The Taylor Swift VS Trump Podcast Drama, How Trump Is Remolding America, & Today’s News

Sup, you beautiful bastards. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show, your daily dive into the news. I'm trying to make sure today's show is out in time because it's Taylor Swift night. I know we're people's eyes and ears ahead of tonight

when the biggest artist in the world is making her podcast debut. The internet in general is abuzz, and oh my God, her army of dancing, friendship, bracelets, swapping, conspiracy theorists, very excited. It's really just a question of how big of a podcast is going to be. With many debating and some even betting that her podcast is going to do as much, if not more,

than Donald Trump on Joe Rogan in at least the first 24 hours. But as far as what it's actually going to pull, I have no idea and I guess we'll see. Though I will say just this moment from the teaser

has me interested in what this podcast is gonna be. I think we all know that if there's one thing that male sports fans wanna see in their spaces and on their screens, it's more of me.

With Taylor making light of last year. With the NFL constantly just featuring her on camera during random points in Chiefs games. With it even getting to a point where people were getting angry at her like she was the one making the decision.

You know, with all that said, what are your thoughts, reactions, and even predictions? And while you leave or don't leave that comment, I will warn you that the rest of the show is not this light. But with all that said, we have a lot to talk about today, starting with this. Right now, we're seeing Donald Trump using his power to transform American culture in his own image.

And there's a few multi-day event, tons of people watch it on CBS and it normally features dozens of fellow artists who commemorate the honorees with speeches and performances. Right, and a committee of previous honorees and prominent members of the arts community

traditionally pick the honorees. But this year the center appears to have broken with that tradition and gone with another process, which is just letting Donald Trump decide. Right, because today you had a reporter asking him how involved he was in selecting the honorees, and he answered.

I would say I was about 98% involved. No, they all went through me. I turned down plenty. They were too woke. I turned, I had a couple of wokesters.

And that, after he said at a Kennedy Center board meeting back in March, we'll go slightly more conservative, if you don't mind, with some of the people in the past, I mean, these are radical left lunatics that have been chosen. I didn't like it, I couldn't watch it, and the host was always terrible.

And Trump notably did not attend the honors during his first term. In fact, he was the only president in the Senator's 45 year existence not to go. And that because in 2017, Trump making sure that the event goes his way. With Trump back in February, firing Biden's trustees and replacing them with his own,

appointing a new director and making himself chairman. And then all of that bringing us to yesterday where he posted on Truth Social that he would reveal great nominees for the Trump Kennedy Center, whoops, I mean Kennedy Center Awards.

And while that may sound like a joke, it also isn't. the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee actually voted to approve an amendment that calls to rename the Kennedy Center Opera House after Melania Trump. But then the next day, Representative Bob Onder introducing a bill to rename the entire Arts Center the Donald J. Trump Center for Performing Arts.

And so today you had Trump holding a press conference where he revealed the honorees and he tried to play it off

like he accepted the burden of the United States. Are you fools asking me to do that? Sir, you'll get much higher ratings. I said, I don't care. I'm president of the United States. I won't do it. They said, please. And I didn't want to do it. Okay. They're going to say he insisted. I did not insist."

With Trump then announcing the honorees, starting with country music legend George Strait. You're a good looking guy.

I hope he still looks like that. Michael Crawford is being honored. One of my favorite talents, I think he's one of the greatest talents I've ever actually seen. Sylvester Stallone. Three time Oscar nominee, Golden Globe award winner, an action movie icon, and a friend

of mine. Gloria Gaynor. I Will Survive is an unbelievable song. And finally, we'll be honoring one of the greatest rock bands of all time, Kiss. It's an honor to present Kiss. Thank you very much.

Where it's a big news for all of them, especially Stallone, who in the past compared Donald Trump to a second George Washington, which on the note of our 47th president, the second George Washington, he even suggested that someday he might honor himself.

I wanted one, I was never able to get one. This year, it's true actually. I said, the hell with it, I'll become chairman. I'll give myself an honor. Maybe I'm gonna honor, next year we'll honor Trump, okay?

