The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.8 WHY'D HE DO THAT?! Controversy Over Schools Reopening, Ninja Live On Youtube, Supreme Court

Episode Date: July 8, 2020

Get 20% OFF + Free International Shipping instantly at http://Manscaped.com/phil LAST CHANCE to get this Limited Drop! (few hours left): http://ShopDeFranco.com Newest random personal video: https://youtu.be/KXuYTmjzWt8 Follow me off of Youtube: https://linktr.ee/PhilipDeFranco -- 00:00 - Tech CEO 05:07 - Ninja's First YouTube Stream 07:05 - TIA 08:40 - Schools Try To Circumvent ICE 16:17 - Supreme Court Ruling  -- WATCH Full “A Convo With” Podcasts: https://www.youtube.com/ACW  LISTEN On The Podcast Platform Of Your Choice: http://LinksHole.com WATCH the ACW Clips channel!: https://youtube.com/ACWClips ✩ SUPPORT THE SHOW ✩ ✭ BUY our GEAR, Support the Show!: http://ShopDeFranco.com ✭ Lemme Touch Your Hair: http://BeautifulBastard.com ✭ Paid Subscription: http://DeFrancoElite.com  ✩ TODAY IN AWESOME ✩ ✭ The Boys Season 2 - Teaser Trailer: https://youtu.be/cVHwlqyMyhM ✭ Transformers: War For Cybertron Trilogy - Siege Trailer: https://youtu.be/UksT5I1lvJM ✭ The Umbrella Academy Season 2 | Official Trailer: https://youtu.be/Me0eoCwLj-A ✭ Make Your Own Flipbook with Pixar’s Pete Docter: https://youtu.be/jo-UNLm4yh8 ✭ Ready Player Two: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ready-player-two-sets-november-publishing-date-1302284 ✭ Secret Link: https://youtu.be/CYlbJjIFCUU ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩  Ninja Starts Streaming on YouTube https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/8/21299002/ninja-youtube-streaming-mixer-shut-down https://youtu.be/OwsCtm3HMYc Tech CEO Apologizes After Rant Goes Viral: https://roguerocket.com/2020/07/08/tech-ceo-apologizes-after-viral-video/ Top Universities Move To Guard International Students https://roguerocket.com/2020/07/08/harvard-international-students/ Yesterday’s coverage: https://youtu.be/abYMkwLcojI SCOTUS Sides with Trump Admin: https://roguerocket.com/2020/07/08/scotus-ruling/ ——————————     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, Brian Espinoza Production Team: Zack Taylor, Luke Manning  ———————————— #DeFranco #Ninja #SCOTUS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup you beautiful bastard. Hope you're having a fantastic Wednesday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. A quick reminder, as of right now, you have about eight hours left. If you want to snag your limited edition bringer of sadness world tour 2020, tee, tank, or hoodie, it's ending today.

But with that said, 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 why are there so many horrible people in the world? I know that's a kind of vague way to introduce this story. It could literally relate to the 20 daily dumpster fires

delivered to our face every time we open our phone in the morning. But specifically today, I'm talking about and starting with Michael Lofthouse. And if you're unfamiliar, he is a San Francisco tech CEO that yes, you've probably never come across in your life before until recently, specifically the last few days where a video featuring him has gone viral

Seemingly he was taking part in the be a bigoted douchebag challenge. Yeah, let's watch the video Yeah, say that again oh now you're shy say again now you're sorry What's wrong with you? Save over time. That's what I'm saying. Yeah, you need to leave. That is not appropriate. We just need to leave. You need to leave. You need to leave. You need to leave.

Asian piece of. Oh my God. Get out of here. You are not allowed here. I already pulled You're not talking to our guests like that. Get out now. Who are these?

They are valued guests. Oh. Where actually, where I'm gonna start is, good job to that employee. I think a lot of people would resort to kind of being a bystander of the situation, but we see the employee repeatedly scream at that man, saying that he's never allowed to enter the restaurant again.

That man is, he's continuing to make remarks. He's laughing while gathering his belongings now as far as that video reportedly It was recorded by a member of the family that was being targeted Jordan Chan with the incident taking place on the 4th of July at the Lucia restaurant and bar in Carmel Valley, California Chan posted this video to her Instagram writing in the caption that her family was there celebrating a birthday calling the incident unprovoked unwarranted and Unconscionable explaining that her family was just singing happy birthday and taking the incident unprovoked, unwarranted, and unconscionable, explaining that her family was just singing happy birthday and taking pictures when the man just started spewing his remarks.

