The Philip DeFranco Show - The Ethan Klein Hasan Piker Destiny Situation Is Crazy...

Episode Date: August 19, 2025

Get Current! Sign up at http://current.com/phil  and use code PHIL50 to get $50! and unlock tools like a paycheck advance, credit building, and more. Terms and conditions apply. Go to http://brain.fm/defranco to get 30 days of free access to science-backed music that really works. LISTEN TO THE SHOW iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-philip-defranco-show/id1278424954 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6ESemquRbz6f8XLVywdZ2V WATCH/LISTEN TO THE DR. MIKE PODCAST Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2CePXwDrvdQTes844wflKp?si=55a6b6049c4841ed Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCwzBkn59HQ 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 - Hasan Piker Responds After Destiny Says It Would Be Justified to Kill Him 05:37 - Gamers Accuse Roblox of Being a Predator Safe Haven 10:50 - Sponsored by Current 11:51 - Trump Promises Security Guarantees, Putin/Zelensky Meeting After WH Summit 21:12 - Maduro Says He’s Mobilizing Militia Fighters in Response to U.S. “Threats”  24:54 - Sponsored by brain.fm  25:59 - Texas Democrat Gets Locked in State House Overnight  28:44 - OK. Teachers Forced to Ace New "Anti-Woke" Test 31:40 - Dept. of Education Struggles to Handle Backlog of Civil Rights Cases 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 #H3Podcast #HasanPiker Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is San Piker, Ethan and Ila Klein, destiny situation. It was one of the most requested stories over on the text line, and it's crazy. With many saying it's gone past the line of drama, and this is something else. Well, this mix of podcasters and political commentators, there is more history here than what's happening now. This latest controversy appears to start when you had Hassan Piker making a remark that many believe targeted Ila Klein. Any kind of violence that Israeli settlers or the Israeli military experiences in the West Bank is literally, legal. It is legal resistance against an occupying military force. I cannot, I cannot repeat this enough. Israel is actually engaging in an apartheid, which is a crime in and of itself. Israel's

doing a genocide in Gaza and an apartheid in the West Bank, two crimes in it of itself, and every type of armed resistance against both the settlers and also the Israeli occupying force in the West Bank, doesn't matter if it's your favorite podcasters like wife that participate in these raids. The violence that the Palestinians engage in in an act of resistance against this illegal occupying force is literally legal. It's what appears that he's talking in general about current ongoing violence there, but the call out to your favorite podcaster's wife has gotten a lot of attention because ILA previously served in the IDF. And this also has a little extra background here. Hassan and Ethan and Ila have been very publicly at odds over their clashing views with

Israel and Gaza as well as just, I mean, a number of other things. But in the here and now, you had Ila seeing Hassan's latest remark and accusing him of calling for violence against her specifically with Ethan then later echoing that, posting a video yesterday saying, why even include a specific person who hasn't served in the military in 20 years? Why does he mix up past and present tense while he's discussing this, you know? Does, is this a responsible use of his words and his platform? Don't you think that even if what you're saying is true and you meant only people on that raid would deserve violence that invoking a specific person is really appropriate and true. And doesn't that have the risk for provoking the craziest people in your

audience to think that maybe it would be a good idea to kill my wife? With that, then getting a lot of attention online and even at the likes of Destiny discussing Hassan's comment in a chat writing, I honestly think you could perfectly justify attacking slash killing Hassan IRL for statements like this. With many then saying that escalated the situation to a whole new level and you had a number of people calling out destiny for seemingly condoning violence. With Hassan then also posting, this sociopathic cult leader is actively telling his audience that it's moral to kill me in real life because I said Palestinians have a legal right to resist against an illegal occupying force conducting a raid. When anyone joins an occupying force and participates in a raid in a legally occupied territory, the occupied people have a legal right to defend themselves through armed struggle. With them then also addressing the destiny situation on a stream on Sunday. That's definitely action. I'm pretty sure. It's also weird that this guy gets to have a YouTube account. Like, that is a real death threat. What I'm saying is not a death threat at all. What I'm saying is, what I'm saying is just what the law is right now. And you had Assan arguing that he wasn't even trying to give an opinion. He was just discussing international law and acts of resistance. With Asan then also claiming that

many people were taking his initial remark out of context and that he by no means was trying to condone or encourage violence against Ila Klein. There is no point where I have said, violence against someone who is not actively in combat is permissible. I don't believe that. That is illegal. This is not, you know, and also immoral. It's a big part of the reason why I also advocate against what Israel is doing. I have also specified that IDF veterans are not valid military targets.

