rehabilitation, because his previous songs, his previous record of songs, promoted violence and illegal activities. So the question is whether this is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech under the First Amendment. And this is different than a lot of cases where speech may be restricted in some way, for example, lack of internet usage If you're a sex offender. This is different for BG because BG is a rapper, so his job is to rap, is to release songs, and he's a gangster rapper for all intents and purposes. Like some of his lyrics are talking about being involved in criminal activities, and it just so happens that describing crime and being involved in criminal activities is what sells in American hip-hop or in hip-hop in general, like that is the number one selling genre of music.
Speaker 1:So what it really comes down to for BG is if he writes a song that discusses criminal activity hypothetical criminal activity we're not talking about him rhyming about things that he's actually committed or actually done is a chance, the federal government may say nah, bro, you can't put that out. We're talking a lot more than a restriction on First Amendment rights. We're actually talking about a restriction on BG's ability to work in a legal profession Like that's. That's what's really at stake here. So very interesting case. The other part of this release condition is that he can't associate with convicted felons, and I know this is the case in a lot of jurisdictions, but it's unique as it's applied to BG as well, because he can't perform with rappers with felony convictions Some rappers like Boozy and Gucci Mane, who he actually performed with possible violation of parole if you perform with these rappers Possible violation of parole if you perform with these rappers especially considering the fact that if you're on tour or you're performing with other musicians, you may not know anything about the criminal record or the people you're performing with Does that count as associating with them? I don't know. Know what BG is talking about in his songs. When you consider slang and language differences between your average appointed federal judge and what may be New Orleans slang or slang from another region. The first question is whether this is even a thing.
Speaker 1:Can a person on supervised relief be restricted? Your rights can be restricted in certain areas. For example, you lose your right to possess a firearm if you're convicted of certain felonies. Your right to privacy is reduced. You're subject to search and seizures if you're on probation or parole. In some states. Probation or parole not able to leave the state, not able to leave the country. Felons lose their right to vote in most states. So there is precedent for the court to remove certain constitutional rights from people who have been convicted of felonies In some states.
Speaker 1:you can lose the right to access the Internet while you're on probation or parole. I'm not going to go too far down this road, because constitutional law and free speech was a very long subject in common law law school. I'm sure any of my listeners who are lawyers are like Patrick. Please, please, do not bring up memories of me being in my common law course. But there is some speech that the government is unable to regulate as strictly. So there's some exceptions that are actually laid out where the government can actually look at what's being said and say no, you can't say this or this is criminal or this is not criminal. Some examples of that would be what we call false statements. You can get in trouble for putting false statements out on the Internet. The two exceptions that I can think of. That would probably not even really but probably almost kind of try to apply to what's happened to BG His speech integral to criminal conduct. But it doesn't fit under that exception. Like that exception is literally if someone walks up to you at gunpoint and says give me your money. That is a threat, that is a crime. You can be prosecuted for threatening someone, but that's not what BG's lyrics are for threatening someone. But that's not what bg's lyrics are. So let's talk about what bg can rap about. That will probably get approved by the federal government.
Speaker 1:Bling bling 2024 they could remix bling bling. The lyrics of bling bling are pretty safe, man. At the end of the day, bling bling is just a celebration of bg talking about what jewelry is up to standard for him. That's what it comes down to Like. For example, bg says if it costs less than 20, it don't look right on him. So he got to have, you know, at least $20,000 worth of jewelry on, or it just doesn't look right on him, it doesn't fit him perfectly fine. Everybody in his crew wears diamonds. It's great that he looks out for the homies like that perfect. And his jewelry is so bright that you have to wear shades to stand on the side of him and the women say perfectly safe, I'm here for bling Bling 2024.
Speaker 1:It kind of segues over to how lyrics and other forms of creative expression can be used against you in a state criminal proceeding. California has passed some proactive laws to try and limit how much things that you use in lyrics or other forms of creative expression can be used against you in a criminal proceeding. Some people are advocates and believe that anything you say in a song should not be able to be used against you in a criminal proceeding. I don't agree with that and I stated this previously. At the end of the day, if you're rapping very general, about something like can't be proven, can't be corroborated, that should not be able to be used against you in a criminal trial. What I mean by that is there are many rappers who rap about what they do with guns, gun violence, robbing people, et cetera, without any specifics. That definitely cannot be used to show that you are a criminal, cannot be used to show that you have committed a specific crime, because it's very general, it doesn't identify a person, a time, a place, can't be corroborated. It could be false and, as we've learned with many rappers who have been exposed, it often is false. But there should not be a blanket exception that says none of it can be used because, by the same token, there are rappers who, very ignorantly, will describe full crimes in their rhymes and give you information in their lyrics that allow you to discover that a crime has been committed. Just to give you an example of the difference between those two types of speech in lyrics If I rap, I kill people for fun.
