What’s up you beautiful bastards? Hope you’re having a fantastic Wednesday. – We’re Rhett and Link. Welcome the the Philip DeFranco Show. – [Both] And let’s just jump right into it. – Another Wednesday, another set of potential PDS host replacements that I have to fire. It’s feeling more and more like I’m gonna have to do this job forever. But, on a happier note, if you’d like to watch my brand new podcast with Rhett and Link, I uploaded it like I always do, right before I uploaded this video at YouTube.com/aconvowith and any and all of the audio platforms of your choice, I’ll link to it down below. If your unfamiliar, it’s a weekly podcast where I bring someone on, try to learn about them. And this one was actually especially interesting for me. They recently put out a set of videos, where they, I’m kind of using the term loosely, they kind of came out as agnostic after very much religion being a huge part of their life. So I was really interested in talking about what is it like opening yourself up like that, and then, in in a number of ways getting hit really hard. And I really appreciate the guys. They got very real, raw, vulnerable. I’d highly recommend you check it out. I think it’s one of the more interesting ones. So definitely after today’s show, check it out. But, with that said, this is the Philip DeFranco show. Buckle up, hit that like button, and let’s just jump into it. And the first thing we gonna talk about today is remembering a day that will live in infamy. People talk about how today in the United States we are more divided then ever. Left verses right, hate being spewed every single day, but that does not hold a candle to the world war that we saw five years ago today. It is the fifth anniversary of this dress. Strangers, families, friends divided. At each other’s throats. Is the dress black and blue or white and gold? It was the darkest of times and some say we’ve never fully recovered. Also, that was five years ago? I, wow. Longer I live, the faster I feel like I’m dying. So I guess the main points of this story, oh the internet, we have fun here a lot. I mean it’s horrible also a lot. But yeah, a little internet history to start us off. Also the dress is black and blue. Nah, I’m just kidding, but I’m not. But I am, but I’m not. Moving on. And then let’s talk about a story that centers around the BAMFs that are Jennifer Lopez and Shakira. All right, so earlier this month, Jennifer Lopez and Shakira were the halftime show at the Super Bowl. In general, a lot of people including myself said they absolutely nailed it. Some even calling it the best halftime show they have ever seen. It easily became the most watched halftime show on YouTube, but we also had some people slamming it, saying that they found their clothes and dancing to be inappropriate. Right, you had some parents up in arms and it actually turns out that people were more vocal about their complaints than we maybe thought. Because what we’re seeing now are reports that the Federal Communications Commission received over 1,300 complaints about that show. And to make this story even better, WFFA local station in Texas, which is the state that actually filed the most complaints, obtained and published the full list yesterday. Some of the complaints they really accuse this performance of a lot. Some writing, “Completely inappropriate “halftime show with simulated orgies, “stripping, and borderline pornography. “This is a family event during prime time “and should never have happened.” Another writing, “The halftime show was raunchy, “lewd, and not acceptable for all viewing audiences. “The scantly clad butt shots of J.Lo, “especially when she turned to the cameras and bent over, “was nothing short of hard porn.” Which, if I could very quickly, having heavily researched the topic, I do not think that is a just comparison. But also several reviews accuse the performance of worsening the issue of sex trafficking. Writing, “In an era where sex trafficking is increasing, “such programs only tend to feed the problem. “If I wanted to see this type of activity, “I would go to a strip club. “Instead, my living room was invaded by this.” Another writing, “During a time when we are trying “to stop sex trafficking and prevent rapes, “why are we showing children women “who are scantily clad during the halftime show? “Why was the cameraman so obsessed “with showing us J.Lo’s crotch and anus?” (chuckles loudly) “Is your network encouraging “more rapes and sexual assaults?” Because apparently that’s what watching women doing with their bodies is as they please does? And we can go through the whole list. A number of them are kind of ridiculous, funny, kind of batshit crazy at times. Also a number of them just seem like they’re angry women exist. Which, actually kinda on that note, to make a comparison to last year’s halftime show, you had Adam Levine showing off his dirty, dirty man body. But that performance only led to 58 FCC complaints. Although, to be fair, these two instances are pretty much nothing compared to the 2004 incident with Janet Jackson. There the FCC released a statement just five days after the Super Bowl saying that they had received over 200,000 complaints. And, in fact, some reports indicate that as time went on, they got even more, reaching half a million. And there, the FCC actually hit CBS with a hefty fine afterwards, but after a bunch of legal back and forth it was tossed out. But ultimately to bring it back to the main story. One, to Shakira and J.Lo, I would once again like to thank you for your service. And two, for the people that sent in complaints about that show thinking that it somehow encouraged sex trafficking and rapes, I would be more concerned about the apparent hit you took to the head. And I guess that’s where I’m ending this one. But from that I wanna share some stuff I love today in Today in Awesome, brought to by Keeps. If you didn’t already know, two out of three guys will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time that they’re 35. You look around, maybe you have that brother, that uncle, and then you see what they’re going through. And if you don’t want to be that guy, you don’t have to just sit idly by. Keeps helps you stop hair loss before it’s too late with their scientific and affordable approach. Their treatments are up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss, and they say here prevention is key. And you don’t have to go broke to avoid going bald. Keeps offers generic versions of the only two FDA-approved hair loss products out there. So some of you may have tried them before, but probably never for this price. Which actually on that note, for a limited time you beautiful bastards can get your order for 50% off. And so if you’re ready to take action and prevent hair loss, go to Keeps.com/DeFranco or just click that link in the description down below to receive 50% off your first order. And the first bit of awesome today is, if you’re in the U.S. or Canada, text this number. In general I’ve used it to communicate to kind of everyone with big blasts then individually, especially after the show. Also the way that the YouTube algo seems to be screwing us on these kind of sensitive topics, I might start using it so that people make sure that they don’t miss the show. I’ll also be sending a little something out tonight, but I don’t wanna say what. Okay, cool. Okay, that sounded sketchier. Anyway, 813-213-4423. Then we got a stunt featurette for Disney’s Mulan, Architectural Digest gave us an inside look at a $50 million Bel Air mansion, we had BTS performing on Jimmy Fallon as well as being on Carpool Karaoke, we got a trailer for Marc Maron’s new special, End Times Fun. Then we had The Onion presenting episode 20 of The Topical. If you wanna see the full versions of everything I just shared, the secret link of the day, really anything at all, links, as always, are in the description down below. And then let’s talk about this case that the U.S. Supreme court took a look at and have now ruled on. And so this story and case start back in 2010 when you have a 15-year-old by the name of Sergio. He was reportedly with his friends along the culvert that divides El Paso, Texas and Juarez, Mexico. And here you had the teenager’s family saying the group was playing a game where they dared each other to run up to the unmarked border, touch the U.S. side, then return to the Mexico side. Although alternatively here, Jesus Mesa Jr., who was a border patrol agent there at that time, claim that the kids were throwing rocks at him in an attempt to illegally cross the border. And according to reports, during one of the runs across, Mesa detained one of the boys. Sergio was able to run away, make it back to the Mexico side, but Mesa then drew his gun and fired shots, hitting the teenager in the face and killing him. And so following this boy’s death, Sergio’s family attempted to sue Mesa based on the 1971 case Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents. And in that case, which dealt with an unconstitutional home search, the Supreme Court ruled that lawsuits could be filed against federal law enforcement officers for constitutional violations, even though no statute has authorized this. So this case worked its way through the courts, ultimately getting to the Supreme Court. And ultimately the decision we saw come down this week was against the family. The Supreme Court ruling in a five to four vote that the family could not sue Mesa. And here Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority, saying that this case was rooted in a different context than the Bivens case, and thus the implied rights from the 1971 ruling should not be extended easily here. Writing, “Unlike any previously recognized Bivens claim, “a cross-border shooting claim has foreign relations “and national security implications.” Adding, “In addition, Congress “has been notably hesitant to create claims “based on allegedly tortious conduct abroad. “And because of the distinctive characteristics “of cross-border shooting claims, “we refuse to extend Bivens into this new field.” And Alito, backed by Justices John G. Roberts Jr., Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh, said that it should be up to Congress to decide the scope of these matters, not the courts. Additionally and notably here, Justices Thomas and Gorsuch went even further, calling on the courts to overrule the Bivens decision entirely in a concurring opinion. Now on the other side of this we saw Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissent. Now she, of course, joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. And they argue that the lawsuit should not be thrown out and that the only reason Mesa wasn’t facing consequences was because Sergio happened to be on the Mexican side when he was shot. With Ginsburg writing, “The only salient difference here: “the fortuity that the bullet happened to strike Hernandez “on the Mexican side of the embankment. “But Hernandez’s location at the precise moment “the bullet landed should not matter one whit. “Mesa’s allegedly unwarranted deployment “of deadly force occurred on United States soil. “It scarcely makes sense for a remedy trained “on deterring rogue officer conduct “to turn upon a happenstance subsequent to the conduct. “A bullet landing in one half of a culvert, not the other.” So with all of that said, kind of the arguments and explanation here, I would really love to know your thoughts. Do you agree or disagree with the Supreme Court decision here? Why, why not? I, of course, would love to know your thoughts in those comments down below. And then let’s talk about everyone’s favorite totally not controversial topic, Russian interference in the U.S. election. It’s unfortunately a topic that a large number of people dismiss because they see it as this partisan play to go after their guy or a topic that people do believe is real but they see it in a selective way. Right, so to kinda bring you up to speed, last week we saw reports that intelligence officials had told the House Intel Committee that Russia was interfering in the 2020 election to get President Trump elected. With that briefing reportedly having taken place on February 13th. And actually right after that news broke, Bernie Sanders told reporters that his campaign had been briefed a month earlier about Russian efforts to help him in the election as well. Right, and so after that we saw both Trump and Bernie respond to the news, though in very different ways. We saw Trump tweeting, “Another misinformation campaign “is being launched by Democrats in Congress “saying that Russia prefers me “to any of the do nothing Democrat candidates “who