If someone were to attack Elyne right now, of course they should go to jail. What kind of idiocy is this? So there you even had some who said, hey, I don't think that you were calling for violence against Ela. saying that it's at the very least very weird that you would bring up your former podcast partner's wife in the context of what's happening in the here and now also something you saw is that what people asked him why are you addressing this you know asking him why are you feeding into people dragging you into drama he said it has led to people issuing active death threats to their communities against me so i think it's a little bit different than just like immature online gossip slot at what point does it

turn into like a real crime i think this is the point where it has turned into a real crime but will you consider it to be something beyond online gossip slop when I either get de-platformed or when I get killed, potentially? With Hassan's saying it's the goal of people going after him to get him banned and fully de-platform. And in terms of platforms and de-platforming in the video that Ethan ended up posting on Monday, he took aim at what content Twitch platforms in general, arguing that the site allows too many calls for political violence, including from Hassan. And then with that, suggesting that since neither Twitch or Amazon are doing anything,

the sponsors who advertise there should. If you use Twitch, if you're watching, when you get an ad, write them and say, hey, I would like to know why you're spending directly your dollars to support violent extremism. Why are you supporting a platform that sanctions, protects, safeguards, encourage, promotes language like what Hassan just deployed against Elon. But ultimately, that's where we are right now. And in the meantime, I'd really love to know your thoughts on this whole situation. One, just in general, no matter who you are, but also two, I know there's at least some crossover of who's watching my show and who's watching these other three. So there's people that are more involved and more invested, what are your thoughts with where things are now? But also, I'll say, as we're talking about creators that are speaking out about platforms, we've got to talk about how creators are continuing to speak out against a different platform, and that is Roblox.

Because Roblox, they've spent the last week trying to put out all the fires caused by the accusations that it's a haven for child predators. But there's just a quick recap of last week. You had a creator by the name of Schlep being banned from Roblox after a series of videos where he catches child predators. Where he and his team, they pretend to be a kid, some creeps approach them. They take the conversation to Discord before eventually meeting up. And at those meetups, cops are there and arrests are made. And around the same time that Schlep was booted from the platform, Roblox announced that vigilantism was banned. All of which led to a crazy amount of backlash from the community.

And then Roblox made a move. They announced that they were restricting social hangouts that include things like bedrooms and bathrooms to 17 years old and up users who were ID verified. But then, creators including some of the biggest creators in the space like Creecraft writing in a tweet. This is a crazy hill to die on. Roblox bathroom games or sex games. Making them 17 plus doesn't solve the issue. 17 years old are still minors. Roblox is still allowing kids to be in these games.

Holy shit, just ban the damn games. Nobody wants sex games on the platform. The whole situation being so controversial that around the same time he left the Roblox partner program alongside many others. Then you saw Roblox scrambling with a wave of announcements, such as a statement to clarify their policy on romantic and sexual content. And so now the policy of the band's romantic and sexual content also implies anything that implies sex. And then on top of that, they're going to prevent anyone under the age of 13 from accessing content that is unrated as well as new tools to try and clamp down on violations. And then over the weekend, Robloch CEO David Bazuki made a video as part of a normal state of the game that he does for the company.

It's titled Update on our Safety Initiatives. And in it, they don't seem to directly address the accusations that many of the games on the platform are clearly inappropriate for minors. And instead, they call them sensitive topics with a leader at Roblox saying, This launch was really about giving parents more visibility and more choice into the things that our youngest users are engaging with on the platform. And one of the things we know about our community is, you know, we have a global UGC community of creators that, as you said, are just explosively creative. But what that means is that for super sensitive topics that families might have very different opinions on or might want to approach with their kids in very sensitive ways, we just can't guarantee that that stuff is, handled in a developmentally appropriate way on the platform. And so we're giving parents the choice to either enable access to games that are primarily

themed on those topics or not. That's in the parental controls now. It's their default unavailable for you 13s just to start from a place, you know, in our safety centric vision of being a little bit more restrictive and then let parents go in and change that if they feel for their family and for their kid, Roblox is the place to engage in any of these topics. In that video, it's almost 45 minutes long, and they go into a lot more. They talk about why they want to ban vigilantism.

