The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 9.28 Who Got Exposed As a Fake! The Rock Endorsement Backlash, & Amy Coney Barrett

Starting point is 00:00:00 So let's get this out of the way. I just shot a whole episode without realizing my hoodie was stained. So regardless of the reality of the situation, I will be moving forward with the argument that this is actually an artistic statement about the state of our world. Hmm, don't see it?

Starting point is 00:00:16 I guess maybe you're not smart. Like I, Big Brain DeFranco, starting the week on a high note. Sup, you beautiful bastards. Hope you had a fantastic Monday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. Buckle up, hit that like button, otherwise I will punch you in the throat and let's just jump into it.

Starting point is 00:00:31 First up today, let's talk about a batch of quickie news. So first up, we look to Texas where the governor has now issued a disaster declaration for Brazoria County. That, after the presence of a dangerous amoeba was detected in a city's water supply. That amoeba is called Nycleria fuleri and according to the CDC, the organism is typically found in warm freshwater lakes and rivers. That amoeba is called Nigleria fuleri, and according to the CDC, the organism is typically found

Starting point is 00:00:46 in warm freshwater lakes and rivers. People are exposed when it enters the body from the nose. From there, it travels to the brain, where it destroys brain tissue. And officials are now aware of this issue because tragically, it was linked to the death of a six-year-old boy who passed away in the city of Lake Jackson earlier this month.

Starting point is 00:01:00 It's believed he was exposed from the amoeba either from a water hose at his home or from a city splash pad. That then prompted testing. And according to the governor's declaration, presence of an Agleria fuleri was identified in three of 11 tests of the water supply, posing an imminent threat to public health and safety,

Starting point is 00:01:13 including loss of life. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality issued a do not use water alert Friday for eight cities. We saw that warning lifted on Saturday for all cities in Brazoria County, except for Lake Jackson. With Lake Jackson remaining under a boil water advisory. And as of now, local officials say that they are working on a plan to flush

Starting point is 00:01:29 and disinfect the water system. Then let's talk about everyone's favorite game when it comes to influencers, find the fake. With this round centering around a tweet that went viral over the weekend, exposing a secret behind some influencer travel photos. That tweet reading, I just found out LA Instagram girlies

Starting point is 00:01:42 are using studio sets that look like private jets for their Instagram pics. It's crazy that anything you're looking at could be fake. The setting, the clothes, the body, I don't know, it just kind of shakes my reality a bit. That post including photos of a private jet set up that's actually a studio in California, which you can rent for $64 an hour. Following this, we then saw influencers who had posed on this set being called out online. Perhaps most focused on here were the Mion twins, with them then eventually editing their Instagram captions to admit that they were on a set.

Starting point is 00:02:06 And while a ton of people were upset about this, they thought it was hilarious and sad, you had others pointing out that it's not exactly a new idea. You have things in the past like Bow Wow, who famously was called out for posting a private plane photo on social media before being spotted on a commercial flight.

Starting point is 00:02:17 People noting other ridiculous things like when people buy empty shopping bags to pretend that they've gone on a shopping spree. But the two main things I want to hit on here, one, stop being fake you fakers. And two, let this be your friendly to Franco reminder that how people present themselves online is often different than what they are in real life. It's part of the reason why you should never compare yourself and your situation to what you see online. That's an artist's self-portrait, not reality. Then in entertainment news,

Starting point is 00:02:40 we should talk about Sola El-Wayly. If you don't recall, she was a host on Bon Appetit's massively popular YouTube channel. And as Tube Filter noted, she was one of the first staffers to call out the publication's discriminatory compensation practices and lack of diversity on camera. She and a number of hosts left the channel. And what we're seeing this week is actually something very awesome.

Starting point is 00:02:56 El-Wayly has teamed up with the massive YouTube food sensation that is Binging with Babish. The Binging with Babish channel, which has been incredibly successful, just under 8 million subscribers as of right now. Several series, Binging with Babish, Basics with Babish, Being with Babish. The Binging with Babish channel, which has been incredibly successful, just under 8 million subscribers as of right now. Several series, Binging with Babish, Basics with Babish, Being with Babish,

Starting point is 00:03:08 has now been renamed and rebranded the Babish Culinary Universe. Seemingly to allow shows to be launched that do not involve him, and the first that we saw is a new series titled Stump Sola, with Sola El-Wayly doing at least a run of 10 episodes. And personally, I think this whole thing is actually very exciting.

Starting point is 00:03:23 It appears like a win-win across the board. Sola was obviously a fan favorite over a Bon Appetit. So to see her then be able to move to a channel that's even larger, that's huge. And then you see binging with Babish, right? Andrew Rea, seeing him go from what was a small one-man operation to now this much bigger thing. That's exciting to see.

Starting point is 00:03:37 That's actual organic talent making big waves in the community. Then in entertainment news that goes political, we have The Rock. You likely seen it by now, but you had Dwayne The Rock Johnson officially endorsing Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. And as far as if this actually moves any undecided voters,

Starting point is 00:03:51 who can ever tell? But as far as my reaction to this announcement, I was actually genuinely surprised. And what I mean by that is I wasn't surprised that The Rock would be voting for Joe Biden. I already put out that video back in June where he said, "'Where is our leader while our country is on its knees?' There was still enough of a gray area in that video

Starting point is 00:04:06 that you'd be like, ah, this isn't gonna hurt him. But for The Rock, who is generally seen as successful because he's appealing to almost every person, like him inserting himself in one of the most divisive elections that we've ever seen, that's bold and notable. You know, with this story, there are two questions in my mind. One, why is your shirt so tight, sir?

Starting point is 00:04:22 It's aggressive, right? And two, I wonder what this endorsement does. Once again, like, does it move more people to go, okay, even The Rock thinks this, or does this hurt his career, or does it help his career in some way? Now you look, following his endorsement, there are a lot of big reactions,

Starting point is 00:04:34 a lot of love, a lot of hate. On his YouTube videos for this, the likes and dislikes are split. On Instagram, you see his post has a ton of likes, but a lot of the top comments are actually people speaking out against him. So I think it's likely we won't see for six to 12 months of, you know, did this hurt or help The Rock?

Starting point is 00:04:48 Is it enough to make or break fans? But even saying that, it brings up another question of have we moved past a time of being apolitical? Right, do people expect their celebrities and their companies to stand for something? Right, like for example, in the corporate business world, one of the most notable examples is Nike and Colin Kaepernick. When that was announced, it appeared to be

Starting point is 00:05:04 a very divisive moment, but you know, you look now and the company has just continued to grow, continued to succeed. Also in the story that's turning into just a number of questions, what are your thoughts around the argument that celebrities should just shut up when it comes to politics? What is your opinion on that, Ben, in the past?

Starting point is 00:05:17 Has that changed since we literally have a celebrity president? Although celebrities in politics is not a new thing. I mean, Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, does it depend on the person? Yeah, really any and all thoughts you have on that, I'd love to hear from you in those comments down below and also the reasoning behind those opinions.

Starting point is 00:05:33 And the last thing that we're gonna talk about today, of course, is the major news around the Supreme Court. Right, over the weekend, Donald Trump announced that he was nominating Amy Coney Barrett to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat. To give you a little background here, Barrett is a federal judge on the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit,

Starting point is 00:05:46 a role that she has held since she was appointed by Trump back in 2017 after working as a law professor at Notre Dame. If she is appointed, which it seems incredibly likely, she will become the youngest member of the court at 48 years old. Trump's two other appointees, Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, are both in their 50s, meaning the three Trump-appointed justices

Starting point is 00:06:01 could potentially serve for decades. Also meaning you'd have a firm conservative Supreme court with a six person majority. Also with Barrett's nomination, we've seen religion brought up. I was unaware of this, but her confirmation would mean that six of the nine justices are Catholic.