Also going on to claim that there was actually more vulgar and racist language coming from this man that was not captured on film. This, including comments like, "'Go back to whatever effing Asian country you're from.'" Also going on to talk about racism in America, criticizing President Donald Trump for amplifying voices of hate.

But ultimately, she ended her post by calling for change and encouraging people to vote in the upcoming election. And like I said, after this video went out, I mean it just blew up, especially because people shared it on Twitter. And what we've seen in response to this situation, we saw a ton of people online beginning to praise the family and that employee for how they handled the situation.

In fact, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, some even sent flowers and letters to the restaurant employee. A spokesperson for the Bernardus Lodge and Spa where the restaurant is located, also saying that others have even offered to pay for meals or A spokesperson for the Bernardus Lodge and Spa where the restaurant is located. Also saying that others have even offered to pay for meals or lodging for Chan's relatives who were celebrating at the restaurant the day of the incident.

The vice president and general manager of the lodge also saying that they were proud of their staff keeping in line with the company's core values. Also noting that Lofthouse was escorted off the property without further escalation. You know, as this blew up, you had people searching for him. He was later identified by several journalists. With reports coming out that he is a tech CEO specifically the CEO of Solid 8 though

Notably there it appears that it's a small cloud computing firm with anywhere between one to ten employees this according to LinkedIn and once people got That information they continued to share it including people like comedian Patton Oswalt with him sarcastically writing Could everyone please stop sharing this video of Michael Lofthouse? He's the founder and CEO of Solid 8, a tech company based in San Francisco. If it goes viral, it could hurt Michael Lofthouse and Solid8, his company. Let's all be nice to Michael Lofthouse and Solid8. We also saw the likes of Chrissy Teigen retweeting a photo

of his LinkedIn profile, writing, oops. We also saw people beginning to bombard Lofthouse with comments on his personal and company's social media profiles. Also Monday night, we saw Chen uploading a screenshot of what appears to be a response from Lofthouse to a user who called him a trash human being. And in this alleged response, among other things,

it looks like he called someone an Asian fuck. However, I do just want to note here that this is something that is being shared. We have not independently verified this. Also, no media outlets have confirmed whether or not that post was real. And part of the reason it's hard to verify is because it appears that Lofthouse's accounts

were now set to private or deleted. Though, it appears that Lofthouse did respond in another way. After all the backlash, we saw Lofthouse on Tuesday speaking to a local ABC station, issuing an apology. Writing, my behavior in the video is appalling. This was clearly a moment where I lost control and made incredibly hurtful and divisive comments.

I would like to deeply apologize to the Chan family. I can only imagine the stress and pain they feel. I was taught to respect people of all races and I will take the time to reflect on my actions and work to better understand the inequality that so many of those around me face every day." But I will say the family does not seem to be buying that apology.

I would also join them in that. You know, specifically we saw Chan's uncle, Raymond Arosa, who was also there for the incident saying, "'He's just saving face. "'I think he really meant what he said and what he did. "'I don't believe his words because his actions "'speak louder than the words he's saying.'" And there, pointing to the social media comment

that allegedly was written by Lofthouse. But still, he told reporters, "'I can't say what he did was acceptable or right, it isn't, "'because a lot of people will probably disagree with me "'for saying I forgive him, but I do.'" Yeah, that's the end of the story, because I don't know what kind of question I could attach to this.

Like, what am I gonna ask? Do you think it's wrong to call someone an Asian piece of shit and say that Trump's gonna fuck you? You know, the words you'd expect from someone who was taught to respect all races. Anyway, that's the end of the story. Then in online entertainment slash business news, we should talk about Tyler Ninja Blevins.

Last time we talked about him, it was just after Mixer announced that they were shutting down, with it then being reported that Ninja and another creator by the name of Shroud actually got paid out their full contract. This without having to continue being locked down. And so that was seen, of course,

for these creators as a massive win, but of course there was the big question of well, where will they end up? I mean, according to the reports we were seeing, they seemingly did not want to go to Facebook gaming, also wouldn't blame them. And so in general, people had the question of, okay, are they gonna go to YouTube gaming or Twitch? And today we kind of, kind of got the answer.

Ninja kind of out of nowhere doing his first ever live stream on YouTube. And notably when I hopped into that stream, there were 153,000 plus concurrents, which obviously completely dwarfed the numbers that he was pulling over on Mixer. But also, I mean, for his career in general, this is amazing.

