The Philip DeFranco Show - Trump’s Epstein Files Problem Just Got Worse. New Names Exposed.

Starting point is 00:00:00 Donald Trump told everyone, he told you to just move on from the Epstein files, right? There's nothing to see there. Why are you being crazy? But we haven't moved on and, oh, man, is there definitely something to see there? Just wanted to ask you, have you had a chance to review any of the unredacted files over at the DOJ, the Epstein files? I did. You did. Yeah, I just came from there. What can you tell us?

Starting point is 00:00:18 He's a bunch of sick f***. Right, so in big news, this week, lawmakers got access to a handful of secured terminals in the Department of Justice where they can examine the Epstein files totally unredacted, or at least they're supposed to be totally unredacted. Then when Rokana and Thomas Massey, they came out of it. there yesterday, they revealed this. There's big black screens of complete redactions. And you go in there and look on the computer, sometimes you lift off the black ink, and there's white ink redacting files. I'd say 70 to 80% of them were redacted.

Starting point is 00:00:43 The main 302 statements where survivors talked about who raped them, all of that was still redacted. And so when we asked the people in the room who weren't responsible for the redactions, they said, oh, we think those are how the files were given to us. So they think that Trump's FBI scrubbed the files way back in March and then gave them to the DOJ attorneys who prepared them for release in November, December, and January. But the Epstein Transparency Act, it doesn't just single out those attorneys. It is very clear that the FBI as well is responsible for making all these files available. So legally, there's no excuse for this.

Starting point is 00:01:15 But then as far as the documents that were actually unredacted for the lawmakers, a lot of them apparently included stuff that shouldn't have been redacted for the public, as Jamie Raskin explained. I saw the names of lots of people who were redacted for mysterious or backgoing or inscrutable, So for example, you had people like Leslie Wexner, the billionaire Victoria secret tycoon, whose close relationship to Epstein is well known. Wexner, his name was redacted from a government document. And I couldn't understand the logic of that. He was not a victim. Reskin also talked about an email that Epstein received from his lawyers, summing up a conversation

Starting point is 00:01:49 they had with Trump's lawyers about the 2009 period. Epstein's lawyers synopsized and quoted Trump is saying that, that Jeffrey Epstein was not a member of his club at Mar-a-Lago, but he was a guest at Mar-a-Lago, and he had never been asked to leave. And that was redacted for some indeterminate, inscrutable reason. Representative Becena Bland actually told DropSight News something similar about a document that she read. One was related to whether or not Trump, you know, had ever kicked Epstein out of Mar-Lago.

Starting point is 00:02:29 as he claimed. What'd you find? That is not. It's not true. It's a lie. It's a lie. But easily, the revelation that made the biggest splash here is that according to Massey and Kana, the DOJ tried to cover up several men. The names of at least six men that have been redacted that are likely incriminated by their inclusion in these files. One is pretty high up in a foreign government.

Starting point is 00:02:50 And some are, they're, one of the others is a pretty prominent individual. And then actually today, Kana got up on the house floor and announced who they were. These men are Salvatore Navarra, Zorab Mikhailads, Leipig Leonor, Nicola Caputa, Sultan, Ahamed bin Soleim, CEO of Dubai Port's World, and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner, who was labeled as a co-conspirator by the FBI. Meanwhile, you had Massey and Deputy AG, Todd Blanche, getting into a huge brawl on X over these and other redactions. Or with Massey pointing to the FBI's list of potential co-conspirators, drafted soon after Epstein's death in 2019 and asking why a well-known retired CEO is redacted, to which Blanche replied, we have just unredacted Les Wexner's name from this document,

Starting point is 00:03:38 but his name already appears in the files thousands of times. DOJ is hiding nothing. But then you had Massey being like, except this specific document contradicts Cash Patel's testimony that the FBI had no evidence of other sex traffickers. Right, and then as far as the next fight, he pointed to a list of 20 individuals and said, four of the 18-redacted names on this document are men born before 1970. And then shortly after that, the DOJ unredacted, 16 of those names, though their photos were still redacted.

Starting point is 00:04:01 Or with Blanche writing in his defense, the document you cite has numerous victim names. We have just unredacted all non-victim names from this document. The DOJ is committed to transparency. But then Massey shot back here, DOJ acts as if they were justified in redacting the men's names, simply because the document contains victims' names. Tonight, they learned you can redact victim names while still publishing the other names, per our law. And then lastly, they tore out a few tufts of each other's hair over this email that Epstein sent to someone in 2009 reading, I loved the torture video.

Starting point is 00:04:27 With Massey calling out the DOJ for redacting the recipient's email address and adding that it appears to be a Sultan. To which Blanche then replied, the law requires redactions for personally identifiable information, including if in an email address. And you know that the Sultan's name is available unredacted in the files. Be honest and stop grandstand. To which then Massey said, our law requires victims information to be redacted, not information of men who sent Epstein torture porn. And also, right, the, the Sultan in question here is one of the six men that Kana named earlier, right? He's the chairman and CEO of a major global logistics firm based in the UAE. You know, also, like, with all of this, it's coming from just one day of a few lawmakers

Starting point is 00:05:02 spending a couple of hours looking through the files, many of which they still couldn't even fully read because they weren't unredacted. So you can just, you know, imagine how much more we're going to be hearing about it. But as Raskin noted, at their current rate, there's just likely no way in hell that they're going to be able to get through all the redactions before Pam Bondi testifies in front of Congress tomorrow. Every member of Congress who voted for the discharge petition, if all 217 of us spent every waking hour over at the Department of Justice, it would still take us months to get through all of those documents. And there are only four computers. Also, like, don't forget, there are still

Starting point is 00:05:34 some two and a half million documents the DOJ hasn't released yet by its own admission. And then also, apparently, there are documents they did release, but which have since gone missing. Some of these files have been taken down, like the DOJ produced them, and for some reason, they took them down. Maybe they decided that victim's names were in there and that they needed further redactions. But those documents not only haven't been put back up on the site with the appropriate redactions, they were not available to us to search. As far as I could tell, we couldn't search the documents that had been taken off the internet. Meanwhile, you've got the fallout from all this continuing with people also reporting out that elites in Europe, they're being

Starting point is 00:06:11 toppled by these revelations, but you know, Trump's own commerce secretary, never mind Trump himself, they're still standing. You have in England, the king now calling for an investigation and possible prosecution of his own brother. You have in Norway the princess who no longer has support to be the queen. And yet in the United States of America, we have someone in the cabinet, Howard Lutnik, who is all over these Epstein files, who allegedly had business with Epstein after he was convicted of pedophilia,

Starting point is 00:06:45 and he still is in the cabinet. Also, you've got a lot of people talking about how the CEO of Chapel Roan's talent agency, Casey Wasserman, exchange flirty emails with Galane, Maxwell back in 2003. Or where you had Maxwell offering to give a massage that would quote, drive a man wild and Wasserman telling her elsewhere, I think of you all the time, so what do I have to do

Starting point is 00:07:01 to see you in a tight leather outfit? While you had Wasserman apologizing for his association with her saying it was two decades ago before any of her crimes had become public knowledge, for Chapel Roan, that appeared to not cut it with her announcing on Instagram that she is cutting ties with the agency and explaining. I hold my teams to the highest standards and have a duty to protect them as well.

Starting point is 00:07:17 No artist, agent, or employee should be expected to defend or overlook actions that conflict so deeply with our own moral values, saying, I have deep respect and appreciation for the agents and staff who work tirelessly for their artists and I refuse to stand by. But at least for now, you have tons of other artists still appearing to be with the agency, including Kendrick Lamar, Coldplay, Joni Mitchell, Lord, Tyler the Creator, Adam Sandler, Brad Pitt, and many, many others. And all of that is also happening as Waserman as the chairman of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics,

Starting point is 00:07:42 and so you have many demanding that he resigned from that as well. Right, and then, also at the same time, if we look to the right wing, there's been a lot of scrutiny on Steve Bannon right now, or the likes of Elon Musk, Dinesh Deneh Susa and Roger Stone, blasting him for his weird conspiratorial conversations with Epstein. With Musk calling Bannon evil, even though Musk himself had some, we'll call it, uh, concerning messages with Epstein of his own exposed in the latest dump. And then actually, while we're talking about Bannon, we got to talk about how the DOJ is now trying to dismiss its own long-running criminal case against him. It's just the latest of the Trump DOJ's unprecedented bid