They explain the scale of their platform and the efforts that the company allegedly makes with organizations to tackle child predators. But overall, what you saw is the video just not going over well with the community. Just one example of that was this community note posted on Bazuki's post announcing this video. Roblox is a history of ignoring child predator issues, silencing critics, and even suing those who expose them, Ruben Sim. Now they're threatening legal action against Schlep for helping get predators arrested. Then for many, one of the biggest issues was the company's refusal to just make certain games. 18 plus and sticking with 17 plus. In fact, there was so much pushback that the company then announced to was considering limiting stuff to 18 plus, which once again got a lot of pushback. With, for example, Schlep, furious that they were just considering this change. And that as you had Creekcraft writing, making these games 18 plus solves the problem of inappropriate content for minors, I guess, but I still don't think virtual sex games should be on the platform. It also doesn't help that users are reporting that these spaces can still be found on the platform. But to be fair, Roblox did say that it would take time to crack down on it. But then beyond community backlash, the situation is also causing financial. and maybe even legal trouble for Roblox.

Because over the past five days, its stock price has dropped almost 9%, which is pretty dramatic for such a short period of time. And then, on top of that, there's this big lawsuit from Louisiana. Where in a news release, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrell said, due to Roblox's lack of safety protocols, it endangers the safety of the children of Louisiana.

Roblox is overrun with harmful content and child predators because it prioritizes user growth, revenue, and profits over child safety. But the suit then also backed up by experienced Louisiana police forces who say they've had to deal with it. For example, Livingston Parish sheriffs claiming they've, had multiple cases that involved Roblox. In one instance, they had a guy who was using a voice changer to sound like a young girl.

However, they also added that no arrests have been made in relation to the platform. But regardless of the lawsuits moving forward, and one big thing that Louisiana claims is that Roblox doesn't really have an age verification process that works. And arguing because of that, minors are exposed to adult content. In response, you had Roblox saying that it's working on a more robust age verification system. And on top of that, they deny that they purposefully made the platform dangerous saying in a statement, While no system is perfect, Roblox has implemented rigorous safeguards, such as restrictions on sharing personal information, links, and user-to-user image-sharing to help protect our community. In adding, unfortunately, bad actors will try to circumvent our system to try to direct users off the platform where safety standards and moderation practices may differ.

We continuously work to block those efforts and to enhance our moderation approaches to promote a safe and enjoyable environment for all users. So notably, this is not the only lawsuit that Roblox is tackling right now. Right over in Iowa, there was a lawsuit filed last month after a 13-year-old girl was allegedly content. on Roblox per token, adult content, and then eventually was kidnapped in traffic. To that case, actually, leading to a man facing statutory rate charges in Tennessee with Iowa prosecutors expecting to file similar charges. You know, at the very least, this whole situation is a PR nightmare for Roblox, and it's going to be very interesting to see what happens from here.

And then actually, there's more we've got to dive into, but first, I need to thank a sponsor for making today's show possible and say, you're still dealing with bees every time you make a mistake? Well, it's 2025. You deserve a banking experience that works for you, not against you. And that's where current. Today's sponsor comes in. They make sure you keep more of your heart. earn cash and less goes to fees. And with current, you can access a paycheck advance of up to

$750, the difference between having peace of mind and stressing over the cost of your next meal. Also, you overspend a bit? No worries. Current's fee-free overdraft gives you up to $200 a wiggle room without bank fees. And if you're tired of wait until Friday, get your paycheck up to two days early with direct deposit. Your bills don't wait, so why should you be forced to? And if you want to build credit without the stress a debt, current secured build card, it helps boost your score while staying in control. In fact, you see an average increase of 80 points in just six months, which is huge. If you need a place to save, you'll get 4% back. on savings, like no gimmicks. Plus, with access to over 40,000 fee-free ATMs nationwide,

getting cash is easy. Whether you're managing, your finances, or just looking for an upgrade. Current is built for real life. Say, scan that QR coder head to current.com slash fill and use code Phil 50 for $50 on us. Terms and conditions apply. Then, diving back into the news, yesterday may have been an absolutely historic day in the path towards peace in Russia's war on Ukraine. Or it was yet another meeting that looks good on paper, but ultimately is going to yield no results and no one actually has any idea how to end this fucking thing. Because like we talked about yesterday, Trump held a massively important summit at the White House with Ukrainian President Zelensky and a bunch of other top European leaders. And at least, based on what's been reported,

these things have gone pretty well, at least by Trump standards. There were no major blowups. Everyone largely appeared to present as a united front, and for the most part, they all agreed on the next big steps. Which I will say, you know, that by itself is pretty significant. There were absolutely no assurances that things would go well after Trump and Zelensky's last catastrophic meeting. And given the fact that Trump gave Putin a literal red carpet welcome for their Alaska meeting last week, you had people going, what the hell is this going to look like? A meeting with Putin, by the way, that resulted in Trump going back on several of his key positions and then doing a Fox News media tour where he repeatedly praised poop. And well, yesterday's summit definitely does appear to be a solid