I think it's gonna be kind of a, I hate calling it a bounce back because he's just, he's a multi multi-millionaire. But like just for comparison sake, right? You have 153,000, 155,000 watching you all at once. And then you compare that to the last three videos he put out on YouTube, 292,000, 195,000, 217,000. So there's obviously a lot of excitement

to actually watch him live. It just needed to be in a platform that people actually use. Now that said, it is important to note, we have no news of an exclusive deal being met. And according to Rod Breslow, AKA Slasher, who reports on the space, according to sources, Ninja is currently in negotiations with streaming platforms and no exclusive deal has yet been signed, including YouTube. Today's YouTube live stream from Ninja is all on his own. Maybe

he'll stream on Twitch too. Which I will say regarding that last part, it will be interesting to see if Ninja does that. Based off of what happened when he moved to Mixer and things that have been said in the past, I don't know if he's inclined to want to work with Twitch, but there is an argument to be made that it would be a great way to negotiate, essentially show these platforms, hey, this is what you could have when the platforms that are negotiating are established

and I'm not trying to get people to just sign up for the first time ever to like a Mixer. Talent has most of, if not all of the power again. But that said, for now, we're gonna have to wait to see what happens next. And of course, with this story, I do wanna pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this? And then let's talk about the updates we're seeing around to wait to see what happens next. And of course, with this story, I do wanna pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this?

And then, let's talk about the updates we're seeing around schools, international students, and ICE. And in part, this is connected to one of the big stories we covered yesterday, so I'll link to that video down below. But as a brief refresher, on Monday, US Customs and Immigration Enforcement announced that it would revoke visas for international students going to schools that decide to shift

to online-only formats in the fall. And this, of course, happening at a time where a lot of schools are afraid to even offer in-person classes because the COVID-19 pandemic is still sweeping across the United States. So of course you now have a ton of students that are scared they're going to be deported

for something that is just completely out of their control. With many also wondering how they'd even be able to get back home with the current international travel restrictions. Once again, oversimplified. If you want a deeper dive into that, link down below. But what we're now seeing today is a number of colleges and universities

beginning to fight to keep those students. In fact, just this morning we saw Harvard and MIT filing a joint lawsuit against the Trump administration. And that, seeking a temporary restraining order prohibiting the government from enforcing ICE's policy. With that suit reading, ICE's action proceeded without any indication of having considered the health of students, faculty,

university staff, or communities, or the absence of other options for universities to provide their curricula to many of their international students. With Harvard president Larry Bacow adding in a personal statement, "'We hope and intend to resume full in-person instruction "'as soon as it is safe and responsible to do so.

"'But until that time comes, "'we will not stand by to see our international students' "'dreams extinguished by a deeply misguided order.'" We've also seen a number of schools scrambling to reassure their international students in other ways. For example, in a statement yesterday, we saw New York University, which is the highest number of international students

in the entire United States, stressed that its hybrid program would accommodate most of its international students, but that this new guidance from ICE will be disruptive to some who will now be forced to rethink their fall schedules to ensure they include live classes. Additionally, requiring international students

to maintain in-person instruction or leave the country, irrespective of their own health issues or even a government mandated shutdown of New York City is just plain wrong and needlessly rigid. Also in New York, we saw Columbia University announcing that it now plans to organize hybrid classes with both in-person and remote learning opportunities, as well as offering pop-up learning centers

for students who can't return to Columbia. Meanwhile, on the West Coast, you had Stanford, which had previously announced that it would hold mostly online classes now saying that it would support International students though as to what that will actually look like it hasn't yet been said also Interestingly you have situations like the University of California Berkeley there students are reportedly trying to create a course for international students solely to circumvent this ice Policy with this news coming after a student said they had found a faculty member willing to sponsor a class that would be quote, only for students who are international and need a physical component to remain in the United States. Right, but with all of that said, keep this in mind, all of this right now is just talk. There is nothing set in stone. We've seen a number of people wondering how this class would even be drafted and if it would conflict with immigration fraud laws.

Also here, one of the points I want to hit on is that this post garnered over 24,000 likes before it ended up being taken down. And right now, there's just this ugly, desperate situation for international students in the country. You know, we've already started seeing reports of international students signing up for really any in-person class that they can find. Others reportedly trying to swap for in-person classes

with American students as those classes fill up. Also, to give a little insight into why ICE and why Homeland Security are doing this, we saw this exchange yesterday between CNN anchor Breonna Kaler and Acting Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kenneth Cuccinelli. So you're basically forcing universities to reopen even if they have personally determined that they shouldn't be doing that for public health reasons. So you've always been picky about your produce.