Now again, while he sounds like he's joking, he did actually suggest at the March board meeting that the honor should be expanded to include executives, athletes, and politicians. But for now, Trump's just hosting the December event. And if it's anything like today's reveal,

it's gonna probably be half fancy gala, half political rally. Because he also just could not resist going off on tangents about Democrats, DC crime, tariffs, and similar topics before catching himself like this.

But I shouldn't make this political because they made the Academy Awards political and they went down the tubes. So they'll say Trump made it political, but I think if we make it our kind of political,

we'll go up, okay?

Let's see if I'm right about that. But all of that, it's just one way that Donald Trump is reforming American cultural institutions in his image. Because the White House just announced that it would be conducting what it called a comprehensive internal review of the Smithsonian to bring it in line with an executive order from March

titled Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History. An order that accused the Smithsonian of coming under the influence of a divisive race-centered ideology and promoting narratives that portray American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive as well as the view that race is not a biological reality

but a social construct." And so the White House says that this review aims to ensure alignment with the president's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive and partisan narratives and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.

Right, and then adding, within 120 days, museums should begin implementing content corrections where necessary, replacing divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying historically accurate and constructive descriptions.

And to make sure that that gets done, Trump's people are gonna be sticking their nose in everything. Right, they'll be looking at all public facing materials, including placards, wall didactics, digital displays, social media content, pretty much anything

that says anything. They're also requesting everything from grant-related documentation, budgets, and schedules to inventories of permanent holdings, staff manuals, and organizational charts. And then finally, they'll conduct on-site observations and interview curators and senior staff to quote, better understand how they decide what to exhibit.

And according to the White House, all of this is just phase one covering eight of the Smithsonian's 21 museums. And then later on, phase two will expand the review to other museums as well. Now with all that, the Trump administration's barnstorming may give off the impression

that it has the authority over the Smithsonian, but it actually doesn't, at least not officially. The Institute's day-to-day operations are run by a secretary who is appointed by an independent board of regents that broadly governs policy. that it's committed to ensuring that it remains free from political or partisan influence. But not only did Trump's March executive order

tie future federal funding to compliance, it said that Vice President J.D. Vance, who sits on the Smithsonian's board, would work with Congress to appoint new board members who were broadly in agreement with the order. Which is then when weird shit started happening.

Like in May, Trump announced on Truth Social that he was firing the director of the National Portrait Gallery, saying she is a highly partisan person and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position. But with that, Trump didn't actually have the authority to fire her, though it didn't matter in the end

because she ended up resigning. Then in July, the artist Amy Sherald canceled her upcoming exhibition at the same gallery after a dispute over one particular painting of a trans woman with pink hair and a blue gown, holding a torch, Statue of Liberty style. With her saying, while no single person is to blame, it's clear that institutional fear,

shaped by a broader climate of political hostility towards trans lives, played a role. And then most recently, we found out that the National Museum of American History removed references to Trump's first term impeachments following a review.

And now the latest review also directs the Smithsonian to submit its plans to commemorate the country's 250th anniversary within the next 30 days. With that event scheduled for the next 4th of July, and we're already beginning to see how Trump's making a mark on that. Because it's now been confirmed that the White House will host a UFC cage fight

to mark the occasion. Though, it's a little unclear where it's gonna happen since the fights usually take place in huge arenas with an octagon. But Trump has also previously suggested and inviting as many as 25,000 attendees, which honestly I think he may actually do. But he kind of lines up with a made for TV presidency.

And there's just a lot that's going to be going on in addition to the 250th anniversary. I mean, next year we're going to seeing the United States hosting the Olympics and the World Cup. So you know a lot to keep our eyes on. And then next up, let's talk some online backlash news.

We're gonna see people right now threatening to boycott elf cosmetics after the company featured comedian, Matt Rife in its newest ad campaign.

Hey girl, has overpriced beauty hurt your wallet?

Elf that!

Alfino and Schmarns have gone to elf court for millions of clients, helping them to access beauty products they deserve at prices that won't injure their livelihoods. I know a thing or two about red flags and pricey makeup.