Starting point is 00:06:13 You know, regarding her religion, you have some concern that her religious beliefs might impact her rulings. So you have others saying it's disgusting to criticize someone over their faith. Also something regarding religion I wanted to note, in recent days you have others raising questions about her and her husband's reported involvement

Starting point is 00:06:26 in a Christian group called the People of Praise. According to reports that group, which is largely described as a Christian sect, grew out of the Catholic charismatic renewal movement that began in the late 1960s and adopted Pentecostal practices like speaking in tongues, belief in prophecy and divine healing. Reiner alleged involvement with that group

Starting point is 00:06:40 is why you saw the Handmaid's Tale trending on Twitter. This is because some claim that the group was the inspiration for the original Handmaid's Book, though that has been debunked. But regardless, religion has been a big question for this justice specifically. And seemingly in response to those concerns, we saw Barrett for her part at the official announcement of her nomination say, I also want to acknowledge you, my fellow Americans. The president has nominated me to serve on the United States Supreme Court, and that institution belongs to all of us. If confirmed, I would not assume that role for the sake of those in my own circle, and certainly not for my own sake. I would assume this role to serve

Starting point is 00:07:22 you. And that's something that Barrett also hit on when describing her personal judicial philosophy, which she said was the same as former Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia, who she actually clerked for and described as her mentor saying, His judicial philosophy is mine too. A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policy makers

Starting point is 00:07:42 and they must be resolute and setting aside any policy views they might hold. Right, and this idea that Barrett will follow closely in Scalia's footsteps is really important to the ongoing debate that we've been seeing. On one side, you have many people and media outlets saying, yes, she will shift the court,

Starting point is 00:07:55 but she is ideologically in line with other conservative judges. But on the other side, you have a lot of others, and specifically you see this on social media, saying that her past decisions, public statements, and publications show that she is an extremist and a religious fundamentalist. And regarding those two sides,

Starting point is 00:08:08 we've seen a lot of confusion over Barrett's record, where she stands on key issues, and how that could affect future Supreme Court decisions. And as far as those key issues, first up, a topic that possibly gets this video demonetized and suppressed, Roe v. Wade and abortion rights. Here, Barrett has been quite public about her personal opposition to abortion

Starting point is 00:08:24 in both academic and judicial writings. She has explicitly said that abortion is always immoral and her nomination has been widely supported by anti-abortion groups. Also in addition to her personal views and her role as a federal judge, she has overseen three cases regarding laws restricting abortions in her home state of Indiana.

Starting point is 00:08:38 In all three of those cases, she expressed concerns over earlier rulings that had ended those restrictions. Twice joining dissenting opinions that would have struck down lower court rulings and upheld abortion restrictions. Twice joining dissenting opinions that would have struck down lower court rulings and upheld abortion restrictions. But you have some arguing that both her personal beliefs and past rulings do not necessarily mean

Starting point is 00:08:51 that she would strike down Roe v. Wade. Right, while Trump vowed to appoint justices ready to overrule the 1973 decision that established that the Constitution recognizes a right to abortion, Barrett has not yet said publicly how she would rule on abortion if confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Starting point is 00:09:03 And this is where things get a little messy. Barrett has in the past called Roe an erroneous decision and claimed that it ignited a national controversy by deciding the issue via the Supreme Court rather than leaving it up to the states. But at the same time, she has also repeatedly said she doesn't think SCOTUS would overturn the ruling. While speaking at an appearance in 2016, she stated,

Starting point is 00:09:19 "'I don't think the core case, Roe's core holding, "'that women have a right to an abortion, "'I don't think that would change. But I think the question of whether people can get very late term abortions, you know, how many restrictions can be put on clinics, I think that will change. Right, and that last point is really important