Starting point is 00:08:11 to benefit Trump allies. Right, because back in 2022, a jury convicted Bannon of contempt of Congress, and those charges were brought by the DOJ for defying a subpoena to sit for a deposition and provide documents to the committee investigating the January 6th insurrection. And Bannon ultimately served a four-month sentence in federal prison after an appeals court also upheld his conviction. But then last fall, you had Bannon appealing the ruling to the Supreme Court, even though he had already served his sentence, claiming that he was actually protected by executive privilege and that his lawyers had told him just not to comply with the subpoena. And now that Trump DOJ, which brought this whole case against him in the first place under Biden,

Starting point is 00:08:39 is asking the High Court to toss it out entirely. Or with Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who's also a former Trump lawyer, arguing in a filing that the DOJ changed its mind and now believes that, quote, dismissal of this criminal case is in the interest of justice. And claiming that the move was necessary to undo the prior administration's weaponization of the justice system. And specifically, you had Sauer asking the Supreme Court to send the case back to a Trump-appointed district judge so that it can be dismissed. Where with also Janine Puro, the U.S. attorney for D.C., making a separate filing directly asking the lower court to officially dismiss the case. And so that's also significant because

Starting point is 00:09:08 if the judge grants Piero's request, it would likely erase Bannon's conviction and end his appeal at the Supreme Court. Now, with all of this, a big thing is, you know, if the DOJ is successful in this reversal, the move would largely be some, because Bannon has literally already served his time. But still, you have experts saying it is just another unprecedented example of Trump weaponizing the DOJ to boost his allies and go after his perceived enemies. But also just because this feels crazy, it shouldn't come as a surprise. I mean, in addition to Trump himself pardoning Jan 6 rioters, his DOJ also recently said that

Starting point is 00:09:35 it would stop defending a similar conviction made under Biden against trade advisor Peter Navarro, who was also convicted with contempted Congress for defying a subpoena from the Jan 6 Committee. And then there's more we're going to dive into in just a minute, but first let me thank a sponsor and say, you know, this year's energy is is wanting a home-cooked meal without turning dinner into a full personality test at 6.47 p.m. That's why today's sponsor, HelloFresh, stays in my rotation. It brings back the joy of cooking without the chaos.

Starting point is 00:09:57 Everything shows up, portion, planned, and ready to go, so dinner feels like a decision, not a debate. Also, HelloFresh has over 100 recipes every week, from comfort food to global dishes, and yes, the portions are legit, nobody's leaving the table hungry. And I like that it works for real life. Quick week nights, feeding multiple people,

Starting point is 00:10:11 or just wanting something that tastes like effort was involved. And if you're trying to eat better, they've got 35 plus high protein recipes, including Mediterranean and lifestyle friendly options. The ingredients are also solid, sustainably sourced seafood, 100% antibiotic and hormone-free chicken. They don't cheap out, steak, seafood, and triple the seafood options at no extra cost. Seasonal produce rotates in, so meals actually feel fresh. And it's the rare meal kit that actually makes cooking feel rewarding instead of like another chore on the list.

Starting point is 00:10:34 I use it, and honestly, I think you should too. It tastes great and it fakes the illusion that you've got kitchen skills. So just go to hellofresh.com slash DeFranco 10 FM or scan that QR code to get 10 free meals plus a free Zwelling knife on your third box. Offer valid while supplies last, free meals apply to discount on first box, new subscribers only, varies by plan. But then, I think right back into the news, we've got to talk about how judges are getting fed up with Trump's escalating immigration crackdown to the point, even threatening sanctions and contempt charges. Right, the Trump administration has been skirting by or outright ignoring judges' rulings in regards in regards in regards in regards to regards to regards to regards to regards to regards to their immigration roundups for a while now. And you've seen many of these judges getting pissed about it with, for example, U.S. District Judge Michael Davis saying in a recent order, there's been an undeniable move by the government in the past month to defy court orders, or at least to stretch the legal process to. or the breaking point in an attempt to deny non-citizens their due process rights.

Starting point is 00:11:20 But sometimes it's looking like ICE racing, detained immigrants across state lines in order to thwart judicial proceedings. Right, because when ICE quickly rushes their detainees at a state, it makes it that much harder for those who were detained to file lawsuits or even hire a lawyer. And Team Trump, they've repeatedly been accused of using those transfers to minimize habeas corpus petitions, right, which is the legal rights of due process that allows people to challenge government detention. And with this, you had one federal judge in Minnesota saying, these practices are deeply

Starting point is 00:11:43 concerning and generally suggest that ICE is attempting to hide the location of detainees. You also had another calling it an effort to, quote, frustrate judicial review. And there's also ice dragging their feet to let immigrants actually go home after the release has been expressly ordered, sometimes for weeks at a time. Right with that, you had a Minnesota judge saying detention without lawful authority is not just a technical defect. It is a constitutional injury that unfairly falls on the heads of those who have done nothing wrong to justify. And saying the individuals affected are people, the overwhelming majority of the hundredth seen by this court, have been found to be lawfully present as of now in the country. They live in their communities.

