The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.21 Halsey Defends, Charli D'Amelio, St Louis Couple CHARGED, HUGE Coronavirus Relief Package &

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards. Hope you had a fantastic Tuesday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. Buckle up, hit that like button, and let's just jump into it. The first thing we're gonna talk about today is actually just a bunch of quickies. In online entertainment slash business news,

Starting point is 00:00:13 we are seeing the reign of TikTok reigning more and more supreme. And this, not only because it as a platform continues to grow, but also a lot of their key, incredibly large talent are making massive moves. We saw Morphe, who recently ended their relationship with Jeffree Star, teaming up with Charlie and Dixie D'Amelio. This for their Gen Z sub-brand Morphe 2.

Starting point is 00:00:30 Though I think there's an incredibly easy argument to be made that Dixie and Charlie D'Amelio are no longer just TikTokers. They now make some of the most highly viewed content on YouTube as well. We also saw the likes of Addison Rae joining the increasing number of celebrities signing Spotify exclusive podcast deals.

Starting point is 00:00:44 Also on the note of exclusives, though not TikTok, we saw Twitch signing a seven figure deal with Logic, which I think is both a big acquisition for Twitch and the further mainstreamification of streaming. Logic, if you don't know, he's a rapper, but more notably, he has also recently announced that with his newest album, he is going to retire. So this is a massive career pivot,

Starting point is 00:01:02 though it seems like one he's excited about might be in part due to the seven figure deal, with Logic saying to The Verge, "'I'm not this rapper guy, man. "'I'm just a nerd. "'I love video games. "'I'm blessed enough to have millions of fans and followers, "'so it is a great partnership.'"

Starting point is 00:01:13 And then I will say my favorite line from this quote, "'I'm gonna bring new eyes to their service. "'They're going to bring new money to my bank account.'" And he then says, I'm just kidding, but I mean, yeah, facts. As far as whatever that content will be, he said, he wants it to help people after they've had a day of protesting or political debates, unwind and laugh and smile.

Starting point is 00:01:30 And it appears that there is at least some excitement over this because even without going live yet, he has over 83,000 followers over on Twitch now. Then in celebrity slash pop culture news, yes, I saw all this stuff with Kanye West. Like I mentioned yesterday, I always feel very uncomfortable when talking about him because he is very obviously not okay.

Starting point is 00:01:46 I have a ton of issues with the stuff that he's been throwing out there, including anti-vaxxer stuff. When he went on the tweet spree that I think a lot of people witnessed last night, I think it confirmed for a lot more that he is genuinely not okay. Which is also why we saw the likes of Jamie Lynn Spears,

Starting point is 00:01:59 Halsey, Demi Lovato, and more speaking out about mental health. Lovato tweeting, it would be nice if for once people can put down the meme making apps and pray for someone who's struggling with mental illness. What happened to compassion? Halsey tweeting, no jokes right now. I've dedicated my career to offering education

Starting point is 00:02:12 and insight about bipolar disorder and I'm so disturbed by what I'm seeing. Personal opinions about someone aside, a manic episode isn't a joke. If you can't offer understanding or sympathy, offer your silence. And adding a lot of people you know probably have bipolar disorder and you aren't aware of it.

Starting point is 00:02:25 Taking this opportunity to make offensive remarks and vilify people with mental illnesses is really not the way to go. This is the exact triggering shit that causes people to keep quiet about it. You know, personally, I very much agree with her. I do think it's incredibly important, whether it be a Kanye West or someone else,

Starting point is 00:02:38 that this situation doesn't mean that they're shielded from just criticisms over the things that they're saying to people, or the things that they're doing in this world that are affecting others. But I do agree that we need to be more compassionate, understanding, sympathetic, that we make it a less intimidating place

Starting point is 00:02:50 for people to share the fact that they're struggling with stuff. That we remember that no matter how famous or distant, or like we think, oh, this person will never see this, we still try to remember that that is an actual person, a human being, I don't know. And you'll never be perfect when it comes to situations like this, you know?

Starting point is 00:03:05 Human beings are flawed. But if there is something positive that can come out of this whole thing, maybe it's a teaching moment for a lot of people on a lot of sides. Or maybe not, I don't know. I'm normally a cynic trying to be hopeful. Then I've had a lot of people send me

Starting point is 00:03:16 this video of Dwight Howard. Do I believe in vaccinations? No, I don't. That's my personal opinion, but no, I don't. That's my personal opinion, but no, I don't. And I don't know what you want me to add to that clip. If before I saw this, you were like, you know Dwight Howard, LA Laker? He's an anti-vaxxer.

Starting point is 00:03:34 My response wouldn't be, what? Not Dwight. The Dwight Howard is an anti-vaxxer and also said stupid stuff about masks? Obviously it's disconcerting to see anyone with an audience pushing anti-vax bullshit. But I don't know what to say at this point. It feels like the stupid is spreading at the same rate,

Starting point is 00:03:49 if not faster than COVID. And so what I'll always say with stories like this, listen to the doctors that specialize in this. It's simple, science over feelings or data over dum-dums. Because I have, and will say this consistently, if you are an anti-vaxxer, I think you're a fucking moron. I stopped having the patients a while ago to be like, I'm trying to be nice about it so we can have a conversation

Starting point is 00:04:09 and maybe you can see the light because no. I'll let my buddy Dr. Mike do that. He's a much nicer person. Yeah, that's where the story ends. I don't know what else you want me to add to this. Don't be stupid, stupid. Yeah, which also I will say, yes, I have been seeing your top comments.

Starting point is 00:04:22 I know a lot of you have been wanting don't be stupid stupid masks We are now looking into it It would probably be something really simplistic like this if we do end up releasing them I'm gonna make sure the profits go to some sort of charity because with how much I've been preaching please wear your damn mask I don't want it to be something where I was like monetarily rewarded for trying to preach that common sense And then let's talk about, actually, do you remember this video? Now as that video went viral, it drew a lot of different reactions.

Starting point is 00:05:05 You saw some people supporting the couple, others just outraged. You had people concerned that you had this couple that were pointing firearms at protesters, seemingly escalating a situation for no reason. But you had supporters saying, obviously this couple feared for their lives and they were trying to protect themselves at their home.

Starting point is 00:05:19 But the reason we're talking about this today is that that couple is now facing serious charges, with St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner saying in a statement that they're looking at a Class E felony for unlawful use of a weapon and also potentially fourth degree assault which is a Class A misdemeanor. But at the same time, we're seeing the couple

Starting point is 00:05:34 having some serious support from the governor and the attorney general. But all of that said, let's talk about what we actually know about this situation. So on June 28th, protesters entered a private gated community to protest in front of the mayor of St. Louis' house. And while the protesters were on their way to the mayor's house, Mark and Patricia McCloskey

Starting point is 00:05:48 ended up calling the police. And during that call, Patricia reportedly said, "'I've got to get a gun.'" And after that, the couple went outside with an AR-15 platform rifle and a small pistol, which results in the now infamous viral video. Now with this situation, one of the things we don't know for sure is how the protesters got into the community.

Starting point is 00:06:03 You have the protesters claiming they were able to just enter through an open gate. Whereas you have the McCloskeys saying that they feared for their home and their lives after the protesters allegedly broke open a closed gate. And that distinction there is very likely to be important if this case does go to trial. As of right now, there is a video circulating

Starting point is 00:06:17 of protesters entering an already opened gate. However, it is unclear how that gate was opened, but it could hurt the couple's argument. Now, eventually that situation deescalated and what we ended up seeing a few days later is Gardner saying in a press conference. I am disturbed by the events that occurred over this weekend, where there were peaceful protesters

Starting point is 00:06:33 who were met with guns and a violent assault. We must protect the rights to peacefully protest and any attempts to chill it through intimidation or use of force will not be tolerated. So that brings us back to Monday and Gardner filing charges against the couple with Gardner saying in a statement, it is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner at those participating

Starting point is 00:06:52 in non-violent protest. And while we are fortunate the situation did not escalate into deadly force, this type of conduct is unacceptable in St. Louis. However, it is important to note here that it doesn't even look like she's necessarily looking to place this couple in prison, but rather that this couple would be a part't even look like she's necessarily looking to place this couple in prison, but rather that this couple would be a part

Starting point is 00:07:06 of one of her office's diversion programs that are intended to keep the courts moving and people out of prison after they admit guilt. But that also appears unlikely that they will admit guilt because after the charges were announced, McCloskey's lawyer said in a statement, "'The charges filed today against my clients "'are disheartening as I unequivocally believe

Starting point is 00:07:20 "'no crime was committed. "'I, along with my clients, "'support the First Amendment right of every citizen to have their voice and opinion heard. This right, however, must be balanced with the Second Amendment and Missouri law, which entitle each of us to protect our home and family from potential threats.

Starting point is 00:07:33 And like I mentioned, those charges also face backlash from people like Missouri Governor Mike Parson, who bashed Gardner in a series of tweets, writing, Kim Gardner's action toward the McCloskeys is outrageous. Even worse, the Circuit Attorney's Office has admitted there is a backlog of cases and dozens of homicides that haven't been prosecuted yet.

Starting point is 00:07:48 She has accelerated this case forward. We must prioritize laws that keep our citizens safe over political motivations. Kim Gardner owes every single family who has had a loved one murdered an explanation on why she has acted on the McCloskey case instead of theirs. Also, even President Trump has gotten involved with his press secretary telling reporters.

Starting point is 00:08:04 He said it is absolutely absurd what is happening to the McCloskeys. He noted that this is an extreme abuse of power by the prosecutor. However, Gardner's actions also received support both during her initial investigation into the incident and after the charges were filed. With many activists happy that the McCloskeys

Starting point is 00:08:19 could be facing repercussions for their actions. But as far as the law here, the law is probably gonna be a massive hurdle for Gardner. And the reason for that, as some have pointed out, is that the Missouri laws on this are complicated. Right, state law defines felony unlawful use of a weapon as when a person exhibits in the presence of one or more persons any weapon readily capable

Starting point is 00:08:36 of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner. Right, so that sounds like something that the McCloskeys did. But, and it is a very big but, Missouri has what is known as the Castle Doctrine. Generally speaking, it allows for someone to defend themselves and their home from unlawful intruders. So the general thing is if someone breaks into your home,

Starting point is 00:08:50 you do not have a duty to retreat. And that's the legal doctrine that says a threatened person can't act in self-defense if they can retreat. Now obviously, other states do have versions of the Castle Doctrine, but Missouri has one of the most extreme versions. Under Missouri law, you can use deadly force

Starting point is 00:09:03 to not only protect yourself or your home, but it also allows force to be used if someone believes it is necessary to stop what they think is stealing, property damage, or tampering in any degree. But it also expands from there because Missouri allows someone to protect any kind of residence, vehicle, other private property,

Starting point is 00:09:18 or any other location where they have the right to be. Right, so here, the McCloskeys will likely claim that they feared for their lives and their property was in danger and thus protected by the Castle Doctrine. But if this did go to trial, it's possible that a jury might not buy that defense. Right, the argument against that is the protesters

Starting point is 00:09:32 were not going to their home, but rather to the mayor's residence. There's also been the argument that these protesters, you know, they were just in the street, they were just in the road, but in this community, both are completely private, which is why many legal experts in Missouri think that the protesters didn't have a right

Starting point is 00:09:43 to be there in the first place, whether or not they entered peacefully. Also in this instance, if you're hoping to look back to previous legal cases, there's not much help there. Missouri's Castle Doctrine was heavily expanded in 2017, meaning there's not a ton of case law to fall back on here. But either way, what we ended up seeing is Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt

Starting point is 00:09:58 asking the courts to dismiss the charges. As Missouri's chief law enforcement officer, I simply will not stand by while Missouri law is being ignored. That's why I'm entering this case and seeking the dismissal of this case to protect the rights of Missourians to defend themselves and their property

Starting point is 00:10:13 under Missouri's Castle Doctrine. Although we've also seen him get pushback from state representatives like Rasheen Aldridge Jr. who tweeted, the AG is wrong on this issue. This isn't about the second amendment right to self-defense, especially when we wasn't even heading to the McCloskey's home. They purposely came out their homes

Starting point is 00:10:27 and pointed loaded firearms at unarmed and non-violent protesters. This is in fairness, but politics. But all of that said, as far as what the McCloskey's could face here, if this went to trial and let's say they were found guilty, each of them technically could get up to four years in prison for the felony and 15 days in jail for the assault

Starting point is 00:10:42 and thousands upon thousands in fine, not to mention the possible civil litigation against them. But also if that ended up happening, Governor Parson has already said that he would step in and pardon the couple. Yeah, ultimately that is where we are with this story. And then I do want to pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this?

