The Philip DeFranco Show - The Candace Owens Ben Shapiro Situation Is SO BAD For Trump

Episode Date: November 4, 2025

The Kat Pod: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSorc5GU9Gc SeatGeek: https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/PHIL use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first order. “DEFRANCO” for $10  on returning buyers. Go to http://ziprecruiter.com/defranco to try ZipRecruiter for free. Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “DEFRANCO” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/PHIL LISTEN TO THE SHOW iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-philip-defranco-show/id1278424954 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6ESemquRbz6f8XLVywdZ2VWATCH CRASHING OUT w/ PHILIP & ALEX Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCergKLoy-Yv9zlPk3XQYK7Q?sub_confirmation=1 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2DkU87umhGH9mH1z24Bi9w?si=6sSdjhVNQjyVeBQDLiXcyg Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crashing-out-with-philip-defranco-and-alex-pearlman/id1843429519 WATCH/LISTEN TO MY NEW PODCAST w/ KAT ABUGHAZALEH Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2CePXwDrvdQTes844wflKp?si=55a6b6049c4841ed Youtube: https://youtube.com/acw?sub_confirmation=1 iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/in-good-faith-with-philip-defranco/id1827016835 JOIN OUR COMMUNITY 📸Instagram: https://instagram.com/PhillyDeFranco  🐦Twitter: https://twitter.com/phillyd  🎵TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@philipdefranco  TODAY’S STORIES 00:00 - Candace Owens Catapults Herself into MAGA Civil War 04:04 - Trump Endorses Cuomo for NYC Mayor at the Last Minute 07:41 - Redistricting, Governor Races, & More at Stake in Today’s Elections  12:09 - Sponsored by Seatgeek 13:17 - CBS Cuts Contentious Part of Trump Interview About Corruption 19:12 - Donors for White House Ballroom Have Contracts with U.S. Government 23:13 - Sponsored by Ziprecruiter 24:19 - Scholarship for Black Students Opens to All After Right-Wing Challenge  26:26 - Kat Abughazaleh on Chicago ICE Protests THE TEAM Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino   ———————————— #DeFranco #CandaceOwens #ZohranMamdani Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Can Maga stop the bleeding? Can they pause this ongoing civil war or is it just about to get worse? Right, that's what you've got many asking right now as conservative and right-wing figures continue to go after one another and now you've got people like Candace Owens fully entering the fight. While this has been bubbling like we talked about yesterday, the main issue kicking things off was Tucker Carlson interviewing the white nationalist griper leader, Nick Fuentes. Because while you had many defending Tucker's choice, you also had many others, including Ben Shapiro, arguing that by platforming Nick Fuentes, Tucker was not only platforming anti-Semitism and other hateful ideologies, but engaged. in those conversations himself. And then Ben also brought up the fact that Tucker previously interviewed Candace Owens, who also platform Nick and has been criticized

for spreading anti-Semitism and other conspiracies, though, to say that Candice Owens and Nick Fuentes are the best of friends, that would be, uh, let's say, short-sighted, if not just outright wrong. Well, now, Candace has responded, but not just because Ben Shapiro brought up her name, but because he brought up Charlie Kirk's name. And you know, since Charlie's death,

Candice has spent a lot of time discussing the investigation, suggesting that there are truths to uncover that we don't really know about, and also alleging that he was facing threats over his changing views on Israel. Right, and this is another major point of contention that we've seen, you know, many involved denying this, but she also talks about it a lot on our podcast, people agreeing with her.

But for Ben Shapiro's part, he mentioned Charlie and Nick Fuentes, they were very much at odds with one another. And so Ben argued that Tucker actually betrayed Charlie and his legacy by having Nick Fuentes on his show. Now, Tucker Carlson has seen fit to launder Nick Fuentes, the person who hated Charlie most and who wished him destruction. That's not an act of friendship. It's an act of sick evil.

And then you had Owens not happy with Ben for saying that. They've decided posthumously that Tucker Carlson was a bad friend to Charlie Kirk. And do you know who can actually debunk that pretty easily? Yours truly. I got you guys. Okay? And it's just a little bit of common sense. Before Charlie died, really kind of just before he died in July, I interviewed Nick Fuentes.