You deserve better than that. It's a Matt Rife co-stars in the ad with drag queen, Heidi and closet. They're doing a whole legal parody and many elf customers apparently not amused. And that in part seemingly because there are still many out there who feel burnt because of a controversy back in 2023, after Matt opened up a standup special

with a joke about domestic violence. And you know, he got a lot of heat for that joke and he ended up doubling down. saying if you were someone that was offended by that joke, you should buy a special needs helmet. So with this ad, you had the comments filled with things like you didn't have the budget for a comedian who doesn't joke about abuse, the guy who jokes about DV in an ad targeted to women, that's a choice.

And I think Andrew Tate's available for the next ad. Right, and the idea that Elf's customers are women, it was a big talking point in all the backlash. And when you had things like that DV joke turning a lot of women off, I mean, even he himself tried to distance himself from his female fans. With him at one point telling Variety, I don't pander my career to women.

I would argue this special is way more for guys. And so now with this new ad, you have people posting videos of them tossing out their health products, as well as videos like this one

that have over 600,000 likes. through so many hands, the amount of checks and balances and approvals that would have had to happen for this campaign to go live. Can you honestly sit here and tell me that nobody at the top stood back and said, hey guys, I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think that as a multi-billion dollar business in the beauty industry with a customer base

that is 90% women, we should have the face of our campaign be a man who openly jokes about violence against women. And then in addition to that,

you had people calling out the brand for pairing him with Heidi. Writing things like, elf, I'm a hold your hand when I say this, just cause you got a drag queen in the mix does not mean it's a green light for Matt Reif.

Somebody said we have to have somebody from the conservative spectrum

and somebody from the gay spectrum.

So that way we appeal to everyone. And I will say is depending on where you go on the internet, there's not a universal reaction here. Because while you have tons of people saying they're no longer gonna be buying Elf and they're gonna be switching to other products, Matt Reif, he's not without supporters. You go to some areas of the internet, people are mocking the fact that there's any backlash here.

And if you go to the comments on his Instagram posts with the ad, there are tons of people praising it. or it's just a blip. And then I've got more news for you in a second, but do you ever wonder how many subscriptions you're actually paying for? Because if you're like me, it's more than you think. Right, and thanks to today's sponsor, Rocket Money, I found subscriptions I totally forgot about,

like the random app I hadn't touched in months. And Rocket Money, it's the personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions, so you can grow your savings. I also found I'd been paying for a service I hadn't used in years. You know, Rocket Money, it gives you an all-in-one, easy to digest dashboard overview of your financial life, subscription, spending habits, bills, and more. And Rocket Money will help you cancel unwanted subscriptions

in just a few taps. But it also doesn't stop there. The app also helps you cut back on spending like it did for me with dining expenses Plus it lets you set budgets and tracks your spending automatically. Right, I mean, Rocket Money has over 5 million users and has saved a total of $500 million in canceled subscriptions and saves members

up to $740 a year when using all of the app's premium features. And you can choose the plan that fits your budget. So cancel your unwanted subscriptions and reach your financial goals faster with Rocket Money. Just go to rocketmoney.com slash PDS, rocketmoney.com slash PDS. And then next up in the news, it's happening.

The Texas Senate just approved new congressional maps that give Trump his wish. They carved out five more Republican seats in the House. But this is also just the first step. And there are still a bunch of things that need to happen before the new gerrymandered lines can be finalized.

Because yesterday, the state Senate passed the measure 19 to two with only Republicans voting in favor. And that after nine of the 11 Democrats walked out of the chambers in protest, calling the process corrupt and claiming in a statement, this mid-decade redistricting isn't about fair representation, it's about politicians picking their voters

instead of voters choosing their leaders. And notably there, while the two Democrats who remained in the chamber voted no by not walking out, they still gave their Republican colleagues a quorum, meaning that they had enough members present to hold a vote on the maps. And so with that, you had the two Dem state senators issuing a statement, defending their choice to stay, saying, we learned that quorum breaks can delay,

but not defeat this effort. Legislators cannot stay away forever, and the governor will call as many special sessions as needed to prevail. Our greatest hope is at the courthouse, and the sooner we get there, the better. super significant because they come as Democrats in the state house have fled the state entirely to deny a quorum in the lower chamber

after governor Greg Abbott called a 30 day special session to redraw the maps. So it was a session that Abbott very much tried to promote as being about a number of other legislative issues, including relief for the deadly floods that killed 135 people.