But now you find yourself checking every label to make sure it's Canadian. So be it. At Sobeys, we always pick guaranteed fresh Canadian produce first. Restrictions apply. See in-store or online for details. It won't take long to tell you Nutrile's ingredients. Vodka. Soda. Natural flavors.

So, what should we talk about? No sugar added? Neutral. Refreshingly simple. We're not forcing universities to reopen. However, if a university, let's just take your version of it, if they don't reopen this semester, there isn't a reason for a person holding a student visa to be present in the country. They should go home, and then they can return

when the school opens. That's what student visas are for, and we want to accommodate that for schools, and we're working hard to do that. Cuccinelli also saying that this policy was designed in part to encourage schools to reopen, which actually here, let's talk about schools reopening in general, because that's becoming a big thing being hit

by the Trump administration. Monday, the same day that ICE made this announcement, we saw President Trump tweeting, corrupt Joe Biden and the Democrats don't want to open schools in the fall for political reasons, not for health reasons. They think it will help them in November. Wrong. The people get it. Then saying yesterday, I see why Harvard announced that they're closing for the season or for the year. I think it's ridiculous. I think it's an easy way out. And I think they ought to be ashamed of themselves. You want to know the truth.

So we're very much going to put pressure on governors and everybody else to open the schools. You also had Education Secretary Betsy DeVos saying. Ultimately, it's not a matter of if schools should reopen. It's simply a matter of how. They must fully open and they must be fully operational. And how that happens is best left to education and community leaders. With DeVos disavowing certain reopening plans such as hybrid models that suggest students

only physically go to school a few times a week, DeVos telling governors in a conference call a choice of two days per week in the classroom is not a choice at all. And adding, students across the country have already fallen behind. We need to make sure that they catch up. It's expected that it will look different

depending on where you are, but what's clear is that students and their families need more options. And here, DeVos also compared the coronavirus risk to risks like learning to ride a bike and being shot off in a rocket into space, saying schools already deal with risk on a daily basis. Though, a quick aside here,

the education department has also come under a lot of scrutiny itself. This is several states have now filed a lawsuit against the department, accusing it of attempting to take pandemic relief funds away from public schools and diverting that money to private schools. Also vice president Mike Pence saying on that call yesterday

that if all schools remained closed in the upcoming academic year, US economy would take a $50 billion hit. Trump also continuing this push this morning, saying that he may cut off funding if schools do not open. Also comparing the US situation with that of Germany, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Though I will say of course there it is incredibly important to note that is not an apples to apples comparison. Those countries at least comparatively have all managed to suppress the virus one way or the other.

Right, the US has not, we've seen the number of cases increasing. Trump also disagreeing openly with the CDC's guidelines to reopen. But also for this story I say, you know, let's take a look at this. Right? If schools reopened, what would they look like? Could they even feasibly do that? I think part of this topic involves us not painting all of education with a broad brush. Right, there's high school and college, you have your older kids, and then you have your younger kids. You know, there is some evidence that suggests that kids are less likely to catch COVID-19. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, more and more data has been coming out

around the severity of the illness and the likelihood of infection for children, both of which are substantially lower than they are for adults. But of course, you also need to take that with at least some level of hesitancy, right? It's not clear how strong that evidence is right now. I mean, there's also data to believe

that schools closing back in the early stages of the pandemic could have helped to contribute to these lower infection rates. And also at the same time, it's important to remember, this is not universal. You still have reports of kids dying from COVID-19, so it's not like they're just immune. And of course, it's been noted

that not every kid is the same. Their health varies. Some have asthma, others have conditions that make them more susceptible. But still, going back to the Academy of Pediatrics, you have them saying, the AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal

of having students physically present in school. This because of several potential negative impacts including interruption of support services as well as a difficulty for schools to identify learning deficits, sexual abuse, substance abuse, and depression. And as far as going back to school in person, you have the CDC recommending that desks should be six feet apart. Also, the groups of students stay together and don't share objects. Also recommending a hybrid schedule. However, it also notes that face masks will likely be challenging for students, especially the younger ones, to wear all day.

But ultimately, that's where we are. We have to keep our eyes on the situation. You have August rapidly approaching. We're likely to see a lot more schools announcing their plans publicly. So with this story, I do wanna pass a question off to you. And it's really two questions because like I said, it's not just one universal topic.