Starting point is 00:12:16 some are separated from their families. And then on top of all that, the immigration court system is under serious strain. Thousands of immigrants, they've been filing habeas corpus petitions. Are you at a Minnesota court seeing 400 cases in January alone? And you also had another judge in New York saying back in December that the district had been flooded with petitions

Starting point is 00:12:31 for relief from immigrants who were locked up despite posing no danger or flight risk. And this overwhelming problem in immigration court, it's not going anywhere anytime soon. Especially with this new federal appeals court ruling allowing the administration to move forward, ending deportation protections for more than 60,000 migrants from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

Starting point is 00:12:46 And in addition to all that, it's looking like Trump's planning on further taking advantage of the immigration courts being stretched to the point of breaking to target specific groups. Right, and so dozens of asylum cases for Somali migrants have been randomly expedited over the weekend, moved up the docket by years at a time in some cases. With attorneys for those migrants saying that this looks like an attempt by the Trump DHS to reject Somali asylum applications without court hearings, fast-tracking their deportation and limiting due process. And so now they're just scrambling, many lawyers going from zero hearings on their calendars to dozens, with many of those also being at conflicting times across several states. And of course, you know, it's hard not to notice that the cases that were expedited were specifically Somali cases. You know, the group that Trump and his cronies have most recently targeted with hateful rhetoric. And with all this, you had one immigration attorney saying, I haven't seen a demographic poll like this where they are targeting specific nationalities.

Starting point is 00:13:29 Saying this feels like a setup. So to rush these particular cases with judges who may not be familiar with them, it's disappointing that their system isn't going to give them their full day in court. And so all of this has led to judges rapidly losing their patients with ICE and the DOJ resulting in threats of contempt charges and even sanctions. Right, in some two dozen cases just in Minnesota, judges are thrown around terms like contempt and non-compliance to get the government's attention because, surprise, surprise, team Trump really isn't complying with judicial orders. Especially in cases where an immigrant was unlawfully arrested and must immediately be released.

Starting point is 00:13:57 And this isn't some small problem. The Chief Judge Minnesota State Court, Judge Patrick Schiltz, he found that ICE had violated nearly 100 judicial edicts. And he added that that is probably an undercount, saying ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence. And understand, it's not just Schiltz. We've seen other judges speaking out against the issue as well. We're saying things like, this is clearly not tenable,

Starting point is 00:14:19 I can't continue to have federal prosecutors violating really important orders. If somebody should be released, that has to happen. You have a Georgetown law professor saying, these types of threats, they're rare, but adding, it's become almost routine under this administration. Now with all that, right, as of this moment, no sanctions or contempt charges have actually happened,

Starting point is 00:14:35 but this is a situation that is very rapidly reaching a boiling point. We even saw Schiltz planning on pulling in head of ice Todd Lyons last month to explain why he shouldn't be held in contempt for the noncompliance on his watch. And while in that case, the hearing got canceled after ICE finally released the immigrant detainee in question at the time, Schiltz made it very clear that the threat of contempt wasn't off the table entirely. Saying the court warns ICE that future noncompliance with court orders may result in future show cause orders requiring the personal appearance of lions or other government officials.

Starting point is 00:15:00 And actually today, you had lions finding himself in the hot seat. The House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing grilling lines and other members of the Trump administration. And while he pledged to provide reports into the killings of Renee Good and Alex Freddie, he also refused to apologize to their families. And with all that, you had Representative Eric Swalwell's line of questioning, getting probably the most attention here. Shere Lyons, will you apologize to the family of Renee Good for being called a domestic terrorist by the president and his leadership?

Starting point is 00:15:25 No, sir. Why not? Sir, I welcome the opportunity to speak to the family of private, but I'm not going to comment on any active investigation. Will you apologize to the family of Alex Prettie for also being called the domestic terrorist? Sir, again, I'm not going to speak to any ongoing investigation. You then also had a heated exchange when Swoleon. Wallwell started asking lines about firing ICE agents. How many ICE agents have been fired for their conduct under your leadership?