Starting point is 00:10:56 Do you agree or disagree with a couple facing charges here? Are you on the side of they were worried about their own safety, their home safety, so yes, they were well within their rights? Or no, do you think this was the use of deadly weapons to intimidate peaceful protesters who were just walking by? Any and all thoughts you have on this, I'd love to hear in those comments down below.

Starting point is 00:11:11 Next up, let's talk about the European Union because they just agreed to a massive coronavirus stimulus package. Package that's been described as so important, it's expected to help Europe avoid what could be the worst economic blow it's received since World War II. But also, if you've seen any reports thus far

Starting point is 00:11:25 about this stimulus, you might be a little confused about it. That's because some reports are calling this a $2.1 trillion deal, whereas you have others describing it as an $859 billion agreement. And it seems to be a very large and thus possibly important discrepancy. But there's a simple explanation, $2.1 trillion, that is the general overall amount, right?

Starting point is 00:11:44 About $1.3 trillion of it will actually go to the EU's budget for 2021 to 2027. That specific length of time, because this is something that's negotiated every seven years covering a wide range of things, everything from road repairs to agricultural subsidies. Then the rest of the money, the 859 billion amount, that is the stimulus package.

Starting point is 00:12:00 And that is tied directly to the COVID-19 pandemic. And according to the final agreement, this package will largely be spent over the next four years. It'll include both loans and grants meant to be sent to member nations, and it will focus on providing funding across three main pillars. One, helping businesses rebound from the pandemic. Two, rolling out new measures to reform economies

Starting point is 00:12:18 over the long haul. And three, investing to help protect against future crises. And it's a very big deal this agreement was reached because for a time there were concerns if it was even possible. You had talks running along this in part because you had a handful of rich Northern countries slowing down the talks.

Starting point is 00:12:31 Those countries being the Netherlands, Denmark, Austria, and Sweden, which are also known as the frugal four which is the most disgustingly responsible nickname I've ever heard. You know, their main objection here was how much should be given to countries like Italy and Spain, countries that have been hit very hard by the virus. Also concerned over how much control

Starting point is 00:12:47 those countries should have over how the funds distributed to them will be spent. For example, you had Dutch leaders arguing that Italy and Spain were to blame for pre-pandemic economic difficulties that left them struggling to pay their way out of this crisis. Also arguing they don't want to send monies

Starting point is 00:12:59 to those countries if they have no guarantees of economic reform in return. And incredibly important to this debate was how much should be given in grants and how much should be given in loans. There's obviously a big distinction there. Loan, you have to pay back. Grant, that money is just given to you.

Starting point is 00:13:11 And that was an incredibly important point in this debate because especially in times of crisis, the EU has typically only offered loans, not grants. But one of the biggest arguments here is that we are in extraordinary times. This is a massive, massive crisis on a completely different level, which is why we saw a lot of EU countries

Starting point is 00:13:26 pushing for a mix of grants and loans. Now the original proposal would have given out 500 billion euros in grants, but the frugal four pretty much immediately shot that down. This because it would have required them to pay in more. And so they suggested only handing out 375 billion euros in grants. But then on the other side of the negotiating table,

Starting point is 00:13:41 you had Spain arguing that the EU couldn't afford to give out less than 400 billion euros in grants. Also arguing that a failure to reach an agreement here would result in a two-speed economic recovery, meaning richer countries would bounce back faster than struggling countries, and so in return, it would place further strain on the EU as a whole. And ultimately, what we ended up seeing