Starting point is 00:09:32 because while many experts believe that it is unlikely that SCOTUS will wholesale overturn Roe anytime soon, what is very likely is that this court will make decisions on cases that will slowly chip away at the ruling instead. Though, understand this is a point of debate because the conservative justices do have enough votes to go directly after abortion. That's for a number of reasons, including that Barrett has been clear that she would be open to reversing a Supreme Court precedent

Starting point is 00:09:51 if she believed it went against the Constitution. Right, so Roe v. Wade, one of the big things here, and in addition to that, you have the Affordable Care Act. And the timing with this one is incredibly significant because just a week after Election Day, the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on the latest challenge to the ACA. And notably here, Barrett has publicly criticized the Supreme Court decision that upheld Obamacare as constitutional. In a 2017 article that she wrote,

Starting point is 00:10:12 she quoted her mentor Scalia's dissension with the law by saying that it should be called SCOTUS care, with her argument being that an originalist reading of the constitution would not allow for Obamacare. Also criticizing Chief Justice Roberts' stance on Obamacare, saying that he considered too many factors outside of the constitution when considering Obamacare's constitutionality. Also regarding the ACA making employers offer birth control regardless of their religious preferences.

Starting point is 00:10:31 In 2012, she allegedly signed a petition against this provision and is quoted by Newsweek saying at the time, And this concern that a newly appointed Barrett along with the other conservative justices would be killing the ACA is something that we saw Biden speak on this weekend. This is about your health care. This is about whether or not the ACA will exist. This is about whether or not pre-existing conditions will be continue to be covered. This is about whether or not a woman can be charged more for the same procedure as a man. This is about people's healthcare in the middle of a pandemic. Also, with everything I just covered, I do want to note, those are just two key points.

Starting point is 00:11:12 It is very likely through the confirmation process, other things will be raised. Questions about her opinions and past choices regarding LGBTQ plus rights, immigration, maybe even stories related to this election. There's been a lot of talk from people like Ted Cruz, President Trump, about getting this person on the court in case anything comes up with the vote.

Starting point is 00:11:28 Which actually, regarding the timing, what happens next, Barrett will be meeting with senators for the next two weeks. Notably, that is much shorter than usual. Normally lawmakers are given around six weeks to meet with and vet a SCOTUS nominee. But there, Republicans have argued that the quick turnaround is okay

Starting point is 00:11:40 because Barrett has already been vetted by the Senate. Or this, because back in 2018, she was actually being considered for the SCOTUS seat that is now held by Brett Kavanaugh. After that two weeks, Republicans have scheduled four consecutive days of confirmation hearings starting October 12th with a full committee vote set for October 22nd, with of course their idea being

Starting point is 00:11:55 to have a full floor vote before the election. Though officially McConnell has not yet committed to a pre-election vote. And the question of will they or won't they regarding a pre-election vote, it's less about can they? They can, as of right now, it is more a matter of strategy. And ultimately the question of how will this impact voting? Pushing through the nominee before election day,

Starting point is 00:12:12 does that supercharge liberals or conservatives? And that's incredibly important because right now, Republicans control the Senate, but there are a number of Republicans who are vulnerable right now. But at the same time, there is the very real situation that even if Republicans lose the Senate, they can still approve Barrett in the time

Starting point is 00:12:25 after the election and before the new session in January. But for now, we have to wait and see, not what will happen, but kind of the process that gets us to that end point. Because the power is where the power is right now, and that can only change if people go out and vote. And that is where I'm going to end today's show. As always, thank you for being a part

Starting point is 00:12:40 of these daily dives into the news, supporting the show with likes, shares, whatever. Also, if you're new here, definitely hit that subscribe button and hey, maybe text me at 813-213-4423. I'll make sure you get a notification for the show, sometimes behind the scenes stuff, cool opportunities. But with that said, of course, as always,

Starting point is 00:12:56 my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you tomorrow.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 9.28 Who Got Exposed As a Fake! The Rock Endorsement Backlash, & Amy Coney Barrett

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