Starting point is 00:15:49 Sir, I can get you that data. I'll get that back to you. Is it more than one? I'm not going to speak about personnel actions, but I'll get you that data. Can you tell us if at least, God, I hope at least one person has been fired for their conduct since these operations have begun? Are you telling us you can't even say one person's been fired? Sir, I'm not going to talk about personnel actions, but we will get back to you. But two people have been killed so far. Now, for his part, lines, he repeatedly referred to attacks against ICE agents and law enforcement,

Starting point is 00:16:16 but that ended up really only inviting even more scrutiny with Representative Dan Goldman saying, You said in your opening statement that references to ICE as the Gestapo or the secret police encourages threats against ICE agents. 100%. The problem is you have it backwards, sir. People are simply making valid observations about your tactics, which are un-american. an outright fascist. So I have a simple suggestion.

Starting point is 00:16:47 If you don't want to be called a fascist regime or secret police, then stop acting like one. And that actually wasn't even the biggest condemnation that Lyons faced because you had Representative La Monica McIver basically saying that he was going to go to hell. Mr. Lyons, do you consider yourself a religious man? Yes, ma'am.

Starting point is 00:17:07 Oh, yes. Okay, well, how do you think judgment day will work for you with so much much blood on your hands. I'm not going to entertain that question. Oh, okay, of course not. Do you think you're going to hell, Mr. Lyons? I'm not going to end. Of course not.

Starting point is 00:17:21 So generally, like this hearing, it painted a very clear picture of lawmakers' frustrations with ice. And actually, on that note, it appears that Democrats are even willing to send DHS into a shutdown over ICE funding now. Because Congress is facing a Friday deadline to fund the department, but some lawmakers say that they don't want to pass another continuing resolution to keep it afloat as they're demanding real changes with immigration enforcement. So you're seeing people like Senator Angus King and Independent from Maine telling NBC

Starting point is 00:17:42 What ICE is doing is unconscionable and it's got to be reined in. I can't in good conscience vote for it. I would feel complicit in what they are doing. You know, King's statement here, it's being seen as a big deal because he's one of eight senators whose vote is really, really crucial crucial crucial. Now that's said, as far as how things currently stand, negotiations between both parties and the White House, they're ongoing. Last week you had Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer sending a letter to Republicans with a list of demands asking that agents no longer wear masks or enter homes without warrants and that they wear body cameras, IDs, and stop racial profiling. But you had Republicans calling those demands unrealistic and on serious. And so then no surprise you had Democrats rejecting the plan that Republicans sent forward this week,

Starting point is 00:18:16 with both Schumer and Jeffrey shutting it down and saying that it is both incomplete and insufficient in terms of addressing the concerns that Americans have about ICE's lawless conduct. You know, because there's been such a massive public outrage against ICE recently, Democrats, they appear to be emboldened to stand their ground. Recent polling has even showed that over 60% of Americans believe that the agency has just gone too far and they're making the country less safe and only 34% approve of their actions. And so with all that, you had Senator Chris Murphy saying, I don't think there's a lot of interest in continuing to fund this agency that's out of control,

Starting point is 00:18:43 killing American citizens, tear-gassing elementary schools without reform. People are going to get killed. More people are going to get killed if we continue to fund DHS. And then as far as, you know, what happens if the Friday deadline passes with no deal insight, yes, you know, the shutdown only impacts DHS, but DHS's umbrella still includes agencies like TSA and FEMA. Meanwhile, ICE itself actually would probably continue operating as it already got $75 billion in funding last year. But for the Democrats right now, it really appears to be the principle of the matter. Everything that's going on, ICE at the very least needs to fundamentally change if it's going to get even more cash patting its budget.

Starting point is 00:19:15 Then finally today from that, I want to end today's show with congratulations and one more thing. So first, congratulations to Octavio M, C Geek's latest weekly winner who just scored $500 in tickets and was going to go see Bless at their first Dallas show. For the rest of you all, that's right. Seekeek is still giving away $500 in tickets and you should definitely answer today if you haven't already. You could be the next winner and snag $500 towards seeing your favorite artist, sporting event or play. I mean, there's like over 70,000 events to choose from. Hey, just add code to Franco to your C-Geek app profile for a chance of the weekly $500 prize, no purchase necessary.