And Charlie and I discussed the interview. And never once did he tell me not to speak to Nick Fuentes. Never once did he consider it an act of betrayal. Never at any point did Charlie say, don't do that, because that's ridiculous. It's not who he was. What I will not allow is this absolute inversion of reality where Ben Shapiro becomes any sort of voice on who is and who is not betraying their friendship with Charlie. Right, so Candace's comments, they bring more and more attention to this whole situation,

which I will say has been getting more coverage in many mainstream news outlets. Were you at MSNBC putting out a piece declaring that Nick Fuentes is winning the MAGA Civil War? Also over the weekend, you had the Atlantic writing. Quintez said he wants to drag the Republican Party kicking and screaming into the future, into the right wing, into a truly reactionary party, and saying his vision is coming true. The gap between Fuentes and the rest of the right is narrower than it has ever been. And you even had a New York Times piece going as far as to declare him Charlie Kirk's successor, saying plenty of conservatives, especially Jewish ones, abhor Fueness's growing clout.

But by cheering on Donald Trump as he promoted conspiracy theories and systematically destroyed bulwarks against nativism and bigotry in the Republican Party, they helped make Fuentes' rise possible. Also, regarding the New York Times, who took this picture? What was the lighting? Is there a filter on it. These are just questions I have personally because I have never seen as good of a photo of Nick Fuentes as what the New York Times put out. I consume a lot of right-wing media to stay in the know to do this job. These look like two different people. It's like the New York Times went out of their way to try to make him look like James Dean. But that aside, even though you have outlets and a number of people thinking that Fuentes is winning by, you know, getting this airtime, getting into more

mainstream mega spaces, that doesn't also mean that for a sizable chunk of the Republican Party that they don't view him as fully toxic and radioactive. So you've seen a ton of Republicans trying to distance themselves from not only him but Tucker Carlson denouncing anti-Semitism. But then also an interesting aspect of this is while, you know, some do think that MAGA does actually need to have this civil war. They're also looking at the calendar and saying,

hey, can we put a pin in it? So all of my Republican friends with large followings, can we please refrain from infighting for just two days. Let's do all we can to win on Tuesday. Then you can all go back to fighting each other. As well as, why are so many conservative pundins focused on infighting an e-drama instead of key elections, really makes you think. The regarding elections and voting for her part, you had Candace Owens writing,

not voting until we learn the truth about who killed Charlie, not lifting one finger. But also with that, it's not just MAGA freaking out. It's election day, a lot of people are freaking out, and you have all eyes on the New York City mayor's race. Because 34-year-old state assemblyman Zoran Mamdani is looking more and more likely like he's going to be the city's first Muslim leader, its youngest in more than 100 years, and one who has openly described himself as a democratic socialist. All of which has some very, very excited, but also, So it's inspired Islamophobic attacks, a billionaire spending spree, and the threats from the

President of the United States who falsely labeled Mamdani as a communist. And in fact, Donald Trump has now publicly endorsed Momdani's opponent Andrew Cuomo in the 11th hour. And again, he repeated his warning, though it really comes off as a threat, that the city will suffer if Momdani wins. So this also shouldn't be the most surprising thing, because you had Trump saying on 60 minutes and an interview that aired on Sunday. It's going to be hard for me as the president to give a lot of money to New York, because Because if you have a communist running New York, all you're doing is wasting the money you're sending there.

So I don't know that he's one, and I'm not a fan of Cuomo one way or the other, but if it's going to be between a bad Democrat and a communist, I'm going to pick the bad Democrat all the time, to be honest with you. Of course, like any engagement, it was an official official until he posted something to social media. With him writing that if Mamdani wins, he'd cut the city's federal funding to the very minimum as required, saying the city would have zero chance of success or even survival with Momdani. at the helm. Then, claiming that a vote for the Republican candidate, Curtis Sliwa, who looks much better without the beret, is a vote for Mammany and adding. Whether you personally like Andrew Cuomo or not, you really have no choice. You must vote for him and hope he does a fantastic job. He is capable of it. Mumdani is not. And then as far as Mumdani's reaction, he said hey, congratulations. Putting out a post stating Trump endorses Cuomo with the caption saying, congratulations Andrew Cuomo. I know how hard you worked for this. With him then also hitting back at a campaign event in Queens.