still have been unable to, after two weeks, “count their votes in Iowa. “Hoax number seven!” Trump also saying that reports of Vladimir Putin wanting to help were disinformation while speaking at a rally in Las Vegas and adding, “Wouldn’t he rather have Bernie, “who honeymooned in Moscow?” Now as far as Bernie, he took a different approach. Instead of denying the claims, he took aim directly at Putin. Saying in a statement, “I don’t care, frankly, “who Putin wants to be president. “My message to Putin is clear: “Stay out of American elections, “and as president I will make sure that you do.” And adding, “In 2016, Russia used internet propaganda to sow division in our country, “and my understanding is that they “are doing it again in 2020. “Some of the ugly stuff on the internet “attributed to our campaign may well “not be coming from real supporters.” Okay, so all of that went down last week, but the reason that we’re talking about this today is because we’re now seeing reports that intelligence officials are saying that the assessment of Russian interference in Trump’s campaign was and has been overstated by the official who gave the briefing to the committee. Now that person was Shelby Pierson, the top intelligence official for election security. And around this CNN, Fox, and NBC all spoke with national security officials who told them that the U.S. actually doesn’t have evidence that Russia’s interference in the 2020 cycle is aimed at reelecting Trump specifically. One of the officials telling CNN, “The intelligence doesn’t say that. “A more reasonable interpretation of the intelligence “is not that they have a preference, “it’s a step short of that. “It’s more that they understand “the president is someone they can work with. “He’s a dealmaker.” One of the intelligence officials who spoke to CNN also said that the way Pierson characterized the intelligence was misleading, while another just said she “failed to provide nuance” that was needed to convey the information. With the report adding Pierson’s characterization of Russian interference led to pointed questions from lawmakers, which officials said caused Pierson to overstep and assert that Russia has a preference for Trump to be reelected. And to that point, NBC also reported that intelligence officials say that it was an overstatement fueled, they believe, by a misinterpretation by some Democratic lawmakers on the committee. But also very notably here, NBC also said that the officials who spoke to them did not dispute that she told the House the analysis suggests the Russians favor Trump, a preference the Russians displayed during the 2016 election, U.S. intelligence community publicly concluded. And adding the two former intelligence officials briefed on the matter told NBC News there is evidence that the Russians would like to see Trump remain in office. But those officials who spoke to NBC also said that they were worried the information was being distorted by both Republicans and Democrats for political gain and specifically adding that Trump and his national security advisor, Robert O’Brien, have sidestepped questions about how they would respond to foreign election interference, and have instead put the focus on Democrats. By doing so, they have also played politics with intelligence and national security, current and former officials say. Now with all of that said, I know earlier I kinda joked about how we were never as divided as the blue and black or white and gold dress, but we do live in very divisive times, especially politically speaking and I think that it’s really hard when people deny the facts. There is no doubt that the Russians interfered in 2016 and I think that Donald Trump has done a great disservice by often dismissing those facts. Some thinking and saying he’s doing so for nefarious self-serving reasons, others I think at the very least I think it’s related to his ego. If he admits this thing, he feels like it’ll delegitimize him. But ultimately, at the very least I hope we can all come together to know that there is one man said to gain from all of this interference. And that man is Vladimir Putin. The whole goal here is to sow chaos, to undermine democracy, to make us question everything. To the point of even if they have their hands on any specific individual thing, there’s questions about it, there’s skepticism, people don’t know what to believe. And this isn’t a new thing from Russia. They’ve just gotten exceptionally better at it in the past decade. And I ultimately end up leaving this story and situation kind of deflated, concerned, because it feels like it shouldn’t be a partisan issue whether it be Russia or any other outside interference. That we should be against that, we should all together be trying to combat that but unfortunately it feels more and more like it’s only going to be used for political purposes. And there’s a range in the ways that it could be used, but one of the scarier ways is to make essentially half the country, depending on who wins or loses come November, doubt the validity of the results. And so that’s why for a number of different possible outcomes, I’m very concerned about November. And I know there are a large number of people, I mean not necessarily people watching this video, but people in this country that assume even though they’ve had issues with the government, that everything will ultimately be okay, everything’s kinda worked things out. Politically speaking, in the United States we’re living in a time of firsts, a time of extremes, and a time where more than ever it doesn’t feel like we have the us in the U.S. But on that delightful note, that’s where I’m ending today’s show. Of course I’d love to know your thoughts on this or anything I talked about today. And that is where I’m going to end today’s show. And hey, thanks as always for tuning in to my little daily news show. If you like these, hit that like button on the daily. It helps out the show. Also if you’re looking for more to watch, maybe missed yesterday’s show or you wanna check out that brand new podcast with Rhett and Link, you can click or tap right there to watch either of those right now. But with that said, of course, as always, my name’s Philip DeFranco, you’ve just been filled in, I love yo faces, and I’ll see you tomorrow. – I hope you like this video. Subscribe if you like it.