Starting point is 00:19:43 But then, the final thing that we need to talk about today is Israel is finally, once and for all, taking over the West Bank. But that's what you're seeing a lot of people saying about these new policies approved by Israeli PM Netanyahu security cabinet over the weekend, and some saying that they amount to open defiance of Donald Trump's stated opposition to annexation. And all of this is cut out as the IDF is reportedly getting ready for a new offensive into Gaza, possibly throwing a wrench into Trump's peace plan, just as his peacekeeping force that he promised seems to be taking shape. But starting with the West Bank, notably Netanyahu avoided making the

Starting point is 00:20:10 announcement himself. Instead, he left that job to two government ministers who run the country's West Bank policy, including the far-right finance minister, Betzal Smotrich. A man who once said that the starvation of millions in Gaza might be justified in moral land, who has also otherwise been the Israeli official probably most aggressively pushing for a West Bank takeover. You had him again making his intention crystal clear, saying in a statement, we are deepening our roots in all parts of the land of Israel and burying the idea of a Palestinian state. And with that, the bulk of any future Palestinian state would be made up of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which were captured by Israel in 1967. And they're now home to more than 3 million Palestinians, along with roughly 700,000 Israelis, living in settlements that the international community overwhelmingly consider is illegal.

Starting point is 00:20:49 There, you've also had the government retroactively authorizing seller outposts considered illegal even under Israeli law. But also, I guess, until now, at least one thing standing the way as settlement expansion has been a decade's old law banning the sale of property in the West Bank to anyone besides local residents, with local here referring to Palestinians. And that's a role that actually goes back to before 1967 when Jordan controlled the territory. And it stayed in place because international law says that an occupying country cannot change existing legislation, except for security reasons or the benefit of the local population. But despite that, the measures approved by the Security Cabinet include repealing that law, essentially making it possible for Israelis to buy land anywhere on the West Bank. Among the things that opponents of this plan fear is that settlement groups with deep pockets

Starting point is 00:21:27 are going to take advantage by buying property deep inside the enclave, which would then leave the Israeli government with no choice, but to also move deeper into the territory because of the military. is obligated to protect Israelis wherever they are. But also with that, that's not the only way the security cabinet has paved the way for annexation. They're also repealing a requirement for a transaction permit before closing a land purchase.

Starting point is 00:21:45 And that's important because these permits, they've at least somewhat helped tackle the relatively widespread use of forgeries and other fraudulent methods as a means of buying property from Palestinians who didn't actually want to sell. Also, another big thing is that land records that have until now been sealed

Starting point is 00:21:57 will be open to the public. And this has actually been a key goal of the settlement movement for a while, with the reason being that it'll make it easier for them to track down Palestinians who might be willing sell. Though there, I'll say, notably, that might also end up putting Palestinian lives at risk. And that's because there's a law enforcement by the Palestinian Authority that actually makes

Starting point is 00:22:11 selling land to Jews punishable by death. But then also, beyond everything related to buying and selling land, the Israeli governments now also asserting radio control across the West Bank. The 1993, Oslo Accords left the Palestinian Authority administrative power over about 40% of the West Bank. But now, according to Netanyahu's security cabinet and an apparent violation of that agreement, even those areas will fall under Israeli control when it comes to the management of heritage and archaeological sites, environmental hazards, and water. And with that, you have Israeli enforcement agencies claiming the power to destroy any Palestinian structures deemed to be violating laws in these domains.

Starting point is 00:22:42 So of course, with that, you have activists arguing that Israel could find any excuse to carry out the demolitions. And similarly, you have them saying that the security cabinet calling for more involvement in major Palestinian cities is just a pretext for greater control. In Hebron, for example, the largest city in the West Bank, the Israeli military, will takeover planning and construction in the area of a small Jewish settlement. And there are fears that this will lead not only to settlement expansions, but also unwelcome changes at a religious site that is sacred to both Muslims and Jews.

Starting point is 00:23:06 Also, similarly, in Bethlehem, a new Israeli agency will be set up to run Rachel's tomb, another holy site shared by the major monotheistic religions. And then, of course, you know, with all this, the backlash has been very, very big. For you at eight Muslim majority countries, mostly in the Middle East and North Africa, but also including Indonesia, signing a joint statement condemning the changes. They also accused Dettanyahu's government of accelerating attempts at its illegal annexation and the displacement of the Palestinian people. And you also had a high-ranking official with the Palestinian Authority calling on the Arab League, the organization of Islamic cooperation and the UN Security Council to take action.