first step. It's also just that. A first step. Because currently, there doesn't appear to be a clear path forward and as reports have noted. European officials also warned the road to any settlement seems long and they acknowledge they still have much to hammer out with the administration about what the U.S. role might look like. With French President Emmanuel Macron telling reporters after the event, it is a step and then adding we are very far from declaring victory. But as far as what happened in that meeting, they focused on two major overarching themes. One, setting up direct negotiations between Putin and Zelensky and two, figuring out what security guarantees the US and European nations would give Ukraine if it agreed to a future deal to end the war. But starting with

a potential meeting between Putin and Zelensky, because according to reports, that was an area of common ground that leaders talked about at length. And there really shouldn't be a surprise. Trump and European leaders have long called for a meeting like this, and Zelensky previously said he would attend, but the big question is whether Putin would actually get on board. Now there, Trump, for his part, has repeatedly insisted that he thinks Putin will get on board, arguing that he has a good relationship with the Russian president, and he believes that Putin will eventually agree because Trump wants him to. But Russia, they've painted a very different picture with Putin's foreign policy advisor pushing back on Trump's claims after the meeting in Alaska, saying that the two men had

agreed only to explore the possibility of such a meeting. But this narrative of, I think he'll do a deal for me, it's one that's just continued. I mean, at one point, Trump could even be heard on a hot mic telling McCrone. I think he wants to make a deal for me. You understand that it's crazy as it sounds. And then during another dramatic moment, he reportedly left the meeting to call Putin so they could discuss the possibility of future meetings.

Withen Trump, later writing on truth social, that he had called Putin and, quote, began the arrangements for a meeting at a location to be determined between President Putin and President Zelensky. With him then adding that he would hold a trilateral meeting between himself and the two leaders. But again, you had Russian officials

appearing to downplay expectations for a potential meeting. For example, Russia's foreign minister telling state-run media that the country isn't against a bilateral meeting, but that any contacts involving top officials should be prepared very carefully. And then, to further undermine the possibility of talks being held, we saw Russia launching massive strikes on Ukraine just hours after the White House summit. The Ukrainian official saying that those strikes had targeted energy and transport infrastructure and calling the strike's systematic terrorist attacks that were a direct violation of international humanitarian law.

But then, this afternoon, you had White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt giving a briefing where she seemed to speak in very definitive terms about the fact that a meeting between Putin and Zelensky was going to happen, saying that both leaders of quote, expressed a willingness to sit down with each other and claiming that plans for such a meeting were underway. And when a reporter questioned her about Putin's level of commitment, we saw this interaction. Did Putin promise to do a meeting with Zelensky, a direct meeting in the coming weeks? He has, and I just answered that question for you. But as of recording, Moscow has not confirmed any of that. And with that said, as far as the security guarantees for Ukraine,

while European leaders and Trump were also able to find common ground there, the whole situation is a lot stickier, all say. Because like we talked about yesterday, ahead of the summit, Trump told reporters that European allies would be the first line of defense and the U.S. would be involved and help them out. But at the same time, he didn't provide any more specifics, including whether or not the U.S. would consider sending its own troops. With that, it didn't seem like European leaders got any significant information in their meeting about how specifically the U.S. would be involved. Though notably, some European leaders expressed optimism that Trump had promised to provide at least some kind of post-war security assurance for Ukraine, even if the

details remain unclear. I mean, that includes Zelensky himself, who described Trump's assurances as a major step forward. With him then also adding that Ukraine would buy $90 billion in American weapons through Europe as part of whatever security guarantees are ultimately made. And while we didn't get any specifics, one possibility that's getting tossed around, including during the meeting yesterday, is this idea of a guarantee that's similar to NATO's Article 5 on collective mutual defense, which is a central tenant of the organization and states that an attack on one NATO member is considered an attack on all of them. But there, it's unclear exactly how NATO members could offer Ukraine Article 5 like protections

without pissing Russia off, which is strongly opposed allowing Ukraine to join the alliance. You know, even if Ukraine technically wouldn't be joining NATO, if you gave them Article 5 like protections, it would effectively give the country the number one most important benefit of NATO membership. I mean, the Russians shot down that idea before the meeting even started yesterday with a foreign ministry spokesperson saying in a statement that the country, quote, categorically rejects any scenario that envisages the appearance in Ukraine of a military contingent with the participation of NATO countries. So all of that, it remains hazy. And as of recording, Trump hasn't really provided any more clarity in his public remarks since the meeting. With him just writing on

truth social, during the meeting, we discussed security guarantees for Ukraine, which guarantees would be provided by the various European countries. with a coordination with the United States of America. And we also didn't get a whole lot more from the nearly half hour long interview we did on Fox and Friends this morning to discuss the summit. Right there, Trump mostly just reiterated that he had made a vague commitment of security guarantees. When it comes to security, they're willing to put people on the ground. We're willing to help them with things, especially probably if you could talk about by air, because there's nobody has the kind of stuff we have. Notably, his comment there about helping Ukraine by air appears to be a reference to providing aerial capabilities rather than a physical presence of US troops.