What are your thoughts regarding what's happening with colleges and international students? And then separate from that, what are your thoughts about younger kids going back to school? And then let's talk about the just absolutely massive Supreme Court ruling we saw come down today. And this decision actually came out of two combined cases. You had Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania

and Trump v. Pennsylvania. And all of this is about employers' ability to deny birth control coverage, right? Under the ACA, the Affordable Care Act, employers were required to cover cost-free contraception for their employees. Though, notably here, there were also exceptions for houses of worship like churches.

They could refuse on religious grounds. Then, back in 2014, we saw those exemptions being extended after Hobby Lobby won a Supreme Court case. That, then allowing certain closely held corporations like family businesses to refuse birth control coverage if it contradicted their religious beliefs. And then, in 2018, we saw President Donald Trump further expand this by allowing most employers to opt out of cost-free birth control coverage if it contradicted their religious beliefs. And then in 2018, we saw President Donald Trump further expand this by allowing most employers

to opt out of cost-free birth control coverage if there is a religious or moral objection. And so that was the biggest expansion of all because that would include a bunch of workplaces, from small private businesses to universities to big public companies. And there, what we ended up seeing happen was the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania

challenged Trump's rules, citing the fact that they would now have to cover contraception costs to those who lost it under the Trump administration. But what we ended up seeing this morning is a Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration. And very notably, this was not a five to four decision, this was actually a seven to two ruling. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor being the two dissenting votes. And in this decision, you had Justice Clarence Thomas writing that the Trump administration had the authority to provide exemptions from the regulatory contraceptive requirements for employers with religious and conscientious objections.

And adding, it is clear from the face of the statute that the contraceptive mandate is capable of violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA. You also had Justice Samuel Alito writing in the concurring, I would hold not only that it was appropriate for the departments to consider RFRA, but also that the departments were required by RFRA to create the religious exemption or something very close to it.

Now notably as far as what does this mean, this ruling could leave as many as 126,000 women without access to contraception within a year. I mean, birth control is a very common form of healthcare. Around nine out of 10 women will seek some form of it in their lifetime. And it's likely because, you know, in a number of cases, it is for contraception, but also some forms

of birth control also help a variety of other things. Things like regulating menstrual cycles, lowering risks for various forms of cancer, managing migraines, and other issues like endometriosis. Now, as far as the dissent, we had Ginsburg writing, "'This Court leaves women workers to fend for themselves, "'to seek contraceptive coverage from sources "'other than their employers insure,

"'and absent another available source of funding "'to pay for contraceptive services out of their own pockets. With her also saying that while the court takes a balanced approach in religious freedom cases, it should not allow the religious beliefs of some to overwhelm the rights and interests of others who do not share those beliefs. And that today, for the first time,

the court cast totally aside countervailing rights and interests. You know, with this ruling, we saw a variety of reactions. We saw the National Women's Law Center condemning the move on Twitter, writing, this is disastrous. Thousands of people could now have their birth control coverage determined by their boss.

It's invasive, archaic, and dangerous. And adding, we know that without coverage, many people struggle to afford birth control. It doesn't have to and shouldn't be this way. With them also saying that it will have a larger impact on low-wage workers, people of color, and LGBTQ people. And asking, why during a global health crisis is the Supreme Court making healthcare worse?

You also had Dr. Daniel Grossman, the head of a research group at the University of California, San Francisco called Advancing New Standards and Reproductive Health tweeting, "'This is dangerous and a serious violation "'of workers' freedoms, privacy, and healthcare access. "'No employer is welcome into the exam room

"'when I talk to patients about their contraception options. "'Why should they be able to dictate the method from their corner office? But also on the other side of this, you had people like Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, saying it should be common sense to allow a religious group to conduct themselves according to their religious convictions. And yet, government agents have tried to punish them with obtuse fines for doing just that. We are pleased to see the Supreme Court still recognizes religious freedom. But with all that said, that is where we are with this story. Of course, I do want to pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts regarding the Supreme Court still recognizes religious freedom. But with all that said, that is where we are with this story. Of course, I do want to pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts regarding the Supreme Court decision?

Do you think they made the right move or the wrong move? Right, so I guess it basically boils down to the question of do you think it is okay that any company out there can seek a religious exemption so they don't have to support federally approved forms of contraception? With companies that are not publicly traded also not even needing a religious exemption, they just have to have a moral objection.

Yeah, let me know what you're thinking in those comments down below. That is where I'm going to end today's show. And hey, as always, thank you for being a part of this community, watching these daily dives into the news, liking the video, sharing it, being a part of the comments down below. Also, if you're new here and you wanna be informed

on the daily, be sure to hit that subscribe button and definitely tap that bell so it looks like this. And YouTube will hopefully work and notify you when I upload new videos. 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.