Speaker 1:Ok, what does that prove? Doesn't prove that I've killed anyone. Proves that I said it, but doesn't prove that I've actually done. It. Can't be tied to any specific crime. There's no dates, times or anything like that in that statement, so that shouldn't be admissible. All that is going to do is prejudice a jury into thinking, oh, this guy's a bad dude. He said he kills people for fun. That is not probative evidence. What if I said this in a lyric?
Speaker 1:I shot Pookie with the Draco in front of the safe code. Then I bounced the Turks and Caicos. Okay, well, that's some information there and you know the evidence shows that I went to Turks and Caicos at a specific time, in close proximity to when somebody named Pookie was shot with a Draco in front of Safeco. That may be the beginning of an investigation or a charge. Fact of the matter is, don't be describing specific instances of what you did or have done in your rhymes Coming up next Rush Judgments have done and your rhymes Coming up next Rush Judgments I'll talk to you guys with some quick takes about some topics that kind of piqued my curiosity this week. So we got presidential immunity coming up, we got Camila Cabello, we got Ryan Garcia and some interesting shows I've been watching lately. So stay tuned, we'll be back. Public indictment. Welcome back, guys, to the Public Indictment Podcast.
Speaker 1:This is a new segment I'm calling Rush Judgments. It's where I'm going to give quick takes on trending topics that caught my attention between shows. So now these are my early opinions. So they're based on limited evidence. They're subject to modification upon receiving new evidence, but I form quick opinions. That's what it comes down to. So, without further ado, number one presumed innocent on apple tv listen.
Speaker 1:As you guys know, I'm a lawyer. I usually don't like law shows, but this show is pretty accurate. Like I have, I've not had a single moment that I can remember in this show when I was like, oh, that would never happen Completely breaks immersion because of some inaccuracy. It's one of those shows that the more you learn about the main character, the less you like them and it pains you to see this guy spiral Like can you have made any additional mistakes outside of the ones that we already know about? So I love to watch those type of shows. The only inaccuracy in this show that has kind of broken immersion for me is how his wife is portrayed the main character, jake Gyllenhaal's wife. How she's portrayed. Without any spoilers, let's just say I've yet to meet a black woman who would put up with the amount of shit his wife did, maybe an episode behind, so don't y'all be texting me spoiling stuff but at the end of the day, the fact that he's got this wife, this black woman wife and we all know how the sisters don't take a lot of smack from brothers man the fact that his wife is just like ride or die in these circumstances, it just basically kills the immersion for me. Like bad, but anyway. Anyway, other than that shows great.
Speaker 1:Number two the supreme court recently upheld executive immunity for official acts of the president. There are some dicta in that opinion. There were some opinions that were voiced by the judges in the actual ruling that people are interpreting to have widened presidential immunity. But at the end of the day I looked at it as I don't see that necessarily changes the law, the actual ruling itself. The president was already immune for prosecution for official acts. What the real question is going forward is what's an official act like? Is trying to overturn an election in which you lost an official act? I'm going to go ahead and say probably not. Assassinating US citizens who are your opponents? Probably not an official act. So there may be some litigation coming as to what an official act is and what an official act isn't, but at the end of the day the ruling has caused a lot of alarm and I'm not sure that it changes the actual immunity scope much. Number three One of these days people are going to learn that the interwebs doesn't forget anything.
Speaker 1:It doesn't forget nothing. All right, if you post something on the Internet eight years ago, you think you deleted it. It's not gone. Two people learned that this week. Let's start first with ryan garcia, this dude man, as if. As if we didn't already know that ryan garcia was kind of suffering from some mental health issues. He went on a racist rant talking about how he hates n words, he's anti-black, he's the kkk. Hey, let's go bring george floyd back to life and go kill that in again. Ryan garcia ended up getting excommunicado from the wbc because of his racist comments and then he said okay, sorry, I didn't mean it, I'm going to rehab. And then he's like, I ain't going to rehab, I'm going to, I'm going to go manage my brother. Like, this dude is wild. I don't feel bad for him at the end of the day. Like, if you can't keep your mouth shut to stop yourself from ruining the bag. Like, how much money did you make off this devin haney fight and how much money are you going to make off a future fight because you're out here just spewing hatred? Like, can you at least contain your hatred long enough to get the bag? I don't get it, but it is what it is.