In these final days, what was rumored, what was feared has become naked and unabashed. The MAGA movement's embrace of Andrew Cuomo is reflective of Donald Trump's understanding that this would be the best mayor for him. Not the best mayor for New York City, not the best mayor for New Yorkers, but the best mayor for Donald Trump is his administration. Now, as far as Cuomo, in a radio interview about a half an hour after Trump published his post, you had him saying that the president is right, a vote for Sliwa. as a vote for Mamdani, that's why this election is up to the Republicans.

But then also with that, you later had him denying that Trump's words actually amounted to an endorsement, claiming he's not endorsing me, he's opposing Mamdani. And with that, you had him still claiming that he's the right person to stand up to Trump. We heard Donald Trump yesterday, he said if Mamdani wins, he's going to cut off funding to New York. He calls him a communist, he'll send the National Guard. We need a mayor who can stand up to Donald Trump. who can get the funding that New York deserves, who can make sure the National Guard does not come to New York

because we don't need the National Guard, and I can stand up to Trump. Trump will go through Mandani like a hot knife through butter, and we can't have that. Mandami cannot handle Trump. That's clear. And the next mayor has to be able to handle Donald Trump. But again, with all that said,

right now most money appears to be on Mom Doni. Right most of the polls, they've shown him leading by double digits. So again, words are words, polls or polls, and actions are actions. So I will say, as far as the actions, this race, it's already broken early voting records, with more than 735,000 ballots being cast ahead of Election Day, according to the Board of Elections. That's four times the number of ballots cast during early voting in the 2021 mayoral race. But that said, we should know what's going to happen soon because the polls are set to close at 9 p.m. tonight. But then also, even though so many eyes are on New York right now, it is by no means the only important election that's happening today.

Right, because among other things, you have one of the most closely watched being Prop 50 in California, where voters will be deciding whether to temporarily redraw the state's congressional map to give Democrats five more seats. Right, with that measure aimed at countering Trump's unprecedented campaign to push red states to gerrymander their maps to gain more Republican seats. And so there right now, we're waiting to see if the polling's right, with around 60% of voters consistently saying that they'd support the referendum. And then, in addition to that, you have a pair of very important gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey. And both of those are being viewed as a key referendum on Trump who has repeatedly weighed in on these contests. And so in New Jersey, you have Republican and former State Assembly member, Jack Chidorelli, facing off against Democratic Representative Mikey Cheryl.

Well, the state's outgoing governor is a Democrat, Trump made major gains in the state last year. So the election there, it's going to be an important test to determine if those gains were an actual sign of growing conservatism in the state, or it was just a one-time thing driven solely by Trump himself. Though also something that could impact the vote is that as voting got underway today, bomb threats temporarily shut down or disrupted several polling places. With that, I'll say, officials have since said that the threats were a hoax, and the polling sites have either been reopened. or relocated. Right. And then, looking to Virginia, the governor's race there is you not only as

a key test for Trump, but as a thermometer to gauge the political temperature of the entire country. And this statewide governor's race is probably one of the best places to watch this cycle to get a glimpse of what next year's elections might look like. Virginia is a purple state that is a Democrat-controlled legislature, but it also shifted at the right in 2024, and the current governor, Glenn Yonkin, is a Republican who won a major upset four years ago. So this race could give important insight into how voters and purple states feel about the policies being enacted by Republican leaders, right, especially because the Republican candidate is Youngkin's lieutenant governor, winsome Earl Sears, who is largely Senator campaign as a continuation of his administration,

focusing on many of the key issues that got him elected four years ago. But at least as of right now, the Democratic candidate, former U.S. Representative Abigail Spanberger, is polling way ahead of her. And that, notably, despite being impacted by a political scandal that's engulfed her fellow Democrat, Jay Jones, who's running for the state's attorney general. Right with Jones following the polls after text surface where he encouraged violence against political opponents. You know, all in all, there's a lot at stake, not only for, you know, the representatives that are actually going to be elected, but also as far as the messaging. Because again, while there's been a lot of talk about New York, what's going down in New Jersey and Virginia, you've got Democrats widely viewing those as dry runs for the party to get its footing

and test its messaging ahead of the midterms. Because unlike New York and Mamdani, the Dem candidates here, they've been running very moderate campaigns and distancing themselves from more progressive policies. So, and this is where it shifts from news to opinion, that feels short-sighted because elections like these are not national elections. Right, very likely what works in New York City versus Virginia, they're gonna be different things. Which makes sense, those people are being elected to represent different people. But in jumping back to the news, I gotta mention while even these, these are kind of the most talked about elections going down today, there also are a few others that I do want to flag for you. Where there's also a special election in Texas to fill a seat in Congress previously held by a Democrat who died back in March.

