The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 10.19 The SSSniperwolf Situation Got Worse, Youtube Doesn't Care About Your Safety, & Today's News

Episode Date: October 19, 2023

Use my link to install Dungeon Hunter VI for Free: https://dhskol.onelink.me/c9XC/708lrvmj & Get a special starter pack worth $50 [Available for the next 30 days] Join the launch event for free chances to win amazing prizes like iPhone 15 Pro Max, PS5, Apple Watch and more.  Visit https://www.dungeonhunter6.com/luckydraw/ for details.https://beautifulbastard.com NEW DROP + FREE Shipping on Orders over $150 Catch up on our latest PDS: https://youtu.be/Ko3XOjFo-6g?si=bX8xkqG9DxypINU4 –✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - People Furious at YouTube As Sssniperwolf Controversy Gets Worse 04:37 - Cops Claim Defamation After Bodycam Footage Goes Viral  07:22 - “Harlem Park Three” Get $48 Million After Wrongful Imprisonment 08:58 - A-Listers Offer $150 Million Boost in Dues to Help End SAG Strike 10:22 - Sponsored by Dungeon Hunter 6 11:16 - Poll Finds Democrats & Republicans Support Using Violence Against Opponents 11:54 - Sidney Powell Pleads Guilty to Election Interference Charges in Plea Deal 14:20 - Canada to Legalize Medically Assisted Death for People Addicted to Drugs 16:21 - Interview With Rep. Ro Khanna About Term Limits, SCOTUS Ethics & More 25:09 - Your Thoughts on Yesterday’s Stories ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxx Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Star Pralle, Chris Tolve  ———————————— #DeFranco #Sssniperwolf #Jacksfilms ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we're talking about why people are so furious at YouTube right now. We've got cops suing a guy for posting now-viral body cam footage of them arresting him. Sidney Powell has pleaded guilty. The Harlem Three get paid, but is it really enough? And we talked to Representative Ro Khanna about why people don't even trust their own politicians. Now we're talking about all that and so much more on today's extra-large Philip DeFranco show. You daily dive into the news, all made possible by beautiful bastards like you, support things like our beautiful bastard drop that we just dropped this week. And there's so much to grab. Crop

tees and hoodies of Emotionally Exhausted and Keep Going. And we included a lot of tie-dyes with this drop because in addition to Keep Going, we had One Day We'll All Be Skeletons and Ghouls Just Wanna Have Fun. Perfect for spooky season along with As Above, So Below. One of my sneaky favorites is the Everyone is a Villain in Someone Else's Storyline. That's in addition to other goodness like the trucker hat, black denim jacket, the candles, the pins. So grab what you want while you can, but enough of me being Shillip DeFranco. We got a lot of news to talk about today, so just hit that subscribe button and let's just jump into it. Starting with, y'all, people are pissed off at YouTube right now. I mean, not that they actually care unless it affects ad dollars,

but people are pissed. Earlier this week, we talked about that whole doxing scandal with creator Sniperwolf and JacksFilms, with her posting an Instagram story where she showed up to his home, revealing his house to all her followers in the process, obviously a major privacy and safety violation. And her doing this after JacksFilms had made a ton of videos criticizing Sniperwolf's reaction videos because many in the community

believe she's just really stealing and siphoning content more than really transformatively reacting. And so yeah, he's been poking fun at her, but also trying to call attention to the credit small creators deserve in works like this. And Sniperwolf has obviously not been a fan of that, equating those to harassment. But what appears to be an overwhelming majority

don't agree with that, and they've taken Jack's film side, arguing that not only what she did was wrong and reckless, but that YouTube needs to step in and either demonetize or flat out ban her for doxing another YouTuber. But as your resident critic, Philip DeFranco, predicted, YouTube has done nothing.

And so many have accused YouTube of favoritism, thinking that they're just letting her get away with this because she's such a massive creator. With some also saying that YouTube has just been plainly tone-deaf amid this controversy. And this in part because yesterday the main YouTube Twitter account tweeted, Would it be too meta to do a reaction video to a reaction video? And mind you, this whole situation started because of reaction videos to reaction videos. The core of this situation is about commentary and critique and what is fair and square to do in these reaction videos. Which is why I decided to poke the bear

a little bit yesterday, responding to that in a tweet that kind of blew up saying, "'Just as a silly, silly, funny goof, "'y'all should react to this video.'" Which I should let you know is the second tweet that I thought of. The first was that I was gonna quote tweet when they said, check in on yourself,

check in on your friends, and I was just gonna say, "'Not like that, Sniperwolf.'" But I do wanna say, like, I have no ill intent to whoever's running the YouTube youtube twitter account i know there's probably like just one or two people trying to do their job disconnected from any sort of enforcement i mean it is still incredibly tone deaf and stupid and if you had scheduled tweets you should have really checked them i don't agree with people that were saying like whoever runs their twitter account is just taunting us at this point or like who's ever in charge of enforcing

the policies on youtube they're not also running the. But by maybe virally dunking on Twitter, those people become aware. And actually, on that note, you have others out there saying the community needs to really ramp up the pressure campaign and force YouTube to act. Writing things like, do not stop spamming them and telling them to take action against Sniperwolf. They are blatantly ignoring handling the situation properly and are waiting for it to die down. Don't let it die down. Don't stop holding them accountable. If Sniperwolf gets away with this, that tells other creators that you can dox and endanger people so long as you make YouTube enough money. It's blatant favoritism and it's disgusting. And for his part, Jaxfilms has also posted about this situation earlier in the week, writing, YouTube, the best time to remove

SniperWolf from your platform was Friday night when she showed up to our home, filmed and posted a live video of our house to her 5 million plus Instagram followers while my wife and I were inside and dared me to come out. The second best time is now. I've sent video evidence to the appropriate channels and I'm happy to share directly with you. This is a clear example of doxing and a clear violation of your policy stated here. But again, and people can call me a cynic,

I think that unless some sort of charges are filed or anything like that, YouTube's not gonna do a fucking thing. And that is, and understand this is just my opinion, I don't believe that they enforce their policies evenly. A part of that is often logistical. There's just so many fucking channels and so many things are happening.

Though here, that's obviously not the case. This is too high profile for that to be like, oh, it got lost in the shuffle. Secondly, it is my belief that if this was not Sniperwolf and this was someone that maybe was more on the outs with YouTube, right? Someone who was not their keynote speaker. And at the very least,

I think they would take some sort of action. Also, I will say with this, I've been hit up by people saying, hey hey have you asked your youtube contact about this there's really no fucking point i've been handed off so many times at this point i feel like a problem child also the reasoning there could be anything it could just be they have other things to work on but it also could be you know as part of this gig you raise awareness on topics like what we're talking about here class actions against their parent company but personally whenever i can i try to assume that there's not like a ill intent so yeah that's why uh my opinion on this is a completely

fucked up situation around sniper wolf but i don't think that youtube's gonna do anything but i guess also with that i'll pass the question off to you what are your thoughts here on the whole situation and do you think that youtube should do anything and if so what is it and then this guy had no idea that a simple traffic stop would earn him both internet fame and a legal battle so this is 19 year old tavin galinakis and he's driving through Iowa when two cops pull him over for having his high beams on, which could blind oncoming cars. So officers Nathan Winters and Christopher Wing,

they take him through the normal process. They ask for registration, insurance, you know, all that. They then order him out of the car and after putting him in their patrol car, Winters drops this bomb on him out of the blue. How much have you had to drink tonight? None. What do you mean none?

I've had nothing to drink, okay? Why would your eyes be watery and bloodshot? So this kid's begging to just take a breathalyzer and go home, but instead, the cops first make him go through a series of field sobriety tests. Stuff like looking into a flashlight, standing on one leg, following the finger with his eyes, and walking along a straight line. During which, he blurts out, Come on, man, it's too easy!

They then finally give him a breathalyzer, and it shows that he has zero alcohol in his system. So Galinakis is ready to go home, but then Officer Winters reads him his Miranda rights and accuses him of having smoked marijuana. Saying that he did so poorly on the fuel test that even if it's not alcohol, he may have something else in his system. To which Galinakis responds, I blew zero, so now you're trying to think I smoke weed. That's what's going on. You can't do that man, you really can't do that. Absolutely I can't.

Is he allowed to do that? Yes he is. So then they put him in handcuffs. They take him down to the station. They put him through a comprehensive drug evaluation. And that, again, showing that he is not intoxicated whatsoever. But very notably, that's just where this story begins, because two weeks later, Galinakis posts the body cam footage to YouTube, where it racks up two million views. And then some months later, he sues the Newton Police Department for a violation of his constitutional rights, false arrest, and negligent supervision and training by the county. But then, the cops fire back with their own lawsuit alleging defamation and invasion of privacy.

And that reportedly because the teen inserted captions with his own commentary into the viral YouTube video and made statements in similar clips on TikTok and Facebook. With him saying about Officer Winters, The guy is on the slow side of the spectrum and he sounded like a little kid who was role-playing a cop during recess. I'm thinking in my head, no way this guy passed training. Also saying that Wing, quote, sounds like he's faded as hell, and adding that he himself had been, quote, kidnapped, then raped by the NPD all night. But then, in two separate decisions, the district judge and the cop's lawsuit dismissed nearly all their claims, ruling that the teen's words were mostly non-actionable statements of opinion or rhetorical hyperbole. But still, the judge left open claims

of defamation and invasion of privacy relating to a false statement that Winters had been convicted of domestic abuse. With captions saying that the officer, quote, beat the shit out of his girlfriend, though, the lawsuit states that while Winters had a protective order filed against him, he hasn't technically been charged or convicted of domestic abuse. And so now we're just waiting for a trial date if one's forthcoming. And so this is going to be very interesting to see how it plays out in its own right,

but it's also kind of amazing when you think about how technology like body cams and social media have really changed how all this works. A couple of decades ago, this would have just been some he said, she said thing. But now every single thing that happens can turn into a giant, giant mess with a public audience of millions. And that's an in addition to the claims, the counterclaims, all the lawsuits. But we wait to see what comes next. I'd love to know your thoughts here. And then how much is 36 years of your life worth to you? And I don't mean it in the sense of like you have a certain job, like just all of the hours and all of your days for all of those years. And so for me, my answer is I don't

think there's any amount of money. That's like my life on this planet is already so limited. But for these three men who were wrongfully convicted for 36 years, they find themselves on the opposite end of that question. So they've already lost all of that time. And a giant pile of cash is the only justice they're likely to get. You've got Alfred Chestnut, Ransom Watkins, and Andrew Stewart, who were all 16 years old back when this happened in 1983. They skipped school one day, and they visited their old middle school in Baltimore, Harlem Park Junior High. And after walking around and chatting with former teachers, security kicked them out and locked the doors, according to evidence later presented at trial. But half an hour later, somebody else inside the

school shot a 14-year-old boy and stole his jacket, for which the trio were blamed. This, even though witnesses told police they had seen Michael Willis, the actual shooter, running from the school, discarding a handgun and wearing the same jacket. Plus, witnesses even failed to identify any of the three suspects in the photo lineups. But still, the police charged these three, who were juveniles, as adults, and the lead prosecutor told the defense that there was no evidence exonerating them, and they got life sentences. But now, after 36 years, a review of their case, which became known as the Harlem Three, cleared them of any wrongdoing, and they were set free. With all of that bringing us to yesterday, when the Baltimore City Board of Estimates voted to award the men $48 million, which reportedly made this the highest payout ever dispensed in Maryland and one of the largest multi-plaintiff settlements in U.S. history. And

it comes after the men already received $3 million from the state in 2020 under a compensation plan created for cases like theirs. And while there's part of me that's obviously happy that these men got something, tens of millions of dollars split three ways, isn't nothing, these three human beings, that one day they were 16 years old, then without doing anything,

they were put in a box for 36 years, and now they're 52. And then actors are now nearing 100 days on strike, and some of the biggest names in the business are trying to get the ball rolling again. With reports coming out that A-listers like George Clooney, Scarlett Johansson, Tyler Perry, Ben Affleck, and Emma Stone held a meeting with SAG leadership this week. It apparently took place over Zoom, and according to Variety, the tone was supportive, but it wasn't all fun and games. The

actors apparently expressed frustrations that negotiations had broken down and said that they want a path forward so the strike can end. And this morning, we actually got an update that some major actors are willing to put their money where their mouths are. The Deadline reporting that some of Hollywood's biggest names are willing to kick in money where their mouths are. With Deadline reporting that some of Hollywood's biggest names are willing to kick in $150 million in dues over three years to help get the strike in the rear view. And so basically, the proposal would eliminate caps on membership dues so that the top earners can pay more. And then that money can be used to improve health benefits and other things that are on the table for SAG right now. The stars are also reportedly coming up with a

new residual formula that would prioritize working and struggling actors over the big names who already have cash. And with that, George Clooney giving a statement to Deadline saying, a lot of the top earners want to be part of the solution. We think it's fair for us to pay more into the union. We also are suggesting a bottom-up residual structure, meaning that the top of the call sheet would be the last to collect residuals, not the first. And adding these negotiations will be ongoing, but we wanted to show that we're all in this together and find ways to help close the gap on actors getting paid. Now, also with this, Deadline didn't say how many actors or exactly who else would be contributing, nor did they say SAG spots on all of it. Though,

some headlines have come out saying the plan wasn't received too well, but there's also not many details there. But it will be interesting to see if anything comes from this offer or if the pressure that we're seeing from celebrities puts an end to the strike. Though obviously, it needs to be remembered, they can't solve every problem. A lot of this has to come from the studios. But still, this is very big and very interesting. And then I'd like to take the time to thank the sponsor of today's show and the reason I may have been slightly late to a few meetings lately, Dungeon Hunter 6.

This is the long awaited new entry in the acclaimed Dungeon Hunter series and the wait was definitely worth it. It's completely free to play, so download it now with a link down below or scan the QR code on screen. I gotta say, I've been loving the gameplay and Dungeon Hunter 6 defeating a boss is just the start.

You can summon up to three of them to your squad during battle to give you a big edge. In the late game, you can even shapeshift into a boss to unlock ultimate power. It's actually pretty awesome, and there's over 100 unique bosses to choose from. Also, Dungeon Hunter 6 has some of the best graphics I've ever seen in a mobile game. The new 3D graphics are stunning, it runs so smooth. There's also tons more to do, too, from leveling up your skill tree to teaming up to fight other guilds. To download Dungeon Hunter 6 with my link below, or scan the QR code if you're viewing on a PC. You'll get a special starter pack worth $50,

including a special secret rare, Demonic Wolf. And starting October 15th, you can enter the Lucky Spin event, win an iPhone 15 Pro Max, PS5, and more. And check the description for more details. And then, both Republicans and Democrats now support using violence against the opposing party. That is what was just revealed in a new poll

by the University of Virginia Center for Politics. And understand, I'm not talking about like small minorities here. And very interestingly, the percentage of Democrats was actually higher than Republicans. So only just so, right? 41% of Biden supporters say they believe that people who support the Republican Party

and its ideologies have become, quote, so extreme in what they want that it is acceptable to use violence to stop them from achieving their goals. Meanwhile, 38% of Trump supporters said they believe the same for the Democratic Party. Or to put it in other words, around four in every 10 people think it's okay to use violence against the opposing political party. So, you know, just a fun little fact as we head

into the 2024 election cycle. And then pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, right, the release, the Kraken lady, widely known for spreading the former president's false election claims, has now pleaded guilty to conspiring to interfere in Georgia's election. And this is absolutely massive because, as Axios explains, she is the first of Trump's inner circle to enter a guilty plea and admit to crimes in connection with subverting 2020 election results. Right, and a very key thing is that this move by Powell comes as part of a plea deal that she reached just one day before jury selection and her criminal trial was set to begin. And remember, she's not alone here, right? We talked about it before. Powell was charged in the sweeping Georgia case earlier this year alongside Trump and many other main players in his attempts to subvert the

election, with Powell specifically in the indictment being hit with seven different charges, six of which involved conspiracies to interfere with the Georgia election, including two counts of conspiracy to commit election fraud, and the seventh was a violation of Georgia's racketeering law, with Powell specifically accused of conspiring with others to illegally access election data in Georgia's rural Coffey County without authorization, and prosecutors alleging that Powell herself entered into a contract with the forensics firm Sullivan Strickler to send a team to Coffey County to tamper with electronic ballot markers and tabulating machines and take information from election systems. Right, and Powell initially pleaded not guilty to the charges with her lawyer repeatedly arguing in court that she had nothing to do with the Coffey

County breach, while also claiming that it wasn't even a breach at all and had been authorized by election officials. But the plea deal that she entered into today contradicts literally all of that, with Powell pleading guilty to all six misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to intentionally interfere with the performance of election duties. And as a part of that plea, she admitted to all of the conspiracy allegations that prosecutors made, including that Powell hired Sullivan Strickler employees to access and copy voting systems without authorization. And so now, as far as the details of the deal, Powell has agreed to receive six years probation, pay a $6,000 fine, as well as $2,700 in restitution to the state of Georgia, and write an apology letter to the state's citizens. But then also, very important thing here, Powell also agreed to testify against her co-defendants in the Georgia case. And that is

absolutely major, because while it's unclear how high up Powell's involvement went into the efforts to subvert the election, it opens up the possibility that she could implicate Trump or other defendants like Giuliani. Though also, I guess, regardless of the specifics there, the fact that she even copped to these charges is a pretty big blow to Trump by itself, especially because it means a member of his legal team is now cooperating with prosecutors. While she's not the first person to take a plea deal, she is just the first in Trump's close circle. Because last month, we saw Scott Hall, a bail bondsman, reach a similar plea deal where he pleaded guilty to many of the same charges Powell faced for his involvement in the Coffey County scheme. And it's very possible there that he

implicated Powell as part of his agreement, which very well may have contributed to her last minute decision to take her own plea deal. Which if all of that were to be true, it seems like the dominoes might be beginning to fall here. Though that doesn't answer the big question of if those dominoes will fall close enough to Trump to knock him over as well. And then is Canada's assisted suicide program turning into eugenics? That is what's being debated right now. Right in that, because Canada is set to expand their medical assistance and dying program, otherwise known as MAID, next spring to include people with mental illnesses, including those addicted to drugs. Whereas currently, people are only eligible for the MAID program if they have a, quote, grievous and irremediable medical condition, like a disease

or disability, that has put them into irreversible decline and has caused physical or psychological suffering. And this idea of including people with mental illness, and specifically those addicted to drugs, is currently a hotly debated topic. And not just by politicians, but also by the Canadian Society of Addiction Medicine in a conference this week. We had Dr. David Martel presenting a framework for assessing those with substance use disorders for MAID at this conference. And he said, I don't think it's fair, and the government doesn't think it's fair, to exclude people from eligibility because their medical disorder or their suffering is related to a mental illness.

And adding, as a subset of that, it's not fair to exclude people from eligibility because their medical disorder or their suffering is related to a mental illness. And adding, as a subset of that, it's not fair to exclude people from eligibility purely because their mental disorder might either partly or in full be a substance use disorder. It has to do with treating people equally. However, the inclusion of drug users in the MAID program doesn't sit well with many, including Zoe Dodd, a harm reduction advocate in Toronto, who said, I just think that MAID, when it has entered the area around mental health and substance use, is really rooted in eugenics. And there are people who are really struggling around substance use and people do not actually get the kind of support and help they need. And with all this, we've seen other advocates and drug users taking offense to the conversation, saying that public health measures like access to overdose

prevention sites, a regulated drug supply, or even just housing and employment for all those lacking are significantly better options. Now, in response to this pushback, Martel has agreed that these programs are underfunded and hopes that this conversation will bring more attention to them. Also going on to say that there is no intention of pushing the MAID program on people and it likely wouldn't even be suggested outside of the conversation of end-of-life planning. Also noting that there's a long list of things assessors will need to account for when considering if a person with a substance use disorder is eligible for the MAID program. But that hasn't comforted many advocates, with Karen Ward, a drug user activist in Vancouver, saying that the expansion of MAID is a, quote, statement in federal law that some people aren't really human.

And adding, the government has made death accessible while a better life remains impossible. Homes for all, guaranteed dignified incomes, access to healthcare, education, and employment. These aren't radical demands. But as this comes down the pipeline and this continues to be debated, I gotta pass the question off to you.

What are your thoughts here? And then, trust in the American political systems has reached historic lows. And while it just kind of felt like that, that's also what was found by an insanely grim new poll from Pew that emphasizes how Americans' views of politics and politicians are, as Pew described, unrelentingly negative. According to the survey, more than six in every 10 Americans express little or no confidence in the future of the U.S. political system. And only 16% of the public said they trust the federal government all or most of the time. With Pew noting that while this decline in trust is part of a 20-year-long trend,

today it stands among the lowest levels dating back nearly seven decades, and adding that more Americans expressed unfavorable views of the Supreme Court than favorable ones for the first time ever since polling on the issue started nearly four decades ago. Meanwhile, two in three Americans say they always or often feel exhausted when they think about politics, and the top two words they use to describe US politics are divisive and corrupt. And this, it might be my favorite one, when asked to describe in their own words

the biggest problem with the political system, one in every three respondents simply said politicians. And that was the most frequent response. But beyond all the doom and gloom, Pew also found that there are large percentages of Americans who want political reforms. A massive majority, 79%, believing there should be age limits on Congress, with nearly just as many saying the same for the

Supreme Court. Also, almost 90% of respondents supported term limits for Congress. Most Americans are also critical of money in politics, with 84% saying special interests and lobbyists have too much influence over politics, 72% saying there should be limits on political spending. And so politicians should be taking this information very seriously as we head into the 2024 elections. And actually, there we have seen some lawmakers saying that fighting government corruption and promoting reform should be a main political platform in this next election cycle. And this including the likes of Representative Ro Khanna, who recently introduced a five-point plan to fight against the falling trust in government. With those five points being, one, to ban all super PAC and lobbyist donations to Congress. Two, ban Congress from trading stocks.

Three, enact a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. And then four and five, impose term limits for both the Supreme Court and Congress. Two, ban Congress from trading stocks. Three, enact a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. And then four and five, impose term limits for both the Supreme Court and Congress. And so to get a better idea of this plan and what's on the line here moving into 2024 for you, we talked to Khanna and tried to break down the various components of this plan. And we actually started by asking him about his plans regarding banning PAC and lobbyist donations, because that's the stickiest of his points, both legally and logistically. Citizens United has such a strong hold on money in politics. And the core of that ruling was that limiting independent political spending from corporations and other groups violates First Amendment rights to free

speech. And with that, Khanna did say that in order to ban PAC and lobbyist money, Citizens United would first need to be overturned. I don't think. You've got unlimited access to music, but time? Now that's limited. The PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard gets you unlimited PC Optimum points, free grocery delivery, and time back for what matters. Save time and earn $1,100 in average value each year. The PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard. The card for living unlimited.

Conditions apply to all benefits. Visit pcfinancial.ca for details. Value is for illustrative purposes only. When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most? When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard. When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill. When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner. Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer. So download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes. Plus, enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply.

Instacart. Groceries that over-deliver. Money is speech. And it would require that Citizens United be overturned to be able to ban PAC and lobbyist money. Now, even if that were to happen at some point, Khanna conceded that it would still be hard to get support for banning big money in politics because both Republicans and Democrats are complicit. There's big money on both sides. I would say that some of the big money on the Republican side is

undermining reforms with pharmaceuticals, reforms with big oil. But I'm against all kinds of big money. And both sides are part of this system that isn't working. But even if a full scale ban on big money isn't in the cards, Connors still urged his colleagues to agree to not take PAC money. And that's actually something that he thinks Biden should be able to get behind, too. When we asked the congressman if he thinks Biden would actually agree to not take the PAC money, he responded. Well, I think he should. He doesn't really need it. He's the incumbent president. He's going to raise a lot of money online. And President Obama

showed you can win two terms overwhelmingly without taking PAC money. We also pressed Conner on whether Congress has the ability to impose a code of ethics on the Supreme Court. There's been a lot of debate on that question with Justice Samuel Alito gaining a lot of attention for an interview he did recently where he said Congress doesn't have the authority to set a code of ethics for the high court and claiming that there's nothing in the Constitution that gives them that ability. But kind of push back against that claim that Congress has no authority. Well, ultimately, we do have that. I mean, we're Article One of the Constitution. We get to have certain say on rules. And Congress, of course, also has the power of having hearings,

impeachment hearings. And I don't think that the Supreme Court would strike down common sense reforms that Congress passed or the American public would be outraged if they did that. If they said, no, we don't believe that we should live by the same rules as other Americans, they really would be seen as an aristocratic class. So I think that's an empty threat by Alito. And to that last point, kind of says that the ethics code that he'd want to set for the Supreme Court is really just the bare minimum to bring them to the same level of accountability as the other branches of government. The irony is whether you're a Republican or Democratic member of Congress, if you go out for lunch, if you go out for dinner and you have a bill more than 100 bucks, you'll either pay it, your portion of it, or you'll disclose it. And this is true about members of Congress, Senate. Why should Supreme

Court justices not have basic disclosure requirements? I mean, they're taking these fancy vacations. We read they're taking trips. They should disclose it and they should disclose the nature of that relationship. Beyond the trickier elements of Connors plan, we also got some specifics on the more cut and dry provisions like term limits, which, again, is very important here because, as we saw in the Pew poll, there's broad public support for that. I like 18 years for Supreme Court justices so every president can appoint two justices. I'm not wedded to that,

but that makes the system work. Every president gets two appointments and you still keep nine Supreme Court justices. For members of Congress, I've proposed six terms, 12 years, and two terms for the Senate. Again, I'm not wedded to those numbers. The congressman also acknowledged that in order to get this bill to pass,

he'll likely have to make some concessions, or things like allowing members currently in Congress to be grandfathered in. I'm for any bill that will pass. I think grandfathering it or starting the cloth once the bill passes is an easier way to get members on board. And to that point, regardless of how much public support there is for these measures that Khanna is proposing, unfortunately, everything's going to come down to how Congress feels. And they have absolutely not been so keen on these ideas in the past.

I mean, we've seen multiple stock trading bans proposed, Khanna himself even previously introducing term limit bills and a Supreme Court ethics bill being floated around the Senate earlier this summer. But none, zero of those policies have passed either chamber. It's a lot of flapping gums and hand waving. And so we asked Conor why he thinks that these past attempts have failed. And he actually said it's because Biden and other party leaders have not thrown their weight behind the proposals. Well, we need the president to get behind it. I would have loved the president to have said this is part of the State of the Union.

As you know, when the president gets behind something, that makes a difference. We need people to run on it. Senators, Congress people, the party. I'd like the parties to get behind this agenda, leadership to get behind this agenda. Conner also arguing that support for these ideas could have massive implications for the 2024 elections. I believe if the president endorsed my policies and directed the party to embrace this in their platform, it would dramatically increase his chances of succeeding and unifying this country. And the same is true for Congress, right? Connors says the reason leadership hasn't

put these matters to a vote before is because it's very hard for members to vote against common sense reforms that are supported by the people they represent. My belief is they'd be making a big mistake. They'd be going against public sentiment and they'd probably lose their seat in an election. So I'm confident if we can get a vote that people will vote for it. Even if they don't really want to, they'll see the sentiment. And on that note, when we asked the congressman why he thinks that his proposal will actually get enough momentum this time when elements of his plans have failed in the past, he responded. I think what my plan does is it's a galvanizing movement. And it's a movement to make this a 2024 election issue.

What I'd like to see is every candidate have to take a pledge, say, I'm going to support Connors 5-point reform plan. They may have their own version of the bills, but they will say they're committed to voting for term limits, for banning stock trading, for banning PAC money. And if it becomes a 2024 election issue and people are running on it, then I think it gives momentum to see Spanberger's bill or other bills pass. And that's really what we need. For Khanna, this proposal is all about just getting members on the record on these issues so the American people can see where they stand.

This is the first step to actually getting other bills passed. Because some of those bills have bipartisan support, Khanna says that even if he can't get Republicans to co-sponsor his five-point plan, individual provisions will get support from both sides. So while he plans to introduce his five-point plan as a single bill by the end of the year, he's fine with it being broken up as long as Congress votes on the record so Americans can hold them accountable. And so we can actually move towards

actually enacting these policies. But the main thing is that it needs to be a vehicle for mobilization so that this becomes an agenda that Democrat or Republican candidates can pledge to and get behind. So even if we don't get the reform in 2024, we're committed to it starting in 2025. I believe if we can mobilize around this agenda, this five point reform plan, we can win back trust of the American people and we can

start to really change the culture in Washington. But ultimately, with all that said, I now I got to pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts here? Not only in what do you support, but do you actually think that Congress would go along with something like this or any of this? I think regarding the age of the term limits, the grandfathering in, it makes it a little more likely. But I, you know, I guess I'm a part of the majority here. I just don't have faith in our politicians. I mean, our government barely ever actually holds other people accountable. It's going to hold itself accountable. But also keep in mind, I am a self-described cynic. So that's a story, a little bit of my feelings. And now I pass the question off to you. And then let's talk

about yesterday today, where we take a look back at yesterday's show. We covered a lot of news. That was a really big show. We dive into those comments and we see what stories stood out to you, what your thoughts were, what your feelings were, what your experiences are. And there we saw a lot of conversation around the Natalie Holloway story in Cold Case. With people saying of her murderer, he had 20 years to apologize. It means nothing when he's apologizing before sentencing. As well as people saying the story made them so sad and angry. And adding time after time, people say, why didn't you ignore him?

Just block him and just say no. What's the worst that could happen? This, this is the worst thing. It's all of us women's fears of saying no. Every time you don't fulfill a man's wants, the absolute fear of S.A.M. being murdered. Also, the murderer saying that he was born again. I saw people saying and agreeing with the statement, it's a little difficult for me to believe someone is born again and feels remorse over the murder of a woman while in prison in another country for the murder of a

second woman. I also saw a lot of people sounding off on the school lunches, lunchables story. Some of y'all saying, thank you for talking about the lunchables. In Philadelphia, the school district is fighting parents to keep them out of the cafeteria. It's sad how marketing has become superior to professional nutrition recommendations. I hope the district stays strong and doesn't give in to the parents' demands, which I will say was really interesting to hear because I thought definitely it would be the other way around. It's crazy that we can live in a world where the school's like, please don't let us poison your kids, which also may give an answer to one of the popular questions in the comments yesterday. One of y'all said, as a European, seeing the food in US schools is baffling. It was obvious this was

going to happen, but how have parents and politicians not stepped in by now? I guess because apparently in some places the parents want this. People also sharing their stories. Saying things like, My mother-in-law was a school lunch lady for 30 years. She took pride in her job and stated that she refused to give children food she herself would not eat. But saying, After she retired, she came to my daughter's school to eat lunch with her.

There were served rock-hard rolls, expired milk, half-roast and fruit pieces and meat that even the lunch ladies working there couldn't identify. She asked. She was horrified and cried since that was the only meal some of these kids would eat that day. We live in the country and a poor rural town and food wasn't even fit for a dog. But then the final comment I'll include today is love these long shows and Phil seems to actually be enjoying it more and more lately. There was a time I thought we'll have another six months tops

but now I can see him doing this for a while longer. And to that, I actually want to say a few things. The first, I'm glad y'all like long shows. That said, every time we post, to some degree, everything is an experiment. Personally, I think our sweet spot for long shows is 22 to 27 minutes. When we hit like the 35 plus minute shows, I think that's too much. But you know, certain days the news calls for it. And when the world's not on fire as much, you know,

I think that's where the 15 minute shows and stuff work. But it is also crazy to think like this, this originated as a two to three minute news show. And then secondly, regarding like enjoying it more, definitely doing this longer that I actually completely credit my team. My team that we've built out is fucking amazing. They are the only reason I can consistently put out this content without wanting to jump off the roof. Well, obviously the news will constantly fluctuate and the views will always fluctuate because, you know, we can't control how our content is being pushed out by the platforms. I feel like over the last month, we've really hit a good stride. And now it's really just about

maximizing the stuff that we're putting out. Like, for example, we put out these shows that can be like 18 to 30 minutes. Over the past months, we then chop those up into TikToks. Then there's like a whole set of TikTok channels. We've done that to some degree with YouTube shorts. But then honestly, everything else just comes back to the first reason I even started posting videos in the first place. The news is such a mess, and it constantly feels like everyone's just yelling things, and this is the only thing that ever felt like there was a community of people that cared about things, that were willing to talk. So, hey, thank you for being a part of this.

But also, that is where your daily dive into the news is going to end today. Of course, for more news you need to know, I got you covered right here. You can click or tap, or I got links in the description down below. Also, you can snag yourself some awesome and support the show with our beautiful bastard drop. Go there. But, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here next time.