U.S. troops because Trump appeared to rule out the possibility during the interview as well. Mr. President, what kind of assurances do you feel like you have that going forward and, you know, past this Trump administration, it won't be American boots on the ground defending that border? Well, you have my assurance, you're not president. And I'm just trying to stop people from being killed. But Trump then also touching on that again during his back and forth about the idea of Article 5 like protections. Mr. President, but you got the Article 5 protections, though, for Ukraine. So they're not going to be a part of NATO, but you still got them the same protection.

So they're not going to be a part of NATO, but we've got the European nations and they'll front-loaded and they'll have some of them, France and Germany, a couple of them, UK. They want to have, you know, boots on the ground. And that said, you have many noting this is just what Trump is saying right now. None of this is written in stone. That said, Zelensky did tell reporters after yesterday's meeting that he expects the security details to be hashed out very soon, saying security guarantees will probably be unpacked by our partners and more and more details will emerge. All of this will somehow be formalized on paper within the next

week to 10 days. And that said, given everything that's going on, you have experts saying that might be an overly optimistic timeline, especially because, again, it's very hard to imagine that Russia would be okay with NATO member countries sending military forces to Ukraine. Given that one of the main goals of yesterday's meeting is to get Putin to agree to sit down with Zelensky, you've got many saying they're going to have to tread carefully here. So on that note, despite its repeated past assurances, you had Trump raising the possibility that Putin wouldn't want to make a peace deal during the Fox and Friends interview. I think Putin is tired of it. I think they're all tired of it. But you never know. We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks, that I can tell you. And we're going to see where it all goes.

It's possible that he doesn't want to make a deal. But in addition to security assurances, there are numerous other factors that would go into Putin's decision about whether or not to take a deal. Russia has repeatedly rejected calls for a ceasefire while a peace deal is negotiated. And while Trump previously pushed for that idea after his meeting with Putin last week, he made the surprise announcement that he dropped that to man. But still, many European leaders have insisted it is a necessary precondition, with, for example, the German chancellor even saying before the meeting that no meaningful talks could even take place without a ceasefire. But also, according to the New York Times, while both the German leader and Macron argued for the importance of a ceasefire, neither pressed it to the point that it antagonized Mr. Trump or open fissures in their

United Front. And then adding that European leaders all but acquiesced to Mr. Trump's abandonment of a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine as a condition for further talks. But Macron seemed to imply that a ceasefire isn't entirely off the table, even if it's no longer a precondition for negotiations. But still, you had left-leaning outlets widely reporting of the European leaders were ultimately able to steer Trump away from at least some of Putin's views and undo the ground that the Russian leader gained with him last week. Like, for example, after his meeting with Putin, Trump told Zelensky that the Russian president wanted Ukraine to seat his control of its eastern Donbass area in exchange for ending the war. And so heading into yesterday summit, there were a lot of concerns that Trump would try to push Ukraine into a land for peace deal. But with that, you had the German chancellor telling reporters that the territory issue didn't even come up at the summit. Though then notably here, you had some right-leaning outlets seemingly trying to push back on that,

with Fox News reporting that, quote, during the meeting, Trump and Zelensky were pictured viewing a map outlining the front lines of the war in the Ukrainian territory currently occupied by Russia, about 20% of the country. Right and then, going on to a story, that Trump may have used the map to discuss with the Zelensky which regions he could realistically part with in order to obtain peace. But of course, you know, that's just pure speculation. There are literally any number of reasons the two men could have been looking at a war man. Regardless of whether or not it was discussed in the meeting, the possibility of territorial concessions is here to stay.

When asked about possible land swaps during his interview on Fox and Friends, Trump said that Ukraine was going to get a lot of land. But he also seemed to suggest that Russia should be allowed to keep Ukrainian territory it had taken by force. I assume you've all seen the map. You know, a big chunk of territory is taken. And that territory has been taken. Now, they're talking about Dombas, but Dombas right now, as you know, is 79% owned and controlled by Russia. So they understand what that's being. But then also as we're speaking of world leaders

is one we gotta talk about in relation to the United States today. Right, and that, because Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro is activating millions of his country's militia members in response to what he called extravagant, bizarre, and outlandish threats from the United States.