Speaker 1:A more accurate example of how the interwebs doesn't forget anything is Camila Cabello. Man, you got to be real careful about what white horse you riding on. When the interwebs got memories, camilla hopped into the Drake beef to basically say these guys need to eat dinner and squash it. And the interwebs said remember when Camilla Cabello was 14 years old and she had a Tumblr account and just started posting all the racist things? Like? I completely understand, the girl was 14 years old and years after she made this comment, she issued an apology, said she was young and ignorant and she didn't know any better and all that. And look, I understand people say some wild things at 14. And as you become an adult, you may not agree with all those things you said before, but you got to remember that the Internet never forgets even stuff that you posted when you were 14 years old on Tumblr. So when you come out on your white horse, it's like people are looking for impeachment material for you, camilla, but the comments they're just priceless, like as tame, as no one takes advice from a known racist to remind her.
Speaker 1:Camilla Cabello was so racist she had to be sent to weekly healing sessions. This is the lady who was so racist she had to see a therapist. I'm sorry, camilla, you made me talk more than I even wanted to in this segment. But remember, the Internet never forgets. Rush Judges folks. We'll be back, welcome back. I have my wife, sydney batch, here as a guest once again. I do want to say before we get started, however, that I want you guys to know it really takes some hard work to wrangle Sydney up to actually be on my podcast with me. Like it's not as simple as me just asking her to be on. Like I have to go through her people.
Speaker 3:No, you do not, not true? I love being on here and spending as much time as I can with you.
Speaker 1:You're so sweet. As much time as I can with you. You're so sweet, okay, so today we're going to talk about an interesting story that I found, and it kind of segues into a topic that Sydney has dealt with at the legislature. Sierra Leone recently passed a law as of July 2nd, and under the law, anyone who marries a person under the age of 18 will face a jail term of at least 15 years and a fine around $4,000. Just from background, on the facts with regards to that, there is an organization that did a study as to how many of these marriages were occurring with women under 18. And in 2017, there were about 800,000 wives under the age of 18, including 400,000 younger than 15, in Sierra Leone. All this to say, north Carolina surely would not have a law that allows you to get married at these super young ages.
Speaker 3:Sydney you would think. You would think it's too much like right for us to be in a situation where we don't allow kids under the age of 18 to get married. But you would be wrong.
Speaker 1:It's okay. So how old do you have to be to get married in North Carolina, our great state?
Speaker 3:Interestingly enough, prior to 2021, the age of marriage was 14. 14 years old.
Speaker 1:Okay, until when.
Speaker 3:Until 2021. 14-year-olds could get married, and North Carolina was a destination for child brides, and so there was a huge push over the last several sessions at the General Assembly to go ahead and increase the age, and so a bill was filed in 2021 session to raise the age to 18. And sadly, we were not able to get leadership in the General Assembly to agree to raise it to 18. And sadly, we were not able to get leadership in the General Assembly to agree to raise it to 18, but we did raise it to 16.
Speaker 1:Wait, was 14, like with parental approval or consent, yes, okay, so it was 14 with. If your parents said, okay, 14 year old, go get married. Okay, 14-year-old, go get married. So what reasoning would people have to not want to raise it the age of consent to marriage? What's the reasoning for pushback on that?
Speaker 3:So I believe that the issue prior to 2021, and, frankly, even in 2021 discussions, when many of us were advocating to raise the age of marriage to 18, because if you can't buy cigarettes or if you can't vote for president, we felt like 18 was, at a minimum, the appropriate age to get married. But colleagues honestly, on both sides of the aisle, said they knew people who got married at 14 or at 16 and they didn't want to invalidate their parents marriages or their fellow church members marriages by raising the age of marriage, which is outrageous to me and doesn't make any sense. We are no longer an agrarian society where people died at 30 and started working and having children at 15 and 16. Times have changed, but apparently that fell on deaf ears with some of my colleagues.
Speaker 1:Wait, but couldn't you just make a law that says you can't marry anyone that is not 18, or you can't consent to marriage if you're less than 18, and not make it retroactive so it does not invalidate previous marriages that may have occurred?