And with that, yesterday, GOP leaders in the state house and Senate said that if Democrats do not return by Friday and give them a quorum, they would end the special session several days early, paving the way for Abbott to start a whole new one. With an Abbott issuing a statement saying that he would start a second special session immediately after the first one ends.

With him claiming that special session two, election stealer-oo, will have the exact same agenda with the potential to add more items critical to Texans. Saying, there will continue to call special session after special session until we get this Texas first agenda passed.

And that last part, it echoes comments that he made to Fox News over the weekend.

This could literally last years because in Texas, I'm authorized to call a special session every 30 days. It lasts 30 days. And as soon as this one is over, I'm gonna call another one, then another one, then another one, then another one. If they show back up in the state of Texas, they will be arrested and taken to the Capitol.

If they want to evade that arrest, they're gonna have to stay outside of the state of Texas for literally years.

So essentially by restarting a new session, Republicans are effectively pressuring the missing Dems to return in the next few days or decide if they're gonna stay out of the state for another four weeks. And Republicans making it abundantly clear that if the Democrats do decide to remain out of the state, the cycle will just continue. That not only blocking votes on the new maps,

but also holding up other important legislative items like flood relief. The fact that Republicans have eagerly weaponized accusing Dems of withholding aid to victims. There you had Democrats hitting back saying that it was the Republicans who politicized the aid in the first place by tying it to the redistricting plans and forcing the legislature to vote on the maps before considering the relief package.

But all of this is many see that by remaining out of the state, the Democrats are essentially just postponing the inevitable, which is why we're now seeing reports that the Democrats are now weighing whether to return to the state.

And there you actually have ABC News and one of its local affiliates even reporting that the missing feel accomplished in their mission of ending the first special session and raising national awareness about the power grab. Or with one source saying that Democrats are tentatively planning to return this weekend,

but noting that the plans could change. And you had a spokesperson for the Texas House Democratic Caucus saying that the plans are fluid and many members haven't made a decision on travel yet. But still then implying that things could be up in the air, saying members are still assessing their strategies going forward and are in a private meeting

to make decisions about future plans currently. And adding, if and when Texas House Democrats breaking quorum decide to go home is squarely dependent on the actions the governor, speaker, and Texas Republicans in charge make with regard to prioritizing flood victims

over redistricting that hurts Texans. But really, unless the Democrats decide to stay out of the state until like after Christmas. This has largely been about raising awareness and kind of sounding the alarm for people like Governor Gavin Newsom. Because you have democratic leaders around the country

making or renewing their threats to redraw their congressional maps to add blue seats if Texas goes forward with its plan. With one of the most vocal leaders being California Governor Gavin Newsom. And in fact, you had his press office mocking Trump

in an all caps post yesterday where he wrote, final warning, Donald Trump, maybe the most important warning in history. Stop cheating or California will redraw the maps and guess who will announce it this week? Gavin Newsom, many say the most loved and handsome governor and a very powerful team. Don't make us do it.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. With a man a few hours later making this post saying, Donald taco Trump, as many call him, missed the deadline. California will now draw new, more beautiful maps. They will be historic as they will end the Trump presidency. Dems take back the house.

And adding that there will be a press conference later this week that will be devastating for MAGA. The moves being made being serious, but obviously the message and the way it's being delivered being kind of a mockery of Trump who posts like that. And with that, I'll say as of recording, Newsom has not provided any specific details, but for a few weeks now,

the governor has been pushing California state lawmakers to approve a bill that would ultimately allow Democrats to pass a map that benefits them. And specifically there, the legislation sets up a special election on November 4th for voters to consider a ballot measure

that would let Dems bypass the state's independent redistricting commission and enact their own maps ahead of the midterms. Also very notably, Newsom called on state lawmakers to set up a trigger mechanism, right? Which would make it so that the new maps only take effect if Texas or other GOP controlled states move forward with their power grabs. And you had him writing a letter to Trump on Monday saying

he would only move forward with the redistricting effort if Trump refused to back down. Writing, if the other states call off their redistricting efforts, we will happily do the same and American democracy will be better for it. And generally speaking, it does appear like many Democrats and people critical of Trump have been supportive of this move.