And there, he may be referring to the $50 million US bounty on his head, or maybe the trifecta of American warships currently heading in his country's direction. Right, and a lot of this, it stems back to in 2020, the Trump administration accusing Maduro and more than a dozen, top Venezuelan officials of planning to flood the US with cocaine and order to undermine the

health and well-being of the nation. Within the White House announcing charges against them, including narco-terrorism, drug trafficking, corruption. Even offering cash rewards for information leading to their arrest, including up to $15 million for Maduro himself. But it's not like it was just Trump. The Biden administration then raised the amount to $25 million. Which, little history tidbit, that's the same amount of money that the U.S. offered for the capture of Osama bin Laden after 9-11. But then, just this month, the Trump administration doubled the bounty to $50 million. In this, is it also alleged that Maduro is actually the leader of Venezuela's cartel de los Soles, which then led to the White House announcing new sanctions against the organization

and adding it to the country's list to foreign terrorist organizations. Making it just the latest drug cartel to be designated one ever since Trump signed an executive order directing the State Department to start doing so back in February. With that, seeming to be the first step in realizing the long-held ambition to bring the military down on cartels. Because if you don't remember, Trump reportedly asked about bombing drug labs in Mexico during his first term. And then the idea of taking military action against cartels, it really picked up steam during his 2024 campaign. And so then with that, a couple of weeks ago, you had Trump reportedly

signing a secret order directing the Pentagon to start using military force against certain Latin American drug cartels. And that being yet another example of Trump proving that he's willing to use the military to do a job typically done by law enforcement. So there, I will say at this case, it's not entirely without precedent. Because in 1989, George H.W. Bush sent more than 20,000 troops into Panama to arrest its leader, Manuel Noriega, who had been indicted in the United States on drug trafficking charges. A move that the UN General Assembly condemned as a flagrant violation of international law. And also in the 1990s, the military assisted Colombian and Peruvian anti-drug law enforcement activities by sharing information about civilian flights suspected

of carrying drugs. But then, when Colombia and Peru started shooting down those planes, the Clinton administration stopped the assistance. And you then had the DOJ's Office of Legal Council publishing an opinion saying that the military officers giving information they knew would be used to shoot civilian aircraft could be putting themselves at risk of later prosecution. So naturally, Congress has changed a law to allow for that type of assistance. But then even still, it's not clear that Trump actually has a legal authority to do whatever he may have. mind here. Because the administration, they've argued that because the cartels, it wants to target are now considered terrorist organizations, it now has the power to take military action. But

while Congress has authorized use of military force against al-Qaeda, for example, that doesn't extend to anyone the White House considers a terrorist. And so with that, according to the New York Times, that might mean that military action against cartels would have to rely on a claim about the president's constitutional authority to act in the national self-defense, which might be a stretch. So notably there, we've seen the administration getting rid of safeguards that are meant to keep it from taking unlawful military action. Right. I mean, in February, for example, defense, Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the DOD's top lawyers in charge of giving non-political advice about domestic and international legal constraints on the armed forces. And then also the administration is largely sidelined the office of legal counsel, which I mentioned before, and its job is basically deciding whether proposed policies are legal or not.

But in any case, I mean, with all that, what we're seeing is the military stepping up its presence in the region. Several warships have now reportedly been deployed to the Southern Caribbean. With one U.S. official even telling Reuters that about 4,000 sailors and Marines are expected to be committed to the administration's efforts in the region. And with that, noting that the additional commitment of military assets would include several. spy planes and at least one attack submarine, and claiming that the naval assets could be used not only for intelligence and surveillance operations, but also as for carrying out targeted strikes. Which then brings us to Maduro saying he's deploying 4.5 million members of the country's militia, calling them prepared, activated an arm. While that number may be inflated, I mean,

Venezuela's total population is less than 30 million people, it still definitely makes the whole situation even more of one that we need to keep an eye on. And then actually, I've got three more big things that we've got to dive into, but first I've got to take a second to thank a sponsor and say, Some days, my brain, it feels like a browser with 37 tabs open, and I haven't had my coffee yet. Between emails, news alerts, and every little ping demanding my attention, staying focused, it can feel impossible. And that's why today's sponsor, Brain.fm, has been great for me. Because, you know, I tried all the usual fixes, random playlist, YouTube background noise, but nothing really helped me stay in the zone. But Brain.fm is different. Their music is designed by scientists to sync with your brain's patterns helping you focus faster and stay there longer.