While there are more than a dozen candidates buying to fill that seat, Democrats are leading in the polls in a blue win there. It would just further narrow the Republican slim margins in the House. Right, and then, in Pennsylvania, they're deciding whether to retain three Democratic judges on the state's seven-member Supreme Court. Well, normally, these retention elections, they don't get a lot of attention. This year, it's different because the stakes are incredibly high. Because the Democrats, they currently have a five to two majority on the state's high court, which has played an incredibly important role in national politics over the last few years, weighing in on key matters concerning voting and redistricting.

And the role of this court, it's likely going to become even more consequential in the next few years, with PBS, for example, explaining that the outcome may have implications for key cases involving redistricting and balloting, for midterm elections in the 28 presidential race. Right, and then the final race that I want to highlight is one that normally doesn't get a lot of attention, but it is insanely important, and we even did a whole story dedicated to it previously. And in fact, it's why I've got my I voted sticker today, because I'm talking about the special election for two members of Georgia's Public Service Commission. Because the TLDR is that while this might seem like a boring, bureaucratic election,

that's exactly what Republicans are banking on. And if people end up sitting out of this election and they let the Republicans win, big energy companies are going to keep setting the rules, are going to overbuild to pad their own pockets, and continue jacking up prices that could be locked in for decades. You know, ultimately where I'll end this is by saying something that I've been saying for a very long time, and I think more and more people are feeling it.

You may not fuck with politics, but politics will fuck with you. It is understandable if you feel exhausted and deflated right now. Last to check, things don't change unless you try to enact change. And the biggest changes, they start local, they start because you showed up when others didn't. So to those you all staying informed, staying engaged, thank you, and to those who haven't,

I get it, but we gotta try. I don't wanna have to care about a bunch of this shit either, but they're forcing us to. And then there's more we're gonna dive into in just a minute, but first let me say, you know, Fall is here and it's stack with football and concerts. Right, like Billy Eilish, Sabrina Carpenter,

Lord, Jonas Brothers, Halsey, John Legend, it's all happening. Right, we've then given out $500 every week for over a year, thanks for a sponsor, over at Seekek, and somehow, some of you all still haven't entered for free, which is crazy, because it's just awesome seeing so many of you beautiful bastards win the $500 Seek weekly giveaway

and use it to hit up concerts, games, Broadway show, I mean, just people live in their best lives. And if you haven't entered yet, I mean, it takes two seconds, and next week's $500 winner, it could be you. And for the un-initiated, Seek is the number one rated ticketing app with over 28 million downloads and tickets to over 70,000 events, sports, music, comedy, theater, you name it. And so for the first timers, download the app, scan the QR code, or hit the link in the description

and use code fill for $20 off your first ticket purchase. And then, and this is key, add code DeFranco to your Seek account as well. That, it gets you at $10 off at any ticket, and it enters you for your chance to win the weekly $500 giveaway, no purchase required. And so if you view Seek before, that applies to you too. Just add code DeFranco to your account and you're entered. So yeah, scan that QR code or click the link below and just remember use code Phil and DeFranco and go make some memories. And then, you know, earlier I mentioned the 60 Minutes interview that Donald Trump just gave and we've got to go back to that because there's a lot more that we need to talk about.

We're really going to focus on two things. Trump's alleged lies of co-mission and CBS' alleged lies of omission. And so first, with Trump's lies, as you might expect, there are a lot of them. With reports counting at least 18 inaccurate assertions and that's probably being charitable. Or with those including things that he's repeated before, things like the 2020 election being rigged, or that he has single-handedly ended eight wars. But I brought, I mean, just a little list of,

of look at this, wars, how many did I solve? Right, and specifically with the latter, some of the things that he's referencing, they're clearly not wars, some are just day-long skirmishes, other arguably ended regardless of Trump's involvement and yet more of actually not ended at all. He also claimed that more than $17 trillion is being invested in the US right now,

though one, that's nearly double the White House's own estimate, and two, reports say even that estimate is wild inflated. He also claimed that each alleged drug boat the military had struck would have killed 25,000 Americans. But if that was true, it would mean that he prevented some 400,000 overdose deaths just by blowing up 16 boats that also may or may not have actually been carrying drugs, which is patently absurd. He also claimed that Biden gave $350 billion in aid to Ukraine, but the real number is close to $135 billion. He also claimed there's no inflation, though in fact it's up to 3%, and he claimed that grocery prices are down when they are in fact up. And even all of that, it's just a sampling. Right? He appeared to say wrong thing after wrong things.