And many noting that in an ideal world, an ideal country, you're not doing this. That in an ideal world, you pass a federal law about having independent commissions and make it so that, you know, it's fair. But noting there that the Democrats have tried that

and it's been killed by Republicans. And so at a time where you have Donald Trump saying, get me five more seats, do whatever you need to do, Democrats can't just be a hall monitor saying, hey, look at that, that's not good. They also have to take action. Which also appears to be why many who are historically not in Gavin Newsom's corner cheering him on here. But hey, for now it remains to be seen

how it's gonna play out. And I mean that both for the midterms And then next up in the news, this actually starts with a question. What percentage of Americans do you think drink alcohol? And specifically I'm talking about adults. I'm giving you three, two, one, 54%. With that number coming from Gallup polls, and it's actually the lowest number since they began tracking back in 1939.

And in fact, the last time it was almost this low was in 1958. And as far as why we're seeing the numbers we're seeing today, Gallup also found that there are shifting attitudes towards alcohol in general. 53% of Americans think that even moderate drinking is bad for your health, which is a drastic rise from 45% last year,

which might be connected to it becoming more clear that even small amounts of booze are linked to at least seven types of cancer. But it's also not just people quitting entirely, even the amount of what's being drunk by drinkers, that's gone down. With now only 24% of people saying they had a drink within the last day and another 40% saying that it's been over a week.

A drastic difference from the pandemic when you had 62 to 67% of Americans reporting to drink. Right back when you had people stuck, bored and stressed. But it's also believed that part of this might be connected to economic factors. With things like inflation and high interest rates

that can drastically cut how much the people are drinking could be a useful metric for how much money people actually have to waste. Because you see, households that make less than $40,000 a year have radically reduced their drinking

alongside those making $100,000 or more a year. There's also interesting trends among voters. Because while Democrats have almost not changed their drinking habits at all, there was a 20 point dip as far as Republicans drinking. And a decrease in alcohol consumption is likely to continue, especially with young people. Where the amount of young people who drink, that is just continuing to fall and it sits at like 50%.

It's outpacing the drop that we're seeing with other age groups. And while you might think, oh, they're just replacing alcohol with something else, that doesn't actually appear to be the case. Marijuana use has gone up, But really with this news, I'm very interested in your personal situation. Do you drink? Yes or no?

Has the amount that you've drank changed? And then I've got more news you need to know in just a minute, but a fun fact, my brain, it shuts down when a restaurant menu has more than 12 items. And so when today's sponsor, ZipRecruiter,

said that they'd help cut through the hiring overload, I was like, yes, please. you shouldn't feel like you're drowning in resumes from people who clearly didn't read the job description. And ZipRecruiter's innovative resume database, it flips the script. You don't wait for applicants. You go find the good ones yourself instantly. And you can try it for free right now

at ziprecruiter.com slash DeFranco. And using their advanced filtering, you can filter by skills, experience, location, whatever you need, and boom, instead of a stress pile. It's I'm sick of reading cover letters fast. And when someone stands out, you don't have to wait. Unlock their contact information and connect instantly. And the instantly is my favorite thing. It's proactive hiring, not passive chaos.

Plus 320,000 new resumes are added every month. So you're not fishing in a dead pond. I mean, I imagine that's a huge reason why they're rated the number one hiring site based on G2. who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. So skip the candidate overload and instead streamline your hiring with ZipRecruiter. Just go to this exclusive link, ziprecruiter.com slash DeFranco right now to try it for free.

