The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 11.7 Racist Texts Exposed, Gal Gadot vs Mia Khalifa, The Truth About America's Water Crisis & Todays News

Episode Date: November 7, 2023

Go to www.babbel.com/defranco to get 55% off! Go to http://shadyrays.com and use code PHIL for 50% off 2 or more pairs of polarized sunglasses. https://wakeandmakecoffee.com We Just RESTOCKED! Up to 50% OFF Your First Bag! Catch up on our latest PDS: https://youtu.be/9RGKWVGjmf4?si=2Easo0uV450ZJHw8 –✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 0:00 - San Jose Police Officer Resigns After Racist Texts Go Public 02:44 - Gal Gadot Criticized For Involvement in Screenings of IDF Film 04:49 - Indiana Woman Thought She Drove Into “Israel School” - Was Actually a Hate Group 06:35 - Active-Duty Members of the US Military At Risk of Data Being Sold Overseas 09:09 - Sponsored by Babbel 10:17 - Camps and Courses Now Teach Kids How to be Influencers 15:27 - SCOTUS Considers Cases Regarding Gun Rights for Domestic Abusers 20:09 - Sponsored by Shady Rays 21:14 - Report Finds U.S. Is Heading Toward a Groundwater Catastrophe 27:00 - Your Thoughts on Yesterday’s Stories NYT Groundwater Report: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/08/28/climate/groundwater-drying-climate-change.html ——————————   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 #GalGadot #MiaKhalifa ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we're talking about this woman who tried to commit a hate crime against a Jewish school only to discover that it was actually an anti-Jewish organization. Gal Gadot's receiving massive backlash over a graphic Israel Hamas documentary she's seemingly promoting. A white cop who killed a black man who was hailed as a hero turns out to be the most racist guy you've ever seen. White data brokers selling personal information of countless U.S. military members is so concerning. The Supreme Court's hearing a case right now about allowing domestic abusers to own guns. And the U.S. is facing a looming catastrophe over groundwater. We're talking about all that and so much more on today's brand new,

extra large Philip DeFranco show. You daily dive into the news, so just make sure you're subscribed and let's jump into it. Starting with, you know, usually today when people are being racist, they kind of try to hide it. You know, they're subtle about it. But then sometimes you get a guy like we're talking about today and you're like, oh yeah, he just fucking hates black people. Meet Officer Mark McNamara, who at the time of this story was a cop in the San Jose Police

Department. Last year, he responded to a restaurant brawl in which a 20-year-old black man by the name of Kayon Green was labeled a hero for wrestling a ghost gun away from another man. But when McNamara arrived on the scene, he shot Green four times in the abdomen, leg, and arm. With police claiming that they believed that it was an active shooter situation and saying they issued Green commands to drop the gun. And bystander footage showing that Green had his back turned to the officers as he was leaving and McNamara shot him as soon as he turned around. But also Green's lawyers say he didn't have enough time to recognize that the police were on the scene or hear their commands and all the commotion. And so he later filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city and we're actually

still waiting on that trial. But also here's the thing, I'm not calling this cop racist because he happened to shoot a black man. Right, because now as part of an unrelated criminal probe into McNamara, internal affairs investigators have discovered some texts that he sent to a colleague just days after the shooting. With him saying, And in June, during the lawsuit, he referred to Green's lawyers who were black and Native American as parasites. Then, recalling a conversation with the lawyer representing the city, he said, I'm like, dude, I don't give a shit about this case. I'm white, he's black, he's gonna win, and I don't care.

It's like, bitch, whatever they decide has no bearing on me whatsoever. It's basically kangaroo court. And then next, when talking about how one of Green's lawyers warned him that he could be found guilty of using excessive force, he said, think I give a fuck what y'all N-Words think? I'll shoot you too, ahhh. And adding that during the hearing, quote, there was like 65 African looking motherfuckers there too, all just mean mugging me and taking notes. They should all be bowing down to me and bringing me gifts since I saved a fellow N-word by making him rich as fuck. Otherwise, he would have lived a life of poverty and crime. Twitch's colleague texted back, why don't black people have any sense in their head? And then in July, if you're like, hey,

somehow those texts make me feel like this guy's not racist. Granted, that could be because I slammed my head against the wall 20 times and I'm not thinking right. In July, McNamara summed up all his feelings in a statement that is as racist as it is succinct, saying, quote, I hate black people. And so with all that, the city's police chief has now announced that McNamara is no longer with the force. Also saying the colleague he was texting with has been put on administrative leave due to the concerning dialogue. But for Greene and many others watching this shit show, it really only points to a larger culture of general racism with San Jose's police department as well as others. And then, Gal Gadot has now found herself in the midst of a controversy and a ton of backlash right now. A lot of people have a lot of different opinions, and all of it this time stemming from a film that's scheduled to screen in New York and Los Angeles at some point this week. With a film called Bearing Witness, and according to The Hollywood Reporter, it's a 43-minute montage

assembled by the Israeli Defense Forces of graphic footage from the terrorist attack carried out by Hamas on October 7th. And with that, The Wrap reporting that much of the footage was filmed by Hamas and includes incredibly violent moments including murders, beheadings, and rapes of Jewish people. Now, as far as the exact times and locations of the screenings, those haven't been made public for security reasons, but a handful of members from the press and others in the film industry have been privately invited. With all this, coming after a small group of international journalists apparently already saw it a couple of weeks ago, per the Daily Beast, during that screening, some viewers burst into tears and had to leave the theater while seeing

the graphic footage. Also, as far as why it's being slowly rolled out to small audiences, you had the rap writing. For Israeli leaders, the primary motivation to share the footage is to respond to international criticism of its military's actions in the Gaza Strip since October 7th. And continuing to say, the 140.9 square mile region is currently experiencing a massive humanitarian crisis that has drawn condemnation from world leaders and citizens alike. Also with this, Oscar-winning Israeli filmmaker Guy Nativ has been leading these screenings, and according to I24 News, he said Gal Gadot actually made these screenings possible as well. Which brings us to why there's been a lot of backlash landing on her

specifically, because while some think this footage should be seen, others argue that it's actually just propaganda the IDF is using to justify its attacks in Gaza. For those criticizing Gal saying things like, she may have played a superhero, but she's nothing more than a propagandist and a genocide enabler. As well as everybody who speaks out on behalf of Palestine gets fired or blacklisted. Meanwhile, the likes of Gal Gadot and Brett Gelman

get to freely antagonize and distribute propaganda on behalf of a genocidal settler colony. Sensible country. And in the midst of all that, you even have the likes of Mia Khalifa condemning her writing. I've been trying to tell you, along with an old headline where she called Gal Gadot genocide Barbie. We've also seen some questioning

if it's really an accurate and full representation of what's going on. Why would the IDF not release it to the public? Some saying things like, so instead of just handing over the irrefutable proof of atrocities to journalists or news human rights orgs, they are holding private screenings with handpicked audiences. Strange. If you're going on a propaganda offensive, you should get someone who can act. But with all that said, as the situation develops and we're seeing more and more reactions still coming through, I'd of course love to know your thoughts here. And then, you know, there's always a lot of talk about the dangerous stupidity of a Florida man story, but what about today we do an Indiana woman story? Because we got to talk about the news involving a woman in Indianapolis who drove her

car into a building that she believed to be an Israel school after watching news coverage of the Israel-Hamas war, with law enforcement officials saying the woman was arrested at the scene after backing her car into the Israelite school of universal and practical knowledge. Notably, at the time, several people were inside, including four kids between the ages of seven months and three years, but luckily no one was injured. And according to a police statement, the woman, quote, told one officer she had been watching the news and couldn't breathe anymore, saying she referenced her people back in Palestine, with a statement adding that the woman said that she had passed by a couple times and saw the Israel school and admitted she drove into the building on purpose. Which, okay, one, immediate hate crime,

but also two, if her intent was actually to attack a Jewish school, she wasn't even a little bit close. Because, plot twist here, the building that she drove into wasn't a Jewish school or even connected to Jewish groups at all. In fact, according to the Indianapolis Star, the building actually is affiliated with the radical Hebrew Israelites, which the Southern Poverty Law Center designates as a hate group and describes as increasingly anti-Semitic, anti-white, anti-LGBTQ, xenophobic, and misogynistic sect of groups who preach they and only they are the true Israelites of the Bible and perpetuate the anti-Semitic belief that, quote, so-called Jews have stolen their identity and birthright. Which that's gotta feel weird. You can't even hate crime, right? I mean, the irony of this woman

trying to attack a Jewish organization by being so stupid she actually went after an anti-Semitic group. But still, with this, you have Jewish groups saying, this is just another reminder of the very real spikes in anti-Semitic hate crimes that the community has seen since the war began. And the Jewish Federation of Greater Indianapolis noting in a statement that the building had a semblance of a Star of David on the front door and adding, although a Jewish facility was not targeted solely due to ironic misidentification, this is yet another reminder to maintain security protocols, remain vigilant of suspicious activity, and to report them promptly to the appropriate authorities. And then it is now time for everyone's new favorite segment, Phil's fun fact of the day

with a little help from Sammy Sacco. Hello. Hey, Sammy. So what's the fun fact of the day? Yeah, well, I thought you might find it pretty cool to know that the personal information of countless U.S. military members is actually for sale and that has potentially catastrophic consequences. Oh, yeah, that's true. A recent study published by Duke University researchers, which was funded by West Point, found that highly sensitive personal data of active duty members of the U.S. military can actually be purchased for mere cents. Yeah, and we're not talking about just names and phone numbers. Researchers found that data available for purchase included phone names, addresses, credit score, net worth, gambling habits,

and details about religion, ethnicity, and political affiliation. Yeah, I mean, they even found out whether a service member is married, how old their children are. And that super personal information costs as little as 12 cents per person. And in one case, the data of more than 1.5 million service members was available for as little as a penny per record. And Phil, I know you're thinking, how exactly is this data available for purchase? Yeah, I am. Well, the researchers posed as buyers in the U.S. and Singapore and contacted data brokers that listed data sets for active U.S. military service members for sale. And in some cases, the researchers were able to purchase data sets for service members that specifically lived in Maryland, Virginia, or D.C. Oh yeah,

and one set's results even showed who lived near military installations like Quantico in Virginia or Fort Liberty in North Carolina. And in total, researchers bought data sets for nearly 30,000 active-duty military personnel and an additional data set on 5,000 friends and family of service members. And while data collection and sale is a multi-billion dollar industry that affects nearly every single American, there is a different sort of risk when it comes with the data of military personnel. Because their positions within the military and the rules regarding their conduct

make them especially vulnerable to blackmail. Blackmail? Yeah, did I stutter? Fucking blackmail. With Major Jessica Dawson, a research scientist at West Point who initiated the study saying, I can take it from here, you show your fucking mouth, saying, cheating on your spouse, financial issues, mental health concerns, all of those things can get your security clearances revoked. Those things are all in the data. It just takes the right combination of content and attackers to start trying to exploit that information. Yeah, I saw this, and Justin Sherman, a lead researcher at Duke on the project, added, if researchers were able to purchase this acting in ethical ways subject to university ethics processes, it would be very easy for a foreign adversary to do so.

The Russian intelligence services don't have a ban on deception. Yeah, and following their discovery, the researchers are now calling upon Congress to pass a comprehensive privacy law and for regulatory bodies like the FTC to develop rules regarding the purchase of military personal data. Yeah, and notably, even though we've seen legislation proposed to address military data scraping before, it's not become a law yet. Yeah, so we'll have to wait to see if Congress can do its fucking job. But in the meantime, let us know what your thoughts are in those comments down below. Okay, bye! I promise, I promise I'm not losing it.

Maybe a little bit. And then, you know, you can understand sounds no matter what language that you speak or you're learning. Like that. The sound of a right answer in Babbel. So thanks to today's sponsor, Babbel, you can start speaking a new language in just three weeks. No, really, you can start speaking Spanish, French, German, you name it, just in time to show off during the holidays. Because Babbel is designed by real people for real conversations. And their tips and tools for learning a new language are rooted in real-life situations

and delivered with conversation-based teaching. Not to mention getting to hear the Babbel sound when you get it right. You'll feel much more confident when ordering meals, getting directions, or just understanding what people are saying to or about you. I mean, honestly, the latter was half the reason I was even interested. I'm a paranoid boy. So don't pay hundreds of dollars for a private tutor. With language apps that are a little more than games, Babbel's quick 10-minute lessons are designed by over 150 language experts to help you

start speaking a new language in as little as three weeks. And with over 10 million subscriptions sold, Babbel is real language learning for real conversations. Here's a special limited time deal for you beautiful bastards. To get you started right now, you can get 55% off your Babbel subscription, but only if you use babbel.com slash DeFranco. That's right, I'm serious. That is 55% off at babbel.com slash DeFranco. Spelled B-A-B-B-E-L dot com slash DeFranco. Rules and restrictions may apply. And then, it is in no way a secret that the creator-influencer economy has absolutely boomed over the past several years. But here's a question. How many of you can actually make it as an influencer? Which I know it sounds like I'm about to sell you on a course for just $99 a month. You can join the DeFranco Alpha Man Squad. I give you daily tips on how to invest, make content, and how women aren't actually people. I'm kidding.

About the course, not about can you be an influencer. Because actually, according to the data, a lot of us actually think we can. I mean, in 2019, a global survey found that nearly 30% of kids aged eight to 12 listed YouTuber as their top career choice. That is three times more than pick the classic astronaut. And that same year, a survey of Gen Z and millennials in the US found that more than half of 13 to 38 year olds wanted to become social media influencers.

And you'd be crazy to think that those numbers haven't gone even higher since then. So now to meet this demand, there's actually a growing cottage industry of summer camps and out of school programs that teach kids how to find fame in the digital age. With that, you have places like the Washington Post taking a closer look at one of those known as Creator Camp, a summer program for kids 6 to 13, where for $230 a week, you can send your kid there for three days out of the week, during which they

make videos with props, green screens, costumes, lighting equipment, and other tools, with the goal being to learn technical skills such as video editing, a ByteDance's platform, cap cut, storyboarding, script writing, and the basics of shooting a compelling vlog. And even though it was only founded two years ago, Creator Camp has exploded this summer, attracting as many as 1,300 campers to 11 locations across Texas. And their founder is saying they expect to expand to have 18 locations next year. Now with this, if you ask the co-founder, they claim that it's more than just a fame and riches machine, saying it's also about self-expression and creativity, and saying we want to change their relationship with technology to not just see it as entertainment, but to see it as a tool to create.

But also, a lot of the campers were very open about what really drives them, social status, fame, and of course, money. With one seven-year-old saying, I love YouTube, and I want to be famous on YouTube because I want a lot of money. And a nine-year-old saying, YouTube is a good path to getting rich because once you upload a ton of videos, that's when you start getting likes and money. Whether it's related or not, nearly every camper interviewed said they watch Mr. Beast and

another YouTuber known as Unspeakable. And notably, as you go higher up the age ladder, kids don't just grow out of this dream like, you know, wanting to be an astronaut. Because they're also saying things like so-called TikTok clubs and other after-school programs geared towards making kids famous on social media sprout up at high schools all around the country. And then it goes even further. Even colleges are embracing this new career path. With, for example, Cornell, UCLA, USC, and East Carolina University all adding programs and courses on social media marketing and content creation.

But also, here's the thing. Whatever you think about this trend and this change, none of this should really come as a surprise. Money moves mountains, money moves minds. And with that, back in April, you had Goldman Sachs research analysts predicting that the creator economy, which it values at $250 billion today,

would likely double in size by 2027. And the bank adding that 50 million people now work as creators around the world. And you had YouTube estimating last year that nearly 400,000 full-time jobs were supported by its creators' work. So increasingly, as we've talked about before, this industry is displacing traditional entertainment like cable news, film, and television. And while we saw creators several years ago using their social media presence to break into established TV or movie gigs, we're now seeing, like I've been saying, for the last 16 years, more and more people using it to break out of those job markets and seeking freedom on platforms where they can be their own boss and potentially make even more money. And this is especially true as we're seeing things like Hollywood strikes, actors and writers

doubling down on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitch as a financial lifeline. But I'm also wondering if this recent Hollywood strike is gonna mirror the last one. Because I mean, that one radically reshaped the media landscape by fueling the rise of unscripted content like documentary series and reality TV shows, as well as independent creators. But it is also incredibly important to note that employment in the creator economy

has its own drawbacks. Unless you're really, really big, there's no formal employment contract. Pay is unpredictable, the work never ends, you're always chasing virality or at least some sort of attention. Competition is insane and the list goes on and on and on. And with that, Drew Grant,

managing editor of the creator guidebook, Passion Fruit, explain it. You work for the internet and on the internet, you're allowed no sick days, no vacation, the content mall still needs to be fed 24 seven, no holidays, and if you're not producing new material on schedule, you're gambling with your entire livelihood. Whereas OG creator Hank Green put it earlier this year at an industry summit, creators can go through this sort of whole

life cycle of their career in six months. And adding that the internet is insatiable and everyone can be replaced. Saying there is, as far as I can tell, an infinite number of 22-year-olds. And despite there being this growing illusion that everyone's seeming to make it on TikTok or Twitch or YouTube or whatever, it is incredibly important to remember that for every successful influencer you see, there's a whole lot more struggling. I mean, just to give you some numbers to back that up, a survey of nearly 10,000 participants last year found that only 12% of full-time creators actually say they make more than $50,000 a year. And 46% said they made less than $1,000. And while with all this, you know, I don't live under the idea that everyone can be successful, but I do

think some of these percentages and the numbers involved could drastically shift if a lot of smaller creators started pulling different levers. For example, I use and I'm invested in the company Fourth Wall. If you're not offering paid memberships and or clothing, you should. My biased opinion is that Fourth Wall is the best in the game there. So even if you're actually using other services, you should go to Fourth Wall. Great profits, great selection and quality, amazing customer service. The list goes on and on.

They even just made it so your supporters can have an app for you. Keep in mind, that's just one out of a lot of tools that I think a lot of creators could benefit from. But regarding the story as a whole, I do want to ask you, what are your personal thoughts regarding content creation online as far as you, but also is this something you've witnessed in college age and down people that you know? Because I will say it was incredibly eye-opening back when my youngest graduated kindergarten. Graduated. The number of kids that said they wanted to be a YouTuber or a streamer was wild. There was like two people that wanted to be a doctor. And then we need to talk about the Supreme Court right now, and not because sugar baby Clarence Thomas got another massive gift from one of his Republican benefactor daddies that he didn't report. Instead,

it has to do with the Supreme Court hearing an incredibly consequential case. And I mean, the conservative majority here could get rid of a federal law that prevents domestic abusers from owning guns. And so you have this case that is especially significant, not only because it perfectly illustrates the real world impact of the conservative high court's total destruction of past precedent, but also it highlights how these justices have taken the expansion of gun rights to the extreme while simultaneously taking rights away from the American people. All right, so let's break it down, because this whole situation centers around Zaki Rahimi, a 23-year-old drug dealer from Texas with a long history of armed violence. Back in 2019, Rahimi assaulted his girlfriend, who was the mother of his child in a parking lot, fired a gun at a

bystander, and then later called his girlfriend and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. And with that, a Texas court ruled that Rahimi had committed family violence and that such violence was likely to occur again in the future. So as a result, the court issued his girlfriend a protective order, suspended his gun license and banned him from owning a firearm while also explicitly warning him that would be a federal felony to possess a gun while the order was in effect. But none of that deterred Rahimi at all. Because after that order took effect, he was brought up on state charges for threatening another woman with a gun.

And then, in the span of just two months, he openly fired a gun in five different public locations. This including into the home of someone he sold drugs to, at a driver in a crash that he was a part of, in a residential neighborhood, at another driver, and in a Whataburger after his friend's credit card was declined. With those shootings leading to a search warrant of Rahimi's home, where authorities found a loaded Glock, a rifle, ammo,

and a copy of the domestic violence protective order. After being indicted by a grand jury, Rahimi eventually pleaded guilty to violating the federal gun law and was sentenced to six years in prison. But throughout the legal process, he continued to challenge that law on constitutional grounds, arguing that it violated the Second Amendment. Now, that argument was initially rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals

or the Fifth Circuit, which upheld his conviction. But, a massive thing, everything has changed after the Supreme Court made an incredibly historic ruling on gun rights last year, wherein that 6-3 decision, the conservative majority of the high court struck down a century-old New York law that put restrictions on people who carried concealed guns outside their homes. But notably, it also went way beyond New York, because in the majority opinion, sugar baby Clarence Thomas wrote that the typical ways for determining whether a law violated the second amendment no longer apply. And the only way that courts can determine whether gun regulations go against the constitution is if the government imposing those restrictions can prove that there was a similar law in place during the 1700s and 1800s. Or in other words, in order for a government to protect its citizens and implement common sense gun restrictions, it has to prove that a similar law existed more than 200 years ago. And if that sounds

absolutely fucking bonkers, it's because it is. But that's also exactly the state of play the current Supreme Court has created, and that is exactly what has happened. Over the last year, we've seen courts all across America being flooded with challenges from pro-gun groups that argue that the high court ruling invalidated existing gun laws.

And we've seen courts nationwide struggling to conform with the Supreme Court's vague standard, all of which resulting in uneven enforcement in different jurisdictions, often dependent on whether the justices hearing the case were liberal or conservative. And that also extended to the highly conservative Fifth Circuit Appeals Court,

which overturned its past decision on upholding Rahimi's sentence in a decision that perfectly shows how insanely restrictive the Supreme Court's decision was. With that court specifically ruling that the federal law preventing domestic abusers from owning firearms was unconstitutional because there weren't any laws similar enough to it

in the 1700s and 1800s. With that court also notably rejecting a number of examples from that time the government provided because they weren't similar enough to the current law. And so in response to that decision, the government appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the U.S. has a long history of imposing laws that disarm people who present a danger to themselves and others. And all of that bringing us full circle to today with the Supreme Court hearing arguments in this case. Now all that said, because all of this is ongoing as I'm recording,

we do not officially know yet what the justices are thinking, but of course we can update from here. But also in the meantime, we can look at their past decisions on gun control. Though it is an important note that this case is also a bit stickier for a few reasons. First of all, Rahimi is a pretty horrible person for pro-gun rights groups to rally around. Though of course that has not stopped the NRA

from filing briefs supporting his case. I mean, hell, even the Fifth Circuit wrote that he was hardly a model citizen when they sided with him. And since then, Rahimi himself has even said that he no longer even wants to own a gun. Though, you know, given his track record, take that with a grain of salt. Meanwhile, this case also comes as the country is still reeling from the deadliest mass shooting of the year in Lewiston, Maine. And finally, and arguably most importantly, laws to protect domestic abuse survivors from gun violence has also been widely supported.

But as one expert told NPR, domestic assaults that involve guns are 11 times more likely to cause death than assaults without guns. And while women are disproportionately impacted, they're also not the only ones affected. Domestic violence with a gun is a leading cause of death for children. And beyond that, more than half of all mass shootings are done by people with domestic violence records, and domestic violence calls result in the highest amount of police fatalities, almost all involving guns. And if all of that wasn't fucking horrible and concerning enough, experts also say that if the Supreme Court strikes down this law, it will have a ripple effect across the country. Not only dismantling similar state-level laws

aimed at protecting domestic violence survivors, but also undoing other important gun restrictions. And all because the argument that America did not have gun laws regulating domestic abuse 200 and 300 years ago. And by the way, women weren't even allowed to vote and black people were literally considered property. It is pure insanity.

But that is the current state of things. Nothing has officially been decided yet. And so we're going to keep our eyes on it. In the meantime, I'd love to know your thoughts. And then, tis the season of giving, and thanks to our sponsor and friends over at Shady Rays, they have you covered with premium polarized shades that won't break the bank. Because Shady Rays is an independent sunglasses company that offers unrivaled product as good as any expensive pair we've worn. Into winter sports, their quick-snap snow lenses move effortlessly between full sun to low-light environments. And their durable frames and world-class optics are perfect for outdoor adventures. Plus, Shady Ray sunglasses are backed by lost or broken replacements. Lose or break your

pair? They will send you a new pair, no questions asked. Or hey, you don't love your Shady Rays? Exchange for a new pair or return them for free within 30 days. There's no risk, and their team is all about superb customer service. I mean, they offer the most insane protection and eyewear with a five star rating by over 250,000 people. Personally, the Black Emerald Signature Series are my go-to, but also the High Rise Black Mirage Timbers are great for the beach because they're saltwater resistant. And Shady Rays is also committed to making a difference in communities across the nation through their impact program. Teaming up with nonprofits, helping people live healthy, courageous lives through some of their most challenging times. And I got to close this with the best news. Shady

Rays is giving out a very merry deal for the season. Just go to shadyrays.com and use code fill for 50% off two plus pairs of polarized sunglasses. And then we have to talk about how America is on the brink of a massive water crisis and is now inching closer to a total catastrophe because a lot got revealed in this absolutely devastating new investigation by the New York Times. With the outlet spending months gathering and analyzing data on the nation's aquifers, which are underground water sources that occur naturally. And a big thing is those aquifers are essential to life in America, right? Not only do they supply 90% of the country's water systems, but they're also relied on for farming, which is one of the biggest and most important industries in the country. And so in this, I mean, it's so thorough.

The Times interviewed more than a hundred experts, traveled the country. And so in this, I mean, it's so thorough. The Times interviewed more than 100 experts, traveled the country, and created a database using millions of readings from tens of thousands of groundwater monitoring sites. And the resulting product here was one of the single most thorough investigations of groundwater depletion to date. And despite the fact that groundwater systems

are a crucial facet of American society that the vast majority of us rely on, the information and data on them has been largely fragmented and piecemeal. But this database that the Times created puts those puzzle pieces together to reveal the scope of this impending crisis. And the full picture that all of these pieces create is a really fucking bad one. Simply put, we are pumping out way more water than these naturally occurring aquifers can replenish. In fact, every

year since 1940, more aquifers have had decreasing water levels than increasing levels. I mean, almost half of the groundwater sites that the Times gathered data for experienced significant declines in water reserves over the past 40 years. And just in the last decade alone, four in every 10 of those sites saw record low water levels, with last year being the worst yet. With the outlet finding that these groundwater sources have been so strained by industrial farms and sprawling cities that it could take centuries or millenniums to replenish themselves if they recover at all. Experts say that for some of those reserves, they have been so intensely drained, we will never get that water back. And in fact, we're already seeing the impact in some places. Like in Kansas, for example,

which is a breadbasket state, already has 2.6 million acres of land that have run out of enough groundwater for large-scale agriculture. And as farms in those affected areas have drained the aquifers, their corn production has dropped drastically, falling to levels not seen since the 1960s. Then another example is Arkansas, which is one of the biggest groundwater users in the whole country. They're actually pumping twice as much water each year from its main agricultural aquifer than can be replenished by rainfall or other sources. And actually, in some parts of the state, the aquifer has dropped to less than 10% of capacity. And that's due in part to the fact that the state produces about half of America's rice,

which is a water-intensive crop. Then, looking at California, they've pumped the aquifers in at least 76 basins at a faster rate than the water could be put back in by rain. Depleting those reserves in major agricultural centers could have a huge impact on crop production, and not just for America. It is those very same aquifers that propelled America to become a food superpower after World War II, when advances in water pumping technology allowed farmers to access water and produce much higher yields. I mean, just last year alone, the U.S. produced 39% of global sorghum exports, 32% of soybean exports, 23% of corn exports. It exported

more cotton than any other nation. That's also hardly the only impact of groundwater depletion. We were talking about absolutely catastrophic existential threats. Because experts say that as the aquifers continue to be drained, many communities will simply run out of drinking water. I mean, one third of the country's drinking water actually comes from groundwater and small rural communities, which are often closest to agricultural areas, rely on well water disproportionately. But very notably, a lack of access to groundwater is also hurting suburban and ex-urban areas. With the Times explaining there, many of the country's fast-growing communities are in places

with limited rainfall, like Arizona, Texas, and Utah, and other areas across the Southwest. And again, we are already seeing real-world examples of this. With one of those being just this past June, Arizona saying it would stop building houses that use groundwater in the Phoenix area. And that because there wasn't even enough water for the houses that had already been approved for building. And in a handful of cities around the country, including Norfolk, Virginia, the groundwater is so depleted that officials are now spending gobs of money to pump treated wastewater into aquifers. And then, making matters even worse, there are a number of serious problems that we've seen arise when aquifers get over-pumped. Right, over-pumping can also cause contamination in aquifers, making the little remaining water unsafe or not potable.

Also, in coastal areas, saltwater from the ocean can move into freshwater aquifers. There have also been examples in other countries of arsenic, which is often found in a common clay soil type, seeping into overtapped drinking water sources. And then in some places, overdrawing aquifers is literally causing the earth to crack apart. But the times are explaining pumping water can cause the earth above an aquifer to slump, collapsing the space left behind by the water that was removed. And noting once that space is lost, it can no longer hold water. Right, and that process is called subsidence, and more than 80% of it is the results of groundwater use. Right, for example, in Houston, overpumping water and oil extraction has resulted in some land sinking more than 10 feet over several decades.

And in Florida, we've seen sinkholes as a result of overdrawing. And then the sinking land, in turn, has damaged home foundations, sewer pipes, and other structures. But the single biggest impact of subsidence is a fissure that tears the earth apart, and it looks like we've released demons from hell. And those fissures are especially tricky because it's very hard to tell where they will actually open. But once they do, not only are they exceptionally hard to close, they usually just end up getting bigger or extending even longer. Meanwhile, climate change is only making the whole situation that much worse, creating a vicious cycle.

Climate change is making it hotter, meaning that crops need more water, while simultaneously shrinking water supplies like snow packs. And that then causes more communities and farmers to fill the supply gap by pumping more water from aquifers. Those aquifers themselves are also impacted by warming because it causes more surface water evaporation, meaning that there's then less water

that can seep in and replenish. And as climate change gets worse, so will droughts and unpredictable rainfall. And keep in mind, everything that we're talking about here, I'm just talking about the main highlights. I'm trying to make it consumable. I'm gonna link to the full report below if you really wanna dive into it. But also with this, everything that we're talking about here, I'm just talking about the main highlights. I'm trying to make it consumable. I'm going to link to the full report below if you really want to dive into it. But also with this, as far as what can be done, it's really hard to

say. I mean, as the Times notes, there are barely any federal regulations for groundwater. The federal government only creating rules on groundwater, but not overuse or depletion. So instead, states are largely in control of everything that goes on, but the rules they implement are at best weak and ineffective, and at worst, actively exacerbating the problem. Some states, including Texas, Oklahoma, and Colorado, setting policies that allow groundwater to be pumped from certain regions until it's totally gone. But also, very notably here, experts do say that Congress actually has the constitutional authority to regulate groundwater over pumping and depletion.

But whether or not there is actually political will is a whole other question. I mean, any effort to create and impose federal rules would almost certainly face a ton of backlash from powerful agricultural lobbies that, I mean, honestly, they spent decades sucking off members from both sides of the aisle. But on the upside, there is some hope that this investigation will actually put some pressure on Congress and the White House, especially because a big driver of this crisis is the fact that we didn't really have centralized national data about it. But for now, we'll have to wait to see if action is taken in. If you live in an area that has been impacted by this, I'd love to hear from you. And then let's talk about yesterday today, where we take a look back at

yesterday's show. We dive into those comments and see what y'all are saying, your reactions, your arguments, your opinions on the story. Sometimes you share experiences. So early on, I got to say yesterday, there were a lot of people that were just sounding off about the random accent I used in that one story. Most of you really just thankful that I addressed it at the end because you felt like maybe you were going crazy. And as far as the why I did that, I don't, I, there's no reason to a lot of the stuff that I do. Also, I saw a number of people that were like, I thought maybe it was like an AI voice, which with that, let me just say, you know, in my videos, I've never actually used the AI voice to replace myself. Though in the future,

if I do ever say anything that was offensive to you and you're like, oh my God, I can't watch anymore. Know that that was AI voice. And I'm sorry about that. I'm going to have a really long conversation with the person that wrote the thing that I definitely did not say myself. But also, in those comments, we had a lot of people sounding off on the Jack's film, Sniperwolf situation. Some writing, Jack had put out a video showing how his videos were having a positive impact on the YouTube community, noting YouTube has a system to report uncredited videos from other platforms, and users can file a claim and someone like Sniperwolf will have to remove content from their videos if they intend to keep the video up. And adding, this has resulted in Sniperwolf's videos being hilariously

edited to remove entire portions of her videos. Some also saying Phil missed a small tiny part where Sniperwolf, right after saying sorry, uploaded her main channel videos on her other channel that did have monetization, effectively doing ban evasion until the internet put up a stink about it and YouTube had to stop that too. She isn't sorry, she's just sorry the internet didn't agree with her this time. And while especially in yesterday's comment section, people were sounding off on pretty much every story, the last thing I want to touch on is the elections that are happening today. With that, specifically, a lot of people talking about what was going down in Ohio. We talked about the

purposeful confusion so people don't know what they're actually voting on. And I saw y'all even comments like, I'm actually in Ohio canvassing right now and the energy here you can feel, but I've had so many conversations with people just not knowing all the facts and misinformation everywhere. I hope I don't have a rude awakening tomorrow, but I'm cautiously optimistic. It's going to be so close. You know, obviously that's a situation we're going to talk about and update tomorrow. We also had Mama Dr. Jones hopping in the comments saying, really appreciate you covering the Ohio issue one vote and saying there is so much misinformation about that bill. And it's important even if you aren't in Ohio, because it has such broad

implication for states trying to safeguard against federal bans. Some even going as far to say, honestly, it should be illegal to try to confuse voters like this, especially when it comes to literally making it harder to place your vote because they intentionally name the measures the same thing. Though there, I would say I completely understand your frustration, though I don't know how you would make something like that illegal. It's definitely deceptive marketing, but also you'd probably have to approve intent. And then even then, and this is kind of one of the fucking wild things, historically, it is easier to do things by whatever means necessary to get something accomplished because it is so hard to undo those things. There's an unfortunate reason strategies like this work. That's why it's so incredibly important to be knowledgeable on things and then try to spread that knowledge.

But that is where your daily dive into the news is going to end today. Though, for more news, you need to know that you might have already missed. You can click or tap right here to watch, or I got links in the description. And of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow for more news.