Starting point is 00:13:57 was a compromise being made. 390 billion euros in grant money with the rest of the money in the stimulus deal going to low-interest loans. And on top of that, this compromise also includes billions in rebates to the frugal four for their contribution to the shared EU budget. Following this deal being made, we saw a lot of different reactions. In general, we saw happiness like that of European Council President Charles Michel. We did it! We have reached a deal on the recovery package and the European budget,

Starting point is 00:14:21 a marathon which ended in success for all 27 member states, but especially for the people. This is a good deal, this is a strong deal, this is the right deal for Europe right now." French President Emmanuel Macron calling it a historic day for Europe. Hard hit countries like Spain, Italy and even Portugal also appear to be content with the grants. But also, you did have others less pleased, like one anonymous official calling it a bittersweet victory. This because to reach this compromise cuts were made

Starting point is 00:14:48 to projects covering health and refugees. Also the Finnish deal does not include expenditure on many research and climate projects. There are also those concerned that there's no language in this that makes it so countries have to stick to democratic norm. This likely because Hungary and Poland had threatened to block any deal that specifically tied funding

Starting point is 00:15:03 to upholding democratic norms. For example, Poland has been accused of eroding the independence of its courts, but is now expected to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of these funds. And while in its own right, it is important to talk about what is happening in Europe, it's also helpful to see what's happening there,

Starting point is 00:15:16 what they're doing, and then compare it to what's happening here. Because you know, we here in the United States, we already saw one round of stimulus checks being sent to Americans. And for the past four months, people in unemployment should have been receiving an extra $600 a week on top of state benefits, sent to Americans and for the past four months people in unemployment should have been receiving An extra $600 a week on top of state benefits. Thanks to measures passed under the cares act

Starting point is 00:15:29 However, and this is very important that support is set to expire on July 31st That is just 10 days away and it comes at a time when temporary bans on evictions in some states are also Expiring this is going to impact a ton of people because as of right now more than 17 million Americans are still drawing unemployment But even with that being the case, there appears to be a ton of opposition to extending those temporary benefits. In fact, just yesterday, we saw broad resistance from Republicans at a Senate meeting,

Starting point is 00:15:51 with them arguing that the benefits are too generous and that people are refusing to return to work because they're making more on unemployment. And so instead, Senate Republicans are expected to lay out a plan later this week that will reduce the $600 per week enhancement, with that plan also expected to include things like liability protections for businesses,

Starting point is 00:16:06 healthcare providers, and others. All right, so there's gonna be stuff in there that Democrats do not like, and as far as what will actually happen, I don't know. You know, you have a Republican-controlled Senate, the Democrats have the House. Will we see what we saw in the EU, compromise? Maybe, I mean, you have Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin

Starting point is 00:16:19 and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows set to meet today with Democratic and Republican leaders for bipartisan talks. Today, we've also seen Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell saying he supports another round of stimulus checks. Ultimately that is where we are right now. It's kind of a waiting game to see what happens. And you know, all that's in the balance is the lives

Starting point is 00:16:34 of millions and millions of American families. No pressure, but with that story, I would love to know your thoughts. Do you want to see another round happen? Yes, no, why, why not? Really any and all thoughts on today's topics. And that is where I'm going to end today's show. And to the three of you still here,

Starting point is 00:16:47 once again, thank you for being a part of this, watching the video, supporting them however you do, liking, sharing, being a part of the conversation down below. It probably all helps. At this point, honestly, I have no idea how the algorithm works. Also, if you're looking for more to watch, maybe you missed yesterday's show

Starting point is 00:16:58 or you want to catch up on the newest bonus channel, click or tap right there to watch that. Also another thank you to robinhoodphil.com for sponsoring today's episode. Definitely go click that link, check it out. But with that said, of course, as always, my name tap right there to watch that. Also another thank you to robinhoodphil.com for sponsoring today's episode. Definitely go click that link, check it out. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in.

Starting point is 00:17:11 I love yo faces and I'll see you tomorrow. I hope you liked the video. Subscribe if you like it.

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.21 Halsey Defends, Charli D'Amelio, St Louis Couple CHARGED, HUGE Coronavirus Relief Package &

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.