Speaker 3:Yeah, and that's exactly what the bill said. It said moving forward, so we're looking prospectively into the future. You will not be able to have anyone get married before the age of 18. And prior to that it was with parental consent under 18. And it also allowed marriage for 14-year-olds if they were pregnant and planned to marry the putative father. So we haven't made that many leaps because it's still 16. But it wasn't going to invalidate any of their parents' marriages or grandparents' marriages. It simply just said we no longer want to marry our children off at young ages. In the state of North Carolina, in a country that you would think would support that, sierra Leone was able to support it and actually had significant fines and jail time. We don't have that.
Speaker 1:I'm just confused I'm going through all these scenarios in my head as to when someone would give consent for their 14-year-old to be married.
Speaker 3:When someone would give consent for their 14-year-old to be married. Yeah, a parent that, for whatever reason, believes that it is in their child's best interest to get married at 14. And even if your child was pregnant at 14, why would you then force them to get married? It doesn't make any sense. They can't rent a car Hell, you can't rent a car until you're 21. You can't get a hotel room in some places until you're 25. But you're going to allow a 14-year-old, whose frontal lobe has not fully formed until approximately the age of 24, to go ahead and get married.
Speaker 1:Well, I don't really want to attack the parents.
Speaker 3:Okay, you don't have to attack the parents. I'm attacking a parent. In what world you would not consent in any situation for our sons to get married at 14?
Speaker 1:No, I would not consent for them to get married at 14. I just, I'm just parents who make that decision. I don't agree with it. That's crazy. But outside of that, I just think it's crazy that people would be against changing that law.
Speaker 3:Well, right, I mean you think it's crazy for people to be against changing the law, but then you say I don't want to judge at their parents though, because you know they might have a legitimate reason for their 14 or 16 year old to get married.
Speaker 1:I'm not saying they have a legitimate reason for their person to get married at that age. I'm just saying I am more disappointed in people, in lawmakers, for not changing the age and allowing 14-year-olds to get married at their parents' consent than I am at parents who allow their kids to do it, I think maybe shackle women who were incarcerated and were giving birth.
Speaker 3:So that was a big year for North Carolina to apparently come out of the dark ages where, if you were pregnant and incarcerated, you were shackled to your bed while giving birth. We passed that law, too, in 2021. Great time for women in North Carolina.
Speaker 1:It's just fabulous. That is wild. But let me clarify what I said previously about why I was more disappointed in the legislature than I would be a parent. Because at the end of the day, like in our profession and any profession, many of us deal with parents who just don't make good decisions that's true like.
Speaker 1:So there there are tons of parents. You know the legal system. You'll see something on the news every day that makes it clear that there are plenty of parents who make horrible decisions for themselves and their kids. But the legislature is supposed to be the people who make the good decisions. Sydney, they are. They're supposed to be in place because they make good decisions.
Speaker 3:I don't disagree with you, but I'm just telling you that that's who's currently representing you in the state of North Carolina that we had to fight to even get it to 16. The bill was almost dead. They had a coalition of all of these amazing groups that were coming together saying hey, did you know that North Carolina actually has a problem with human trafficking? Hey, did you know North Carolina is a destination for child marriage, because we are one of the few states in the entire country that still allow 14-year-olds to get married? And yet, even with all of that information, you had legislators who were like bridge too far. Nah, oh, my gosh, 16. That seems like a reasonable age. Wow, welcome to the General Assembly.
Speaker 1:All right. Well, I don't really want to talk about anything else anymore now. Sorry for depressing you. As always, it's great to have you on the show.
Speaker 3:As you kick me off promptly.
Speaker 1:Bye, bye, bye welcome back to public indictment. This week I got my man, dave hobgott, on here. Man, we are kendrick lamar fans number one and number two. So if you did not come for the kendrick lamar gloating, you are in the wrong place. Now it's a good time to log out.
Speaker 1:What's good, brother lovely man, I can't complain, living life man, um kendrick, a little nba, um just ready man I do want to ask about your impressions on the not like us video which dropped I believe it was this past weekend. We knew it was coming, we had seen all these rumors about him recording it. We had seen some footage leaked from it. And, ultimately, what were your impressions on the video?
Speaker 2:funny enough, me and my wife were in the back of an uber coming home from an event on the 4th, you know, I went on social media for two seconds and saw, obviously, that it had dropped and, like any Kendrick thing, you've got the full, you know several-course meal. And the first time you see it it was just a spectacle, as always, like he does. But then when you really start digging in, man, that former English major, like it was, so it's just beautiful, like all of this stuff, man, beautiful storytelling, just through the images. I mean, the song is the song and it's been out for a while and you know we love that, but just amazing Anytime that I can see someone at his level do what he did. Man, it was a beautiful thing, I loved it.