Again, that's ziprecruiter.com slash DeFranco, ZipRecruiter, it's the smartest way to hire. And then next up in the news, there were no credible reports human rights abuses in El Salvador last year, according to the US government. But notably, pretty much every reputable human rights organization on the planet would disagree. Right, and what you're seeing is that the State Department

just released its annual report on human rights around the world. And it's also been scaled back significantly under Trump. With one of the main things that you'd notice being that there were softer words for the countries that he likes

and the harshest criticism for those that pissed him off. But the big important things that we need to do here is one, talk about what the deal is with these reports anyways. Two, what changes the White House made this year. And three, what those changes actually look like with some examples. And so starting with one, what you should know is that the US has compiled these reports

on every country in the world since the 1970s. And this is, you know, if we're being honest, a stellar human rights record itself, right? And also the U.S. doesn't always act on it even when it does call out another country for violations. These reports historically have the reputation for being reliable and comprehensive. They're relied on by journalists, activists, diplomats, and lawyers all around the world.

Congress uses them to shape decisions on foreign aid and weapons sales. Typically you have the secretary of state presenting these reports in a public briefing and to Congress. But this year, Marco Rubio decided against scheduling a dedicated event,

which is something that's made even more notable when you consider how vocal of a supporter he used to be of this whole process. In 2013, you had him issuing a statement saying, the State Department's annual human rights report sheds a light on foreign governments' failure

to respect their citizens' fundamental rights and arguing, the world has been a better place because America has strived to defend these fundamental human rights, both at home and abroad. And in fact, in 2016, Rubio actually criticized Trump's then Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, for not presenting that year's report to Congress in person. So with all that, then you fast forward to today

and you have the likes of Senator Chris Van Hollen, who voted to confirm Rubio as secretary, saying he regrets that decision. saying when he was a member of the Senate, he used to stand up and support an American foreign policy based on promoting democracy and human rights. But ever since he was confirmed, he seems to have forgotten all that.

With many noting that this version of Rubio today is more like an errand boy for Trump, saying he's been tearing apart the office, overseeing human rights and democracy issues and firing many of the people who work there. And connected to that sentiment,

you had Van Hollen saying, if the Trump administration is going to be undermining human rights here, they don't want to have to report on what's happening in other countries. But then I think it's important we move on to the specifics of what's different with this year's report. Because a lot of it actually goes back to an earlier internal State Department memo.

A memo that instructed employees to remove whole categories of violations not quote explicitly required by statute. And the result of that was that basic rights, widely seen as fundamental under international law, including the right to a fair public trial, they've been dropped. So that's also just the tip of the iceberg. Right, according to the memo,

employees were directed to remove discussion of diversity, equity, and inclusion, sexual violence against children, and interference with privacy. And it didn't stop there. They were also told to get rid of references

to restrictions on political participation and government corruption, violence against minorities and LGBTQ people, and harassment of human rights organizations. And if you're really interested, NPR made a detailed look at every section and subsection that's been cut from the outline. Though also notably, the cuts go beyond just crossing out entire categories.

That memo reportedly directed employees to reduce the number of examples of each violation to just one illustrative incident, no matter how widespread the abuses were. And as far as why that would be an issue, you had the National Director of Government Relations and Advocacy at Amnesty International USA explaining,

if you strip it down to one case, it makes it easier for governments and particularly authoritarian governments to say that, you know, this is just one case. It minimizes everything. It makes it easier to just cast aside, sweep under the rug.

And one of the questions with that is whether that's on purpose. And so then connected to that, this memo ordered that reports on 20 specific countries be flagged for special review by a guy by the name of Samuel Samson. And Samson, he's a political appointee in the Office of Democracy and Human Rights office

that Rubio overhauled. And his resume includes working at a conservative organization whose mission, according to the CEO, in well-paying jobs where they will have influence. And that partisan background may be key because those countries that were sent to him for review, many of them have some special interest to Trump. Right, in El Salvador,

that's where hundreds of migrants that were detained in the US are now in prison. We're talking about people who claim to be the victims of physical and psychological torture. But in this year's report, there's almost no mention of prison conditions.

And like I said at the beginning, this report said that there were no credible reports of significant human rights abuses in the country at all. Though notably, the Biden administration's report on El Salvador last year, which was about four times longer than the Trump administration's, it said differently, right? It said that there were significant human rights issues that included credible reports of unlawful

or arbitrary killings, enforced disappearance, torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by security forces, harsh and life-threatening prison conditions. So the list actually goes way further than that, but you get the point. And then when you move on to the country of Hungