The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 4.15 Ethan Klein's $100k CONTROVERSY, Stimulus Check Problems, Why Student's Are Suing Colleges

Episode Date: April 15, 2020

--- 00:08 - All In Challenge 1:04 - H.E.L.P. 4:15 - College Lawsuits 9:11 - Stimulus Checks --- Check out the latest videos on my NEW A Conversation With Clips channel!: https://youtu.be/OQ09KJZMPbc I’ve been doing live streams HERE: https://www.youtube.com/user/PhilipDeFranco WATCH Full “A Convo With” Podcasts: https://www.youtube.com/aconvowith LISTEN On The Podcast Platform Of Your Choice: http://LinksHole.com BUY our GEAR, Support the Show!: http://ShopDeFranco.com   ✩ FOLLOW ME ✩ ✭ TWITTER: http://Twitter.com/PhillyD ✭ INSTAGRAM: https://instagram.com/PhillyDeFranco/   ✩ SUPPORT THE SHOW ✩ ✭ Buy Merch: http://ShopDeFranco.com ✭ Lemme Touch Your Hair: http://BeautifulBastard.com ✭ Paid Subscription: http://DeFrancoElite.com    ✩ TODAY IN AWESOME ✩ ✭ Secret Link: https://youtu.be/OrU_d-4pwEM    ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩   All-In Challenge: https://www.fanatics.com/all-in-challenge/x-23571039+z-9103744-3838082054?_s=gppc&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIu8CNr6Dr6AIVCdtkCh3XYgspEAAYASAAEgLwDvD_BwE https://www.insider.com/h3h3productions-ethan-klein-giving-away-100000-in-100-days-2020-4   Students Sue Colleges: https://roguerocket.com/2020/04/15/students-sue-colleges-refund/   Stimulus Updates: https://roguerocket.com/2020/04/15/trumps-name-to-be-printed-on-stimulus-checks/   Direct deposit portal: https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus/get-my-payment   ✩ STORIES NOT IN TODAY’S SHOW ✩   Trump Freezes U.S. Funding to the World Health Organization: https://roguerocket.com/2020/04/15/who-funding-freeze/ ——————————   Edited by: James Girardier, Julie Goldberg Produced by: Amanda Morones Art Director: Brian Borst   Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Cory Ray, Neena Pesqueda,   Production Team: Zack Taylor, Luke Manning   ———————————— #DeFranco #EthanKlein #JeffreeStar ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup you beautiful bastards. I hope you're having a fantastic Wednesday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. Buckle up, hit that like button, and let's just jump into it. And the first thing we're gonna talk about today is fundraising and giving money away in the age of coronavirus.

Now on the note of fundraising, a fantastic new initiative called the All In Challenge has been launched. It's powered by fanatics. They're raising money for Meals on Wheels, No Kid Hungry, America's Food Fund, Benefiting, World Central Kitchen, and Feeding America. And they're fundraising by teaming up

with celebrities of all kinds, right? You have people like Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Brady, Justin Bieber, Dixie and Charli D'Amelio. And essentially they sell digital raffle tickets with each of these people for one of a kind experiences. Experiences like a walk on roll in a Scorsese film with DiCaprio and De Niro, or Justin Bieber singing One Less Lonely Girl at your house,

or Kyle Larson will call you the N-word to your face. I'm kidding about that last one. You know, you get the idea. You could be in Kevin Hart's next movie. You could make TikToks with Charlie and Dixie. And they are raising a lot of money really fast. When I started this story, they had raised 2.3 million. When I'm finishing this story,

they've raised over 4 million. Personally, I love the idea of this initiative, and I love celebrities using their celebrity in a positive way. But also, in these times, you know, we have seen some efforts of giving come under fire. It appears that the most recent examples of this involves YouTubers Ethan and Hila Klein,

the couple behind H3H3 Productions. They just recently announced that they're giving away $100,000 over 100 days to help fans who are financially struggling during the coronavirus pandemic. They announced it on social media, calling their initiative the ELA and Ethan's lazy philanthropy or help.

Adding, we call it lazy because we've made it as easy as possible for everyone to participate. Right, because of the increasing unemployment numbers amid the crisis, the clients said they've been trying to figure out the best way they could to help. Ultimately, deciding to conduct several $500 giveaways. And adding in their statement, there was a time when $500 would mean the difference between eating

and starving for ELA and myself. That's a situation I want to help as many people as possible to avoid. And to enter that giveaway, fans have to retweet one of Ethan's daily help posts and comment with their PayPal email address or paypal.me using the hashtag help. Then in 24 hours, they close the raffle, they randomly select two winners,

then a new giveaway post will go up and this process repeats for 100 days. Here they say that everyone's eligible, we only ask that people who apply are 18 plus and truly in need of the money. Also saying they reserve the right to disqualify people suspected of using bots or cheating to improve their odds.