after wrong thing on almost every topic. Which I will say in this part's just opinion, it's wild to watch because there are things that he could talk about and frame as a legitimate win, but instead it's just like falsehood after falsehood. Like sometimes I feel like he does it just for the love of the game. Then also there's this other nagging part of my brain

that's like, no, maybe he actually believes this. Maybe he's just being lied to by the people around him. But also in going back to the news here, a lot of attention has been focused not only on what 60 minutes did show, but also what it didn't. Right, because despite the program's name, the interview lasts nearly 90 minutes, and much of that was

actually cut from the 28-minute show that aired on TV and the extended 73-minute version that was put up on YouTube. Now, with that, CBS notes that the interview was, quote, condensed for clarity, but some suspect that it was condensed for other reasons as well. And so, for example, you had democracy dockets Mark Elias, writing that Nora O'Donnell Ash Trump, a series of softball questions with little follow-up and arguing that the edits seem calculated to make an incoherent old man appear clearer and more reasonable. But what's more, Trump himself sometimes appeared to tell CBS which party he thought they should cut. And so, for example, in one portion that was included in the extended version, but not from the TV broadcasts.

He went back and forth with O'Donnell trying and failing to get her to admit that she's personally noticed a drop in crime in DC. But then after calling her answer that she's been too busy with work to notice unfair, he seemed to suggest that CBS can cut that part of the interview. I get in my car and go to work and I go home. You don't have to use that one. Don't worry. Don't worry.

I don't want to embarrass it. Then in another portion that was also cut from the broadcast, he made the same suggestion before talking about Kamala Harris's 60 Minutes interview, saying you don't have to put this on because I don't want to embarrass you and I'm sure you're not. But 60 Minutes was forced to pay me on. a lot of money because they took her answer out that was so bad it was election changing two nights before the election. And they put a new answer it and they paid me a lot of money for that. You can't have fake news. You've got to have legit news and I think that it's happening.

With Trump then going on to praise, what sounded like CBS News's center right editor in chief, Barry Weiss and all but name, saying, I think you have a great new leader, frankly, who's the young woman that's leading your whole enterprise. With Trump, then keeping praise on David and Larry Ellison, the new owners of CBS News's parent company, Paramount, through their company SkyDance Media, whose merger got approved just days after Paramount $16 million settlement with Trump. With Trump saying, I think one of the best things to happen is this show, a new ownership, CBS, a new ownership. I think it's the greatest thing that's happened in a long time to a free and open and good press.

And then finally, after seemingly finishing the interview, oh, Donald Ash Trump, if she could ask him two more questions. But then, according to the transcript, because this part was cut from both versions of the footage, Trump seemed to agree on the condition that CBS cover him more favorably, saying that means they'll treat me more fairly if I do. I want to get, it's very nice, yeah, now is good, okay, uh-oh. might be the ones I didn't want. I don't know, okay, go ahead.

And then, in the part of the exchange that wasn't cut, O'Donnell asked him why he pardoned a crypto billionaire known as CZ who pled guilty to money laundering. With the government at the time saying he had caused significant harm to US national security, essentially by allowing terrorist groups like Hamas to move millions and dollars around. But then Trump's response was that he pardoned him

without even knowing who he was. I don't know who he is. I know he got a four month sentence or something like that and I heard it was a Biden witch hunt. With Trump also adding in a portion that was cut, I said, eh, it may look bad if I do it, I have to do the right thing, I don't know the man at all, I don't think I ever met him, maybe I did, or you know, somebody shook my hand or something, but I don't think I