They've got modes like deep work, creative, and motivation so you can match the music to whatever task you're tackling. And for anyone with ADHD, there's a mode specifically made for that. And honestly, it's helped me get started on difficult work without procrastinating and stay productive for longer stretches. Brain.fm even won a National Science Foundation grant to improve focus, which is seriously impressive. They also published a study in nature showing their music boost attention networks and improves task performance, especially for ADHD. Plus, they've got sleep and relaxation modes too, which I've been using when I need to wind down after a long day. And you can try for yourself 30 days free at brain.fm slash DeFranco or just scan that QR code. It's brain.fm slash DeFranco for a full month of science.

backed focus-friendly music. But then, getting back to the news, we got to talk about the Texas state legislature getting turned it into a prison and its own lawmakers or the inmates. Right, because yesterday, over 50 Democratic state lawmakers returned from their two-week self-imposed exile, which gave Republicans the quorum that they needed to hand Trump five more congressional seats with a gerrymandered map. With Democrats receiving this warm welcome from supporters as they walked into the state house. This is what democracy looks like. This is what democracy looks like. But then, when they filed into the chamber to resume their work, Speaker Dustin Burroughs announced that the doors the building would be locked and the returning Democrats had an ultimatum.

Either they signed this permission slip, allowing them to leave the Capitol under 24-hour Department of Public Safety Escort to ensure that they don't flee the state again, or they just remain trapped there on the House floor until the chamber reconvenes on Wednesday to pass the gerrymandered mat. And so begrudgingly, all the Democrats signed their slips except for one, Nicole Collier from Fort Worth. I thought about that little child in me when I felt like something was unfair. I didn't know what to do, um, but to stand. I'm tired of being pushed around and told what to do,

when I disagree with the actions of our government. This is just one little petty way of showing that they have the upper hand. But they didn't realize that I'm just as stubborn as they are. And I'm refusing to back down. So while everyone else left, Nicole Collier stayed saying DPS officers locked the doors and had a fun little slumber party with her. As you can see, it's empty in here. Initially, I was only allowed to stay within the chamber.

but since the first, I guess since the first order, I am allowed to go to my office. So I can go from my office with an escort by the sergeants, and DPS will be outside of my office, and then I can come back down to the floor with an escort from the sergeant's office. I'm sure I'll fall asleep eventually, whether that's in my chair or on the floor. And that's exactly what you did, sleeping on the house floor last night and waking up this morning to discover that, yes, this is all real. With also two fellow lawmakers, Gene Wu and Vince Perez, joining her in solidarity and posting a picture of their snacks. Meanwhile, you had protesters gathering outside, demanding her release. But then eventually, videos appearing to show them having gotten inside of the house.

Then later, you had the Democrats releasing video appearing to show law enforcement arresting the protesters and clearing them out of the building. Also, as far as the lawmakers who left the Capitol, they've described the strange experience of being under Conduct. with one telling the AP that an officer went with her to a staff lunch, followed her down the hall for restroom breaks, and tailed her throughout her drive back to her apartment in Austin. But all of this as weird and unusual as it is, it's very likely leading to tomorrow this new congressional map passing. The theory of the Democrats promising to challenge it in court, so the battle is certainly not over, but it very probably is in relation to the 2026 election. There also on the note of battles, I mean, we got to talk about how just north of Texas we're seeing Oklahoma's education officials making their next move in the war on education. Because new teachers there are being forced to take a new anti-woke exam before they're even allowed into their classrooms. Right, or to get more specific, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction, Ryan Walters, says that incoming teachers from blue states will be given an America first exam

before getting their state certification to teach. And this test reportedly is being developed by, of all places, Prager University, and it will consist of 50 questions of topics like U.S. government, religion, and gender. With Walters initially announcing this plan on a state education board meeting last month as a response to what he called a dramatic increase in teachers arriving, thanks to the up to $50,000 in bonuses that the state is offering to address their crippling teacher shortage. And in this case, he was specifically pointing to teachers coming from New York and California, whose teaching standards, he said, are antithetical to Oklahoma's.

With Walters later adding, as long as I am superintendent, Oklahoma classrooms will be safeguarded from the radical leftist ideology fostered in places like California and New York. And then saying they are trying to warp the minds of our kids to turn them into social justice warriors instead of kids that are getting the most of their God-given talents to go get a good job, to go live a fulfilling life. But also, despite weeks of promises that a release of the full test is coming soon, we've yet to see more than a few example questions. But also a key thing is that Walters reportedly told the Education Board that its members will not have a chance to review the test before it's actually implemented. Which already sounds crazy before you remember the fact that teachers will be required to get every question right on this test before being allowed to teach this school year,