Starting point is 00:23:35 But right now, at least, it's not clear what any of those bodies can really do, though you did have UN Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez urging Israel to backtrack. With them noting that existing Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including, in East Jerusalem, are already in flagrant violation of international law. And you also have just so many experts agreeing that the security cabinet's latest moves are just the latest in a long list of violations. And you know, with that in mind, this is really just the continuation of a strategy that Netanyahu's government has been pursuing for years,

Starting point is 00:23:59 is one that really just picked up speeds since October 7, 2023. But I mean, in that time, the government has approved dozens of new settlements, including the largest single expansion since 1993. And last year, according to the UN, they had the fastest rate of settlement expansion since monitoring began. There's also been record-setting, settler violence, and military operations have resulted in the largest displacement of Palestinian civilians in the territory since 1967. And all of that having happened already is key to why what we're seeing now is being described by many Palestinians as de facto annexation.

Starting point is 00:24:25 With all that said, it's not clear yet when these new policies are meant to go into effect. And there's technically still a chance for anti-settlement groups to challenge them in court. But also, you had even people belonging to those groups saying that the chances are pretty slim. Though potentially, one thing that could actually have an impact is opposition from the United States. Where you Trump saying last year that he wouldn't allow Israel to annex the West Bank telling Time magazine, it won't happen because I gave my word to the Arab countries. Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened. But at the same time, you have people arguing that what Israel is doing is an outright annexation.

Starting point is 00:24:54 You've got people like the former head of Palestinian affairs and Israeli military intelligence telling the New York Times, that this may all be a way for the government to advance the annexation agenda while also avoiding open confrontation with Donald Trump, saying I define it as taking steps toward annexation without saying the word annexation. And with all that, while an unnamed White House official reportedly reiterated Trump's opposition

Starting point is 00:25:12 toward Israel annexing the West Bank, there's been no statement condemning or even addressing the new measures approved by Israel's security cabinet. While Netanyahu is set to travel to the United States and meet with Trump at the White House tomorrow, it seems like the focus of their conversation there will be Iran. But also, as that happens,

Starting point is 00:25:26 there's a lot we gotta talk about with another occupied territory, and that is Gaza. Because you just had the times of Israel reporting that the Israeli military is drawing up plans for a new offensive in Gaza to disarm Hamas once and for all. Also I'll say, with that as we've talked about before,

Starting point is 00:25:37 the fighting has never really stopped. In fact, just today there were reports that an Israeli drone strike killed two cyclists in Gaza, which would just be the latest in hundreds of deaths since the October ceasefire began. And that's in addition to the many others who have died for other reasons. Like for example, you also had an Israeli court

Starting point is 00:25:50 recently rejecting an appeal to allow a five-year-old Palestinian boy with an aggressive form of cancer, enter Israel for life-saving treatment. Or that being because of a government policy, barring residents registered in Gaza from crossing the border, even when they no longer lived there, which is reportedly the case for this boy who now lives in the West Bank. And that's just one of many cases, right? I mean, as of November, there were reportedly as many as 11,000 Palestinian cancer

Starting point is 00:26:10 patients trapped in Gaza. You've got the World Health Organization saying around the same time that 900 people in need of outside medical treatment, including children and cancer patients, they've already died while awaiting for evacuation. And then, of course, with this, a new offensive, it could mean things get even worse from here. Especially, as you had an official reportedly telling the times of Israel that disarming Hamas is likely to take many years. and the outlet explaining, should hostilities are due, fighting is liable to be more intense

Starting point is 00:26:32 and more widespread than previous rounds, as Israeli forces will no longer be constrained by the presence of hostages on Gaza's soil. And also with that, you had the paper noting that getting back to large-scale fighting could complicate Trump's Gaza plan and threaten the support of its international backers. That becomes even more notable because you just

Starting point is 00:26:46 had Indonesia announcing that it's getting ready to send up to 8,000 troops to Gaza to be part of the peacekeeping force under that plan. Or with an Indonesian president saying that the number of troops in that force will ultimately come out to around 20,000. But that my friends, you beautiful,

Starting point is 00:26:58 BASTERS is where your Tuesday, Philip DeFranco show is going to end. Thank you for being a part of another daily dive into the news. Let me just say, I love yo faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.

The Philip DeFranco Show - Trump’s Epstein Files Problem Just Got Worse. New Names Exposed.

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