ever met him. I have no idea who he is. I was told that he was a victim just like I was, and just like many other people of a vicious, horrible group of people in the Biden administration. And then, O'Donnell pointed out that CZ's crypto exchange helped facilitate a $2 billion purchase, a World Liberty Financial Stable coin, which Trump owns before the pardon. But when she asked how he avoids the perception and corruption, he seemed to dance around it, rambling about his family, how important crypto is, and how corrupt Biden was. And so she repeated her question, but in another clip that was cut, Trump said, I can't say because I can't say I'm not concerned. I don't, I'd rather not have you ask the

question, but I let you ask it. You just came to me and you said, can I ask another question? I said, yeah, this is the question. With O'Donnell then saying, and you answered, and then Trump continuing, I don't mind, did I let you do it? I could have walked away. I don't have to answer this question. I'm proud to answer the question. But then, rather than answer the question, he rambled more about Biden and how the US is now number one and crypto and that was it that the interview went. Right, so after comparing the full transcript with the two videos, you have many people criticizing CBS's edits with, for example, Chuck Schumer posting, maybe I should file a complaint with the FCC against the Trump White House for editing his unhinged 60 Minutes interview. It will use the

exact same language Trump lodged against Vice President Harris. And this is you had a spokesperson for the only Democratic commissioner at the FCC adding. According to the standards set by the Trump FCC, this could qualify as news distortion and deserves an investigation. Or with that, referring to FCC chair Brendan Carr's assertion earlier this year that Comcast was guilty of news distortion and he threatened to pull its license. Yeah, the debate around this, it is still continuing online, and so with it, of course, I'd love to know your thoughts, opinions, and reactions here. But then next up in the news, Trump's taken bribes for his White House ballroom project. That is what you're seeing more and more people saying after this government watchdog report

just dropped some major news. Because in case you've missed it, or it hasn't been the biggest news to you, if you're like me, you know, Trump announced over the summer that he's adding a ballroom to the White House. And with that he promised not to interfere with the existing building, which was a lie, and saying that it would cost him $200 million and hold 650 guests. But then also, late last month, the hike the projected cost to $300 million and said it would hold nearly a thousand people. Right, and as the immediate future for SNAP benefits is unclear, right?

People might starve. Government employees are not getting paychecks, and a million other uncertainties kind of plague the American public. You had people going, well, where is the money coming from? And, well, the answer is billionaires and corporations. In fact, last month, the listed donors to the Ballroom Project was released, including 24 corporations and roughly a dozen individuals. But the reason we're talking about this today is because the nonprofit consumer advocacy

organization Public Citizen just released a report detailing that the majority of those donors just so happen to have some serious business with the administration. We're talking business that includes billions and billions of dollars worth of government contracts as well as federal investigations into their companies. Now, starting with the contracts, two-thirds of the revealed corporate donors have received a combined $43 billion in federal contracts in just the last year. And if you zoom out to the last five years, that number goes up to $279 billion. And with the revealed list of 24 corporate donors, I mean, we're just talking about 16 companies receiving tens of billions of dollars in government contracts over a few short years.

And then, on top of that, though, again, that would be concerning enough. There's also the finding that the majority of those donors have faced federal enforcement action just during Trump's second term. I mean, we're talking about things including major antitrust cases involving Amazon, Apple, meta, and Microsoft, labor rights cases involving Google and Lockheed Martin, and even issues with the SEC for companies like Ripple and Coinbase. And so with this, you had public citizens co-president Robert Weissman saying in a statement, These giant corporations aren't funding the Trump ballroom debacle out of a sense of civic pride.

They have massive interests before the federal government, and they hope to undoubtedly curry favor with and receive favorable treatment from the Trump administration. Millions to fund Trump's architectural whims or nothing compared to the billions at stake in procurement, regulatory, and enforcement decision. Though that said, the White House at least publicly, doesn't see it that way. Right? They argue, well, these donations, they ease the burden of the project for taxpayers. And with that, you had White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt saying, The same critics who are wrongly claiming there are conflicts of interest would complain if taxpayers were footing the bill. The donors for the White House Ballroom Project represent a wide array of great American companies and generous individuals,

all of whom are contributing to make the people's house better for generations to come. But also, to that point, you had Weissman pushing back, saying that public building should be funded with public money so that American voters have some say through their representatives on what gets built, when, and how. In all of this, it's happening just days after Senate Democrats demanded full disclosure on how exactly Trump's pet project is being funded. Right because last month's donor list actually wasn't a complete one. In fact, Trump reportedly gave donors the option of staying anonymous. And in fact, several that weren't on the original list, they've since been uncovered by journalists. And those include healthcare companies Vantive and extremity care,

which are trying to shape Medicare reimbursement rates for their products, and also the Wall Street giant BlackRock. And so obviously, their desire to remain anonymous, it drew some questions, especially from those on the left. And so you had things like Senator Richard Blumenthal specifically sending a letter to each of the donors asking why they made the decision not to disclose their donation, saying that it raises the question, quote, What promises may have been or may yet to be made in exchange for what presumably will be substantial contributions.