which has already started in some districts. Also, one of the weird things is that the questions, you know, they released as sample questions. They include topics that are already covered in the U.S. citizenship test, which new Oklahoma teachers are already required to pass. to get their certificate. Things like, what are the first three words of the Constitution, why is freedom of religion important to America's identity, and what are the two parts of the U.S. Congress? But then also, the test is reportedly going to include questions about gender. With one of the reported proposed questions asking teachers to select which chromosome pairs determine

biological sex. And with that, you had Marissa Strait, CEO of Prager U, telling CNN that several of the questions on the test are focused on, quote, undoing the damage of gender ideology. Now, obviously, with this move, it has its supporters, but also, we've seen a lot of pushback here. And that pushback's coming from people like the president of one of the largest teachers unions in the country, the American Federation of teachers saying this is a MAGA loyalty test and saying it will, quote, be yet another turnoff for teachers in a state already struggling with a huge shortage. With it then taking name at Walters specifically saying his priority should be educating students, but instead it's getting Donald Trump and the other MAGA politicians to notice him. And actually, if you do take a second to see

who Walters is and what he's been involved in, she doesn't seem off base. Waltors has been a fairly controversial figure in education for a while now. We're talking things like distributing bibles and schools as well as back in a proposal to teach high schoolers that there were discrepancies in the 2020 election. And as before mentioning, it's failed attempt to create the nation's first public religious charter school in Oklahoma, which resulted in a deadlock Supreme Court earlier this year. But for now, that's where we are with what many have called a textbook definition of indoctrination, and we're going to have to wait to see what happens. Especially because Team Trump's battle against so-called woke education, it doesn't stop in Oklahoma.

This goes all the way up to the federal level and the painfully short-staffed Department of Education. But especially as the Department of Education has flipped the meaning of civil rights on its head, And now we're watching it explode. Because the Department's Office for Civil Rights investigates complaints made against schools, colleges, and universities. And even before Trump entered the White House, you had the office having a backlog of around 20,000 cases. So when he came in and fired about half of its staff,

everyone expected that number to grow. Even had Education Secretary Linda McMahon getting grilled about it during a Senate hearing a couple of months ago. And not only are we reducing the backload, but we are keeping up with what's coming in. Now, where they reduce staff? I appreciate it. Because we're doing it efficiently.

If you don't have the staff, you can't do them. So. So that's, excuse me, if you have an efficient staff. My question is, what is the current backlog? Current backlog is probably about, let's see, I'm looking at my numbers now, about 2,500 cases. Except it turns out that that 2,500 number, it may actually be more like 25,000. With that number coming from the Washington Post, which just got internal data from the department, and the rate at which the caseloads growing, it's huge.

Right, in four years, under Biden, the backlog grew by just about 16,000 cases. But now, in less than five months under Trump, it grew by about 5,000, which brings the total to 25,000. So with such few staff, some attorneys reportedly having as many as 300 cases each, making it impossible to devote attention to most of them. When the cases are resolved, reportedly 90% of them are just dismissed, typically without so much as an investigation. But that is not to say that the Trump administration is not aggressively pursuing any cases. Because sources say that the civil rights office has prioritized conservative grievances with anti-Semitism, transgender people, and whokeness. And when you compare its work now to the work they were doing last year, here, black is white, up is down.

We're in the words that Naomi Klein, we've entered the mirror world. And so you're seeing things like under Biden, the office investigated schools accused of treating non-white students unfairly. And under Trump, it's investigating 45 colleges for allegedly discriminating against white people by working with a PhD project,

which is a program that aims to help black, Hispanic, and Native American students earn doctorates and business. Well as things like under Biden, the office warns schools that failure to accommodate transgender students was illegal sex discrimination under Title IX, whereas under Trump, the office warns

that allowing trans women and girls into female bathrooms, Locker rooms and sports teams violates Title IX. And then with all that, you had an education spokesperson telling the post. President Joe Biden's Office for Civil Rights protected racial exclusion, permitted schools to push gender ideology on students and even fought to keep sexually explicit material in school libraries. The Trump administration is reoriented enforcement to protect students and families. And well, obviously, there are many of that support and are against that. One reaction that got a lot of support around what Trump's Education Department was calling racial exclusion was a statement, giving a leg up to the disenfranchised is not discrimination. It's what real Americans do.

It's one of the many performances of American values that have made this country a shining beacon of democracy, a decidedly Democratic act that in the case of civil rights was far too long and coming for far too many. But that is where we're going to end things for now, my friend, at least for this episode. Tap a click right here to watch your latest episode of my podcast or here for the most recent Philip DeFranco show. I've even got links in the description so you can get it easy on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you best enjoy getting filled in. Thank you for watching. I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here tomorrow for more news you need to know.