Speaker 1:Man. I, just outside of the song and the video being good, the thing that I think is so entertaining about it is that kind of when he stopped beefing like Drake didn't reply. His last reply that he made, which I think was the hard part six, was kind of like a throw in the towel, I'm done, type thing. And then it was. You know, you heard some rumblings of people talking about hey, we don't want you guys to diss anymore, it's hurting our bottom line, and Kendrick was just like you know what. I'm not going to make no more songs, I'm going to just keep performing this song in a hundred different ways.
Speaker 2:I don't remember a time and I mean the world has changed obviously a lot since when we were coming up but to see the Amazon special and just how unbelievable and beautiful that was, and then to come back a couple of weeks later with the video it. I mean this poor guy you know there were pictures with michael rubin's little white diddy party now or whatever, and when you look and just the commentary had me in tears, it's like this man has literally aged 15 years and two months, you know. So, man, I love it. It was beautiful, Amazing man, Just art at the highest level. Man, I loved it.
Speaker 1:He looks defeated man, he looks defeated, and then you just it's got to, it's got to kill him every time that he just hears, you know, a minor with a whole crowd.
Speaker 2:A minor with a whole crowd singing along with it. The other thing that I really, really love also was just Kendrick and his argument being how inauthentic and that you were just an actor. This is really not who you are. And you just start seeing everybody in unison online posting all of these videos from many moons ago where Drake just such a cornball and now seeing him playing the tough guy image. Man, I love it. Like I love this so much, man, I cannot tell you, man, it's a beautiful thing, so definitely, definitely so.
Speaker 1:Moving forward, man dave came up with this awesome idea. It's kind of like an ode to this whole Kendrick beef. More so, it is also an ode to our second love, which is the NBA. So we had a free agent period in the NBA recently, with a lot of moves, man, a lot of moves for some players who we expected to move some trays here and there. We probably didn't expect. So each of those moves, we're going to tie it in in a special way for you guys. We're going to pick some of our favorite, link it to a team that the line reminds us of, based on their free agent transactions and their NBA prospects. So I got three. My man, dave, came up with this idea. When you come up with an idea like that, it means you got like 30. So we're going to run it.
Speaker 1:I'm going to let you go first with yours, Dave, and then I'm going to respond and we will go back and forth like that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, my first one. And when we were texting the other night and we were talking about the idea, it is like, okay, who made a splash and then who just didn't? And my first one is for, like what are we doing? And it's for the nuggets and it was from Meet the Grams, and when Kendrick just started the whole thing, he said dear baby girl, I'm sorry that your father's not active inside your world. I mean this is hilarious. We're doing NBA analysis while you're calling somebody a pedophile and deadbeat dad. This is epic stuff. But when I look at what the Nuggets in all seriousness didn't do like you let KCP walk and you're basically letting Joker and Murray waste a prime of their career with Christian Brown as your two guard Like what are we doing? Like it's still time, you can still do more stuff and then maybe make some moves. But I mean, my first quote really was about the Nuggets inactivity and what they didn't do. Their father has not been active inside the world. So that's my that's kind of my first one man.
Speaker 1:Straight up abandoned. And the crazy thing about that move too, man, especially with letting kcp go, is the reason they lost to the nuggets is because they did not have anyone who could guard and yeah yeah, you go, let your best perimeter defender walk out the door like I don't. I don't get it at all unbelievable.
Speaker 2:It again it's. It's two different groups. When you look, particularly in the West, you've got the old guard and they still really believe they can compete, and then you've got these young guys and man, it ain't going to happen. I mean, you look at Ant and I mean, if you don't have legs, young dudes, length, athleticism it's just not going to happen. That was weird to me.
Speaker 1:Not a good look. So my first one was when Kendrick said I believe this was in 616 in LA. It was fun until you start to put money in the streets. Then you lost money because they came back with no receipts.
Speaker 1:That is the Golden State Warriors. And the reason that is the Golden State Warriors for me is because they lost Klay Thompson. He went to Dallas, but the reason they lost Klay Thompson out of his mouth is because they paid Poole and Draymond first, and then, when his time came around, it was like Klay, what you gonna do? And at the end of the day, those two moves didn't do anything for the Warriors. Poole is gone. They basically let him walk out the door. For whatever Draymond is on this deal. It's a horrible deal. They didn't make the playoffs with Klay, so now, without Klay, they're going to make the playoffs with this squad?
