Drake appears to have responded to popular streamer Pokimane’s disappointment over his partnership with online crypto casino Stake.

Pokimane, 28, admitted her ‘heart broke’ after she learned the musician was involved with Stake, and while she still ‘loved’ his music, she was not so fond of Drake, 38, the person. 

Drake has been involved with Stake since 2022 and he even features links to the website prominently on his Instagram bio. 

A disappointed Pokimane lamented on her livestream after watching what appeared to be a clip of him promoting the venture: ‘When I heard Drake was involved with Stake, my heart broke. I’m going to be honest. Because I’ve been a little Drake fan girl, you know, the Canadian blood running through my veins, and I still love his music, but now I don’t love him as much as a person.’

Drake reportedly saw Pokimane’s comments through streamer Los Pollos, and is said to have responded: ‘I watched the clip what’s she mad about? what is it the braids???!?’

Fans took a screenshot of his comment and posted it online, along with the original video of Pokimane’s remarks.  

A screenshot of Drake’s alleged response to Pokimane has been shared online 

During a 2022 appearance on The H3 Podcast, Pokimane also blasted the artist when the topic of crypto gambling was broached

Drake’s ‘braids’ remark appeared to be a reference either to his new hairstyle or to the song Euphoria, the diss track rival Kendrick Lamar wrote about Drake. 

It’s not the first time Drake has been in hot water with Pokimane. 

During a 2022 appearance on The H3 Podcast, Pokimane blasted the artist after crypto gambling came up during the conversation. 

‘I used to be such a Drake fan girl,’ she said during an interview on The H3 Podcast. ‘Showing your true colors…. as a Canadian we’re disowning you. We’ll keep the music though. We’re disowning you.’ 

The snub is just the latest issue Drake has been dealing with. 

The musician recently filed legal documents against Universal Music Group, claiming the company used illegal methods to promote the Kendrick Lamar diss track Not Like Us.

The Grammy-winning entertainer said in legal docs reviewed by TMZ Hip Hop that the musical monolith implemented the use of ‘bots and a payola scheme’ in its efforts to push the single, which was released this past May.

The Toronto native said that information provided to him from an ‘inside source’ indicated that UMG breached FCC statutes in engaging in the practice of payola, according to legal docs.

Drake filed the legal papers Monday in Manhattan via his Drake’s Frozen Moments LLC, saying UMG breached state law in its conduct, specifically the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, according to Billboard.

The legal filing Drake submit is considered a ‘pre-action’ under state law, which calls for a probe prior to a full suit being filed. 

The First Person Shooter performer, whose full name is Aubrey Drake Graham, said UMG made ‘covert payments’ to many organizations, including radio stations, to play and plug the diss track aimed at him, TMZ reported.

Drake, 38, has filed legal documents against Universal Music Group, claiming the company used illegal methods to promote the Kendrick Lamar diss track Not Like Us. Pictured in LA in 2019

Drake’s feud with Lamar, 37, (pictured in 2023 in NYC) dominated hip-hop headlines this year

Drake, whose feud with Lamar, 37, dominated hip-hop headlines earlier this year, said in legal docs that UMG has a checkered past in regards to payola, also referred to as ‘pay for play.’

Drake’s legal team said in court docs that ‘UMG … conspired with and paid currently unknown parties to use ‘bots’ to artificially inflate the spread of Not Like Us and deceive consumers into believing the song was more popular than it was in reality.’ 

Drake said that an insider told him that UMG executives also authorized the spending of funds on bots to boost Not Like Us’s Spotify totals, garnering 30 million streams.

Drake also named Spotify in the legal filing, according to Billboard.

UMG brass also paid social media influencers to push the single, which includes inflammatory lyrics aimed at him (referring to him as a ‘certified pedophile’), Drake said his source informed him, according to TMZ.

The Slime You Out rapper said in legal docs that UMG also ignored enforcing copyright requirements via social media, in an effort to make the track go viral.

The Family Matters vocalist – whose own music is distributed via UMG – said that one goal in filing the lawsuit was to audit UMG in their alleged payments to iHeartRadio and its affiliates.

Drake told the court that details in regards to that issue could be the foundation of a civil fraud and racketeering suit against UMG and their collaborators. 

Drake said in legal docs that facts he can already prove could support a defamation lawsuit against UMG.

UMG has a checkered past in regards to payola, also referred to as ‘pay for play,’ Drake said in legal docs 

Drake has long been affiliated with UMG, through subsidiaries such as Lil Wayne’s Young Money Entertainment and Republic Records. Pictured in 2019 in LA 

Drake has long been affiliated with UMG, through subsidiaries such as Lil Wayne’s Young Money Entertainment and Republic Records, Billboard reported.

Lamar has also been with UMG throughout his career, via the companies Top Dawg Entertainment and Interscope, in addition to his own communications firm pgLang.

Drakes legal team noted that UMG in May of 2006 paid a $12 million fine to the New York State Attorney General to settle a probe in to whether the company had used payola tactics to boost the music of artists.

Among those UMG paid to promote 18 years back included artists such as Ashlee Simpson, Brian McKnight and Nick Lachey, among others, authorities in New York said at the time, Variety reported.

A spokesperson for Universal Music Group told Dailymail.com in a statement: ‘The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue. We employ the highest ethical practices in our marketing and promotional campaigns.

‘No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.’

Dailymail.com has reached out to reps for Drake for comment on the story.