Right, in those letters, they were followed up by another, except this from a bunch of Senate Democrats to the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. And they are demanding more information and transparency about the donations and warning that Team Trump's actions here raise some serious concerns about corruption. And also with this, they want to know whether or not Team Trump sought any sort of ethical advice before accepting the donations. And there, they specifically pointed to what was uncovered in the Public Citizens report, right? The millions and revenue that these donors are getting from government contracts and saying, These circumstances risk blatant corruption as these companies and their stakeholders seek to position themselves in the government's good crisis. But ultimately, that's where we are and, you know, switching from news to opinion here. I will say who's funding and who tried to do it anonymously.

That is for me where the biggest part of this story is. Right, I'm personally not a romantic around the history of the White House and what was there. But I think, you know, the American public seeing the connection, seeing the dollars, that is important. Then there's more we're going to talk about and just a minute, but first let me say, you know, what if you could instantly find whatever you're looking for? Parking spots, last minute holiday gift, jeans that actually fit. Imagine how much time and stress you'd save. Well, that, it's why today's sponsor, ZipRecruiter, is an early gift for anyone hiring right now.

But if you've got open rolls, stop waiting on the perfect applicant, right? You can try it for free right now when you go to ZipRecruiter.com slash DeFranco and see how many great candidates are already in your area. Because this time of year, I mean, half your team's on vacation, or you got another half pretending to work from home and deadlines, they're just not the same. ZipRecruiter's smart matching technology, it instantly connects you with top candidates who actually, fit the role. You don't just post a job and pray, ZipRecruiter actively finds qualified people and sends them straight to you. They even have an advanced resume database so you can unlock contact information instantly and reach out directly.

No, we'll circle back in January, just results. Right, 4 out of 5 employers who post on ZipRecruiter, get a qualified candidate within the first day. That's faster than your group chat deciding where to go for lunch. And it's why ZipRecruiter is rated the number one hiring site on G2, because it actually works. And right now you can try it for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash DeFranco. Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash DeFranco ZipRecruiter. smartest way to hire. But the next step in the news, we've got to talk about how a 150-year-old law targeting the KKK was just used to get rid of a scholarship for

black students. Specifically, we're talking about students at the University of California, San Diego, where black students make up only about 3% of the undergrad student population. Notably, most of the students, they're from California, which is a state where black people make up just above 5% of the population. And with that, a private nonprofit by the name of the San Diego Foundation, as for decades administered the Black Alumni Scholarship Fund, which was meant to, quote, expand educational opportunities for high achieving civic-minded African-American students. And they had an explicit goal of increasing black graduation at UCSD from 2% to 5% of degrees awarded.

But then, in July, the Pacific Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit against both UC San Diego and the San Diego Foundation. Right, and they represented a right-wing group called the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation, as well as a fourth-year student who said that he was denied access to the scholarship because he isn't black. And for the first time, it cited the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which was signed into law to stop conspiracies between government officials, and private groups aimed at denying black Americans equal protection under the law. But here, you have the Pacific Legal Foundation arguing that the University and the San Diego Foundation's collaboration, it amounted to a conspiracy that restricted all students' rights to equal protection. You're the group's attorney saying the law is supposed to protect everyone, regardless of race, and adding,

we're simply trying to ensure that promise of equal protection is granted to everyone. But with all this, it's unclear whether the use of the KKK Act and the lawsuit it would actually have held up in court. Right, and that, because you see San Diego and the San Diego Foundation settled before a judge even considered the case. With the foundation announcing that it would rename the scholarship and make it available to all students. Really, regardless of how you feel about this or your reactions to it, what is clear is that this is the latest domino to fall in terms of efforts aimed at diversity equity inclusion, not just at California, but also nationwide. I mean, in 2023, of course, the Supreme Court effectively overturned affirmative action, and since then, some elite universities across the country reported record lows and enrollment for black students. And also, since Trump got back into office, he's launched investigations over DEI programs and withheld millions in federal grants that support minority students. calling the programs discriminatory.

And then with all this, we've seen universities shuddering their diversity programs and closing cultural centers in response. So yeah, you know, we'll have to wait to see where things go from here, but really, the current trajectory, it's definitely clear. But then, finally today, I want to talk about Kat Abu Ghazale. But if you're unfamiliar, she's running for Congress

in Illinois's 9th congressional district, and last week, she got indicted by the federal government for conspiracy to impede law enforcement during the ongoing Broadview ICE protests. Right, and Kat, she says that the indictment is politically motivated, and she's currently facing up to seven years in prison. And while today, I talked to her for her for my in good faith podcast links to that down below. It's about an hour. You know, we talk about

a lot, but I wanted to share where, you know, she talked about the indictment, what they were protesting, you know, why they were there. So, Kat, you're the first person I've had on who is actively facing a federal indictment after the DOJ unsealed it last Wednesday, charging you and five others with, with federal conspiracy for protesting outside of Broadview Ice Processing in Illinois. Now, I know you can't go into the specifics of the alleged incident, but can you talk about why you were there, why you were protesting? Yeah, absolutely. You know, Chicago has been under a terror campaign by ICE. And you might have seen a video a couple weeks ago of an ICE agent throwing a little blonde woman to the ground. That small blonde woman was me. I stay small because

I'm five feet tall. And that was something that people pointed out over and over again. And it really resonated with people because, well, they're not supposed to attack white or white passing folks. And while it hurt a lot, that was the third time an agent has done it. And what I really wanted to stress to people is no matter what we were going throughout there, getting thrown, getting gas, shot with pepper balls, dragged, whatever ICE agents were doing to protesters, the reason we were protesting, that facility, it's so much worse than there. This is what they are willing to do to people on camera. What are they doing behind the boarded up windows? Because ICE has literally boarded up the Broadview Processing Center windows with plywood. We have heard months ago we heard

about people being denied beds, people sleeping on concrete, grandmothers and pregnant women, dozens of men in a single cell, no access to hygienic facilities, no hot meals being held for days or weeks at a time, despite because it's a processing center only being supposed to be held for 12 hours at a time. And now it's apparently gotten worse. The people who have been willing to speak out, which I don't blame anyone who's not willing to, they are risking their own and their family's safety to do so, have described scenes of horror, people being denied water, going into cardiac arrest and carried out on stretchers, being given fake translators. So they'll sign their own self-deportation notices. That is the reason we are protesting. That is the reason that

Despite how ICE treats protesters, we keep coming back. And that is the reason that Chicago, not just at Broadview, across the city, across the suburbs, Chicago has stood strong in a way that ICE and Trump did not expect. And how long have you been hearing about what's been happening at this facility? Like who are your sources, but where are you hearing about these things, where are the story is coming from? The Tribune did a really great investigation to this facility earlier this year. And there's been a vigil at the Broadview Processing Center for almost 20 years every Friday morning. I believe it was in late August when a group of protesters, I think about six, joined that vigil and were arrested by Broadview PD. One of them was a woman named Rachel Cohen, and I saw her Instagram video of that arrest.

And the week after, I and many others joined the vigil and the protest. and then it just became a weekly ritual of going to the center, ice escalating week after week. But there are things that are more important than getting sleep on a Thursday night. There are things that are more important than your physical comfort. And that's why we were out there. And what we are hearing lately is coming from people who are talking to their lawyers. I had someone in this district actually tell me about a family member who was abducted by ICE. and put in this facility, a family member that was older, that doesn't like to worry people.

So they didn't talk a lot about the conditions. But when they were sent to a facility across the country, they did express relief and said that that was the first time they had slept on a bed and over a week. But that, my friends, is where this video is going to end. Though again, you've got more just to click away. You can continue on with Kat and I. We've got a full hour right here for my new podcast in Good Faith with her. There's also, of course, the newest to Franco news that you might not have seen yet. And you can get all of it wherever you go, because I got links to the YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts of everything in the description. But no matter what you do, thank you for watching.

I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.