Speaker 1:Nah, so at the end of the day, if I'm picking who, I had to pay, there's no way in hell I pay Poole over him. There's no way in hell I pay Draymond over him, and that's. They tied their hands by doing that and everyone knew clay was going to walk because they couldn't pay him. You can't pay him what he wanted to get paid in a situation where your team didn't make the playoffs last year. So that's where. That's where. That's where that comes from for me, man, that's my pick number one for sure.
Speaker 2:Now the next one for me is really two teams I'm putting together, um, because when this line jumps out and I think it really connects with both of them, to be quite honest, and it's my beloved Knicks and then the Thunder and it's in Euphoria and it says I make music that electrify them, you make music that pacify them. And when I think about sitting down 82 games and watching what the Knicks and Thunder are about to be, man, I cannot wait for the Knicks to re-sign OG to bring in Bridges. So you've got that Nova Knicks, you've got four guys on the same team now. I loved watching the three last year and the chemistry that they had.
Speaker 2:So now, honestly, man, after re-signing OG, bringing in Bridges, honestly, I think that is as good a top seven. It's right there with any top sevens in the whole league. And I mean honestly, man, you know how tibbs gets down man, like he doesn't need any more than seven guys anyway because he's not going to play a bench. But if you're looking at another seven man like okc bringing in that perimeter defender and caruso bringing in a little front line bulk with Hardenstein man Throwing that in with SGA J-Dub, dort, chet Wallace man, again talk about electrifying audiences, man, I cannot wait for the Nixon Thunder this year.
Speaker 1:Dope line. Right there, man Fits in perfect. My next one is I'm glad D-Rose came home. Y'all didn't deserve him either that is from not like us. We may both have that one.
Speaker 2:We do, we do yes, sir, yes, sir we may have it for different reasons.
Speaker 1:See, first of all, before I even get into that, I want to talk about how crazy that line is, because DeRozan is kind of like this NBA representative of this beef, for the fact that he's born in Compton, ended up going to Toronto. They cast him off like he was nothing from Kauai, won a championship, got to go to Chicago to get out of uh, canada. But when I'm talking about letting D Rose come back home, it reminded me of the Bulls and how terrible terrible this organization has been for the longest period of time, because I mean, I can never blame DeRozan and Levine for going to Chicago to get the check.
Speaker 2:Like they got paid to go there.
Speaker 1:No one thought when they went there this team was going to be any type of competitor in the Eastern Conference. I get it 100%. But man to get out of Chicago for the Rosen. I'm glad that boy got to go home. He didn't get to go all the way home, but he went to Sacramento which is going to be a great spot for him.
Speaker 1:He's going to be in the playoffs. He fits in with them. He's going to provide them with some veteran leadership and some points. I mean he's still out there averaging over 20 a game.
Speaker 3:So they're they're backcourt one through four right now, with him monk and uh, what's your?
Speaker 1:boy dearon fox. Bro, that is points.
Speaker 2:They gonna get you 60 a game, those three they, they are my league pass team that you know if, if it's 10, 30 and nothing else, and I'm awake the king's on, I mean they are and and adding him to the mix, man, I'm with you and that's gonna be beautiful. So, yeah, I agree, because I literally had that written down as well man, yeah, just anybody getting out of chicago right now.
Speaker 1:You doing the right thing, because there's no path to success for them dudes right now.
Speaker 2:But you know what's so devastating, man, it's almost like I would if I wasn't going to be on a winning team. You almost would rather be on a team that was god-awful, because there's just something about that middling team and you can just straight up chop the balls to be 40 and 42 every year, unless they go 42 and 40. And it's depressing, man. I would rather just be on somebody that was garbage, so maybe you could get a uh, you know the next big thing in the following year, man, it's, it's rough, I don't know. So, yeah, he, he, definitely. God bless him for getting the second now.
Speaker 1:Now it's not. It's not many times day when somebody gets traded to Sacramento, they're like yes.
Speaker 2:Greatest moment in life, right. And now my next one is for a team, and I've actually got two quotes. Okay. So the team and it's funny, and it's going to definitely be some people that disagree, and I hear you. Okay, and I think the Sixers are going to be really good. Let me just start out by saying I think the Sixers are going to be really good, okay, but as far as the level of which maybe we're getting folks to prognosticate. So I'm going to quote Kendrick from Euphoria when he said I calculate, you're not as calculated, I can even predict your angles. You could see this from a mile away.
Speaker 2:It was so obvious this was going to happen and, and the thing, I think it maybe even said it in our group chat where I was saying why would you leave la? And again, I'm no, no clippers person, right, but why? The whole point of leaving la would be okay. You know, harden is what he is and kawaii stays hurt, so you can trust him. So you leave and then go to a cold place where I love Tyrese Maxey and when Joel Embiid plays he's as good as it gets, but again, when he plays. So you have literally traded one person that stays hurt for another person that stays hurt, then it meet the grams.
Speaker 2:To look at it big picture, take that mask off or want to see what's under them? Achievements why, I believe you. You never gave us nothing to believe in. Man. Listen, when I hear Kendrick say that, all I can think of, for all of the gifts that Paul George has, for all the gifts that Joel Embiid has, like, like, do you really see them winning it? Like winning it. I'm not saying being like 60 plus wins, having huge games, but I'm saying winning it because, um, I don't know no, I don't at all at all.
Speaker 1:look, man, one of the reasons why you're on this show is because we have very similar thoughts about basketball, and what I'm not going to stand for is you stealing my quotes.
Speaker 2:Oh no. And my teams. Man, look when you got me first with the Kings.
Speaker 1:Oh my God, listen, bro, I got two quotes. It's so funny. I got two quotes for the 76ers. All right, one of them is exactly your quote. I believe you.
Speaker 1:You never gave us nothing to believe in. But my angle with that was more so with Joel Embiid, like we understand. You know, like you said, you won your MVPs. But I was thinking about it today and the whole process thing and how he kind of adopted that nickname. The process, that's my nickname.
Speaker 1:I don't believe in the Process, bro. You ain't never gave me a reason to believe in the Process, whether it be you getting injured, whether it be having opportunities to win and not showing up in decisive games to win. Like I don't believe it at all. But the second line that I attached to the 76ers was History do repeats itself. Sometimes it don't need a reason. And that was with paul george. I was like dude. You just left this situation where you were dependent on some other dude being healthy, and now you're going to the 76ers where you dependent on the other dude. That's never healthy like I'm I. Just now, in paul's defense, paul got the bag to go to 76 for sure. Paul got paid to go there at the end of the day because I was listening to his podcast the other day. This dude was like you know. The first offer he got from the clippers was two years for 60 billion. He was like that was disrespectful. Right, this dude. What did he get?
Speaker 2:Four for $200 in there Right, or something like that. So.
Speaker 1:I get it 100%, but at the end of the day, as far as do I think you're going to come out the East. Absolutely I don't know, man, I feel like one of y'all is not going to be around for at least half the season.
Speaker 2:And the other one of not going to be around for the playoffs. It's just what I've seen and there will be stretches where you're watching them. If you've got league pass where you're going, you may convince yourself. You may say I don't know, man, maybe they can't because they're going. I mean, it's going to be that random night in january when mb goes for 65 and 20, right, and you just sit there, and then the next night george does this, and then the next night tyrese max, it gets you 40 and 10 and you just you know, but just again you just. History do repeats itself, right?
Speaker 1:history do not even history do repeat itself. History do repeats itself.
Speaker 2:This is like subject verb agreement. God bless you. So you know.
Speaker 1:So sometimes you gotta sometimes you can't use the proper grammar when you're trying to fit a certain number of syllables into a bar, apparently absolutely okay.
Speaker 2:So now next team. What's funny is I literally had um three quotes originally for this, but I was like you know what, let me scale this back some. Okay, um, it's for the lakers. So now the first one is literally the opening line from euphoria them superpowers getting neutralized. I can only watch in silence like there is no more luring the big names. They're too tapped out with their um spending on lebron and ad.
Speaker 2:Even the whole ploy about a week or so ago when it was like oh, lebron will take less, like he'll agree to take less if one of these guys comes and joins, like the mid-level, like you want DeMar DeRozan or another like significant player to come in and take like $10 million a year so they can come and now be a part of the second quarter. I've got from 616 in LA where it said your little memes is loose in steam. They figured you out. The forced opinions is not convincing. Y'all need a new route.
Speaker 2:And and that piggybacks on to what I was just saying you get D'Angelo Russell, you get all of these dudes to come in, take a pay cut and then LeBron's pissed at the all-star break and he just starts posting memes on cut and then LeBron's pissed at the All-Star break and he just starts posting memes on social media and then won't talk. And it's like oh, what is this? It'll just be like a crown and a trash can next to it or something. And it's like hold up. So is LeBron saying that the team is garbage? You've got these little memes and people are like look man, I'm not trying to come in here, take a pay cut and then, two weeks before the all-star break, like I'm getting shipped out because this isn't working out, because lebron and the podcaster coach aren't able to make it work.
Speaker 2:So, man, it's just sort of like yeah, man, um, love lebron. I definitively think he's had the best career of any player to ever play in the league. I think he's had the best career of any player to ever play in the league. I think he's probably the second or third best player of all time and he's still amazing. But man, ain't nobody coming to be a part of that circus.
Speaker 1:So yeah, I do have a fourth one and it is the Lakers. Unfortunately, we always got to talk about the Lakers. I always say that on my other podcast, urban gal. Well, like we gotta talk about the lakers, regardless how many wins they got because they moved the needle, the audience is not dumb. Shape the stories how you want, and that right. There is bronnie james in a nutshell, and I hate to talk bad about the kid because I'm looking forward to watching this explode.
Speaker 1:Oh, I'm looking forward to watching this explode. But, with that said, it's just been story after story about why they're trying to validate this nepotism man and number one. Once he got drafted, it was literally the whole narrative was oh, he didn't get drafted in this position because he's LeBron's son. He could have been anyone, he would have been drafted in this position. He's earned his way here, he's earned this position and that's not what it is. But I would much rather they have taken the approach of hey, you know, my kid got potential. I saw an opportunity to get him into a position where he can realize that potential, where he can work hard and become a player, and the Lakers were willing to do it and just leave it at that.
Speaker 1:There's no reason to sit here and pretend that this dude is getting treated like like everyone else is getting treated, especially the fact that they signed him for a four-year deal, fully guaranteed deal with with the fourth option for the second round pick, like come on, man, there's half of these second rounders are not even gonna make the team all right. So you're talking about this guy is getting this contract with no favors. You want me to believe that? I don't believe it. I'm not buying it. So yeah, you can shape it all you want man it is.
Speaker 2:It's going to be really fun watching and then I'm gonna just piggyback off of you. I'm actually incredibly happy for brani because, all accounts, he's just a great kid, great teammate, just a great kid. And I can't imagine you know, you hear the talk online all that you grew up. I mean, yes, it's lovely to be filthy rich growing up with all whatever, but, man, at some point it is going to be an issue. Somebody's going to challenge him into the locker room. Bronny ain't going to like it, and then they'll get traded Right and it's just going to lead him into the locker room. Bron didn't go like it, and then they'll get traded right and it's just going to lead. You can just see where this is headed and it will be entertaining to watch.
Speaker 2:The last one that I picked, it was partially just because one I wanted to mention this team and then two you can't have this conversation without literally bringing this out and it's Orlando the Magic. Say, drake, I hear you like I'm young and I'm just looking and thinking. Between paulo, 21, anthony black 21, franz wagner, 22, sucks, 23, they bring in kcp, who was 31, to give him a little um, a little seniority. That was a good man, man, I'm gonna tell you again. Um, last year at this time, man, I think I told y'all on the group chat last year, this time man, I was able to get okc to win the nba title at 100 to 1 odds. Right, did it happen? No, but that was like a crazy number.
Speaker 2:When I look at the magic and you just look at the potential, like if people take particular leaps if paolo is what I think he could potentially be, casey Pree, I mean, I just defensively, man, what they're going to be able to do as well I think it is definitely a really decent chance. They could be the four seed next year in the East, depending on the help with the Bucs and what's going on with them. But they're an exciting team man and, like I said, you couldn't get through it. But, um, they're an exciting team man and, like I said, you couldn't get through it. Nba and kendrick this tracks and not use that particular quote. So I was like who am I going to talk about?
Speaker 1:you got to figure out something with that 100 man. Hey, the world is screaming that man's a pedophile right now. So we got a screaming on here as well. Hey, dave, as always, man, it's great to have you. We'll have you back. Football's coming up soon. We got some USA basketball to talk about coming up soon, so I look forward to having you back on the show, man. Thanks for your time.
Speaker 2:Can't wait. Thanks a lot. Talk to you All right buddy.
Speaker 1:That is a wrap for public indictment, episode five. Thanks to my guests Sidney Batch and Dave Hopgood for taking the time. We'll be back next Wednesday and every Wednesday thereafter. I appreciate your support. Please, please, if you haven't already, follow us on Instagram at public underscore indictment. On Twitter at pub indictment, p-u B indictment. We're on Spotify, we're on Apple music All of your favorite places to get podcasts. We're available. Subscribe, follow and rate us. We greatly appreciate the support and until next week.