As far as that specific dollar amount, right, $500. They said, we've intentionally kept the amount to $500, so it's under the threshold that requires you to report it to the IRS as income. It's just money in your pocket. And while we saw a lot of people very, very excited about this initiative, there were others that were also very critical.

Some accusing them of using the giveaway to try and self-promote. Some of these people responding with, "'If you truly want to donate for philanthropic reasons, "'don't use a hashtag and ask people to retweet "'in order to be eligible for it.'" Which we saw Ethan quickly respond, "'Retweet' is required for the Twitter bot to pick a winner

"'and comment is required to get their PayPal info.' "'I didn't ask them to follow me or even like the tweet. "'Sorry, it's gross.'" Hila also chiming in sarcastically responding to Ethan's tweet, writing, "'You're supposed to knock on people's doors "'and spread it from word to mouth, Ethan, gross. Ultimately, what I'll say on this situation,

it's very similar to something I believe I said last week. Right, we've seen a lot of criticism of people trying to help, whether it be the Harry Styles' of the world, right, selling a shirt where all the profits go to help. Right, you have the likes of Jeffree Star giving money to fans who are in need. Hell, I mean, even people going after Jeff Bezos

for donating $100 million to Feeding America, but you still have people saying that's not enough, given how much money he has. Right, but for me, right, to Feeding America, but you still had people saying that's not enough given how much money he has. Right, but for me, right, personally right now, I'm of the mindset as long as the net is good, great. If someone that is vulnerable is stable for a little longer, fantastic. I could definitely project intent, right?

Assume the worst of people say, well, they're really doing it for the good image. Right now, I don't fucking care as long as the net result is good. Listen to me here, these are trying times, but it is nowhere near as bad as it's going to get for a lot of people. And so while at a time like this,

I will make fun of things like Gal Gadot and her friends singing a song. But if people are actively trying to put money in other people's pockets, raise money for good causes, put food on someone's table, then no, if anything, I'm gonna cheerlead it so more people potentially are able to get money or can contribute money if they have it like that.

Because the last thing I'd wanna do is anything that would dissuade others from potentially helping because they're scared that it's gonna put a target on their back. Hell, even an update to this story as I was recording it, PUBG, right, Player Unknown, they're also contributing $50,000 to Ethan and Hila's help. So now three people can get picked a day

and there's a way to spin that as a negative, but I won't. But also with this, of course, I gave you the story, then my personal takeaway, and of course now I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this, right? Do you agree with the kind of net good mindset or do you disagree? Why, why not?

Of course, I'd love to hear from you. And then let's talk about lawsuits in the age of the coronavirus pandemic. And I really don't believe that there is going to be a shortage of these in the coming weeks and months. I mean, yesterday, for example, we talked about people furious at Ticketmaster and StubHub regarding refunds.

There's also a class action lawsuit now. And today what we're seeing in a completely different avenue, not entertainment, but rather education, are colleges facing lawsuits. Right, and this is something that's happening all over the place, but we're gonna start with Liberty University. Now for those that don't know,

Liberty is a private evangelical school in Virginia. It's known for being conservative, Christian, and for its president, Jerry Falwell Jr., who is a very vocal ally of Donald Trump. Liberty has 15,000 students attending its campus and almost another 100,000 taking online courses in a normal academic year. But right now, like many other schools in the country,

all classes have moved online. But before Liberty made this decision, they made headlines for reopening their campus after spring break. It was something that received national attention back in March, right? There were tons of headlines about thousands of students coming back to school.

And then, shocker, who could have ever predicted it? Shortly after, you had students experiencing COVID-19 symptoms with reports saying that some tested positive. But that's not necessarily why the school is being sued here. Because while the school is saying that the campus remains open for the student body, big things like student activities, sports,

and recreation centers have been closed, and dining options are limited to takeaway. Now the main part of the campus that remains open are the dorms where the vast majority of students have opted to not return given the circumstances. And largely those who did choose to use them were international students with nowhere else to go. And so in this lawsuit, there's one student referred to

as student A who was claiming that the school is saying that it's open and keeping very select parts going so that students cannot ask for a refund. Saying in the complaint, the university statement that it is open is an illusion being parts going so that students cannot ask for a refund. Saying in the complaint, the university statement that it is open is an illusion being put forth to try to keep money that should be returned to students and their families. Despite ending on-campus services and activities

for the rest of the semester and leaving students with no safe and practical choice other than moving out of their on-campus housing and discontinuing coming to Liberty's campus, Liberty has refused to refund students and their families the unused portions of the fees that they each paid to cover the cost of certain on-campus services and activities, which are no longer available to students.

Also noting that at one point when the school was telling students they had the option to come back to campus, they also said they encouraged students to consider staying home. Almost feeling like the school was saying it was unsafe or that they did not want them to take them up on the offer.

Student also noting that Liberty has technically offered students some money back, though student A calls it a quote, "'mere fraction of what Liberty actually owes.'" And further explaining, "'Rather than providing full and fair refunds, "'Liberty instead chose to offer a $1,000 credit "'only to those students who chose not to return

"'to campus residence halls, "'and this credit would be applied toward fall 2020 charges.'" With student A noting, "'Students who choose not to return in the fall "'will not receive any credit. "'Students who do not live in residence halls "'will not receive any credit. Students who do not live in residence halls will not receive any credit. Anyone wanting that credit would have had

to make their decision by March 28th, 2020. And as far as how small this $1,000 credit is compared to the cost, I mean, reportedly there, the dining plan's gonna be as high as $4,450. The housing plans can be as high as $8,000. Student A also criticizing the school's overall response to the virus, calling it glacially slow. Noting on March 13th, President Falwell was still saying

people were overreacting and comparing it to the flu. And adding that two days after that statement, when a parent expressed concern that allowing students back would be irresponsible. This is because when the semester ends, students will come home and could infect their grandparents. Falwell reportedly responded, "'Nope, then they'll go off to summer jobs

or internships, dummy.'" So student A is seeking on behalf of all students, a prorated refund. Now as far as Liberty's response to this, they have given a statement calling the allegation without legal merit, adding that the school has taken into account the economic impact and legal rights

of all the parties involved. Right, so there's that right now, but Liberty is also not the only school getting slapped with legal action. Students at Drexel University and the University of Miami are also filing suits demanding some of their money be returned. And I mean, tuition alone at both these schools

is over $50,000, and when you factor in room and board, it totals around 70,000. Notably, these schools are also doing the rest of their semesters online right now. According to the lawsuits against the schools obtained by Law 360, students are saying, "'Although the universities are still offering "'some level of academic instruction via online classes,

"'plaintiff and members of the proposed classes have been "'and will be deprived of the benefits "'of on-campus learning. "'Moreover, the value of any degree issued on the basis of online or pass fail classes will be diminished. Students also believe that their tuition covers far more than just their academic instruction.

Right, this goes towards computer labs, libraries, student unions, extracurricular activities, art, networking opportunities, and much more. All of which at this time are no longer available as students are forced to learn remotely. Now with all of that said, whether or not they actually have a strong enough case, that remains to be seen.

For example, the Wall Street Journal spoke to James Keller, the co-chair of the higher education practice at Saul Ewing, Arnstein and Lair LLP in Philadelphia, who said, the students are going to have an uphill battle unless a school has actually shut down and they're not getting credit. The basic contractual agreement is I pay tuition and if I satisfy academic requirements, you give me credit.

That's still happening. But ultimately, that's where we are with this right now. And I will say this is gonna be a fascinating one to watch because if any of these students suing, one, get a legal victory or two, even if the school goes, okay, hey, let's just drop the case, we'll meet you in the middle. You'll imagine, see almost instantly,

thousands and thousands of other lawsuits be filed. But finally, with this story, I do wanna pass a question off to you. One, what are your thoughts in general? Should these schools be refunding students, even if just partial? And also you watching, are you someone you know currently experiencing a situation like this?

And then let's talk about the news and updates around the $2 trillion stimulus bill that was passed a few weeks back. One of the big parts of that package was the nearly $350 billion in loans to help out small businesses. And right now what we're seeing there are strip clubs and lobbyists suing the federal government

because they are ineligible for those loans. And according to Bloomberg, the program excludes various businesses, including nonprofits, strip clubs, and those primarily engaged in political or lobbying activities. But in two separate lawsuits, the American Association of Political Consultants

and four strip clubs in Wisconsin said that this violates their constitutional rights. With lobbyists reportedly writing in their complaint that they will be forced to abstain or substantially limit the exercise of their constitutional right to freedom of speech, particularly speech in the height of political campaigns. Anyway, the Wisconsin strip clubs arguing

that they have been denied loans, saying that this would cause the permanent ruination of their businesses, all because of quote, "'The inability of plaintiffs to engage "'in protected First Amendment activity, "'and the inability of plaintiffs, staff, entertainers, "'and customers to continue engaging in "'or viewing protected First Amendment activity.

Another major stimulus update, as many of you have already seen in your bank accounts, the government has started giving out those $1,200 checks. And remember, this is for people who make under $75,000 a year, also an extra $500 for each kid under the age of 17, with that phasing out for folks who make over $75,000 and capping off at $99,000. And here, according to the Treasury Department,

80 million people are expected to receive that money via direct deposit by today. But for the tens of millions of people who aren't set to get that money today, things might be a little sticky. And this includes things like, yes, the fact that parents can only get the extra $500 if their kids are 16 and under.

So what that means is parents who have kids that rely on them financially, who are in high school and college, they don't get $500 for them. And those kids, well, I mean, really just young adults, they won't get $1,200 for themselves. Also another issue, the fact that millions of tax paying immigrants and their households,

including family members who are US citizens, won't get the checks. But one of the biggest issues is timeliness. Right, for most people who already got that money sent directly to their bank account, it's because they signed up to get their tax refund by direct deposit when they filed their taxes. So the government already had

their banking information on hand. But that's not the case for millions of people who got their last tax refund in the mail or didn't file taxes because their income was too low. Though there is an exception for people who didn't file taxes but are on social security. They'll still reportedly get their money sent directly to their accounts. Also of note here, if you're one of the people who has not gotten their money yet for the reason I'm talking about, the treasury has now set up a portal for people who haven't authorized direct deposit to upload their banking information and get their

money faster. I'll link to it down below. But for everyone else waiting for a paper check, it's going to take longer. I mean, first of all, the Treasury and the IRS said they will not start issuing those checks until the week of May 4th. And from there, they'll issue about 5 million checks per week for up to 20 weeks, with lower income people getting theirs first.

Meaning that some people won't even see their checks until September. And now, on top of that, it's being reported that there is a chance that it might be delayed even more. And the reason for that is because yesterday, it was reported that the Treasury ordered President Trump's name to be printed on the paper stimulus checks. And according to reports,

the IRS's information technology team was only informed about this decision yesterday. This despite the fact that the checks are scheduled to be sent for printing tomorrow. So according to reports, that team is now racing to implement a programming change the two senior IRS officials said will probably lead to a delay in issuing the first batch of paper checks.

With Chad Hooper, a quality control manager who serves as national president of the IRS's Professional Managers Association saying, any last minute request like this will create a downstream snarl that will result in a delay. Because confusion and miscommunication at a time like this is so wonderful. While officials at the IRS, right,

who are in charge of making this change have said that there will likely be a delay, a treasury department representative denied that. And so now we essentially have to wait to see who is actually right here. But even though some IRS officials said the delay would only slow the delivery for a few days, this is still a massive deal for a few reasons.

First of all, it is the first time ever that a president has put their name on any kind of IRS disbursement. I mean, according to three administration officials who spoke to the Post, Trump had privately suggested to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who oversees the IRS, to allow the president to formally sign the checks, but the president isn't legally authorized

to sign treasury disbursements. As the report explains, it is standard practice for a civil servant to sign checks issued by the Treasury Department to ensure that government payments are nonpartisan. Instead here, Trump's name will appear on the memo line. And with this decision, a lot of people, including IRS officials, still have problems with it.

For example, people like Hooper, saying, "'In this time of need for additional resources, "'anything that takes our focus "'from getting those checks out the door "'and hampers the equitable, fair administration "'of the tax code is not something we can support.'" You also had others upset at the move because the IRS is supposed to be apolitical.

That's actually something ensured by laws enacted by Congress after Nixon used tax audits as a tool against his political opponents. And as Nina Olson, a former senior IRS official said, "'Taxes are supposed to be non-political, "'and it's that simple.'" Also calling the move absolutely unprecedented and in fact noting that when the Bush administration

gave economic rebate checks to taxpayers back in 2001, the White House there actually asked the IRS to include a letter that took credit for giving you your money back. But there, the IRS commissioner at the time rejected that ask because it was too political. As far as my reaction to this story, and more specifically the push for Trump's name

on these checks, I mean, one, it's not surprising, right? Though the word of the day for the past four years has been unprecedented. And also, two, I have the personal opinion that to see this situation as anything other than a hyper-partisan move slash reelection campaign trick, I mean, it borders on pure lunacy or at the very least is willful ignorance.

But also, this is President Donald Trump that we're talking about. The fact that he still signed a document even though the money going out to people isn't something called like Trump bucks with his picture on it is a win. That is where the bar is set. We're constantly talking about what our new normal

is gonna look like in the next year, next several years, but we've been living a new normal over the past few. Yeah, for now, that is where the story ends. We're gonna keep our eyes on this. Hopefully there are not delays, even the fact that it's a possibility. Anyway, that's where I'm gonna end this one. And that is where I'm going to end today's show. And hey, if you liked this video,

you liked the way that I break down the news, hit that like button. Also, if you're new here, you want more of these daily videos, hit that subscribe button. Definitely tap that bell to turn on notifications. Also, if you missed one of the last shows, you wanna catch up,

you can click or tap right there to watch that right now. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you tomorrow. I hope you like this video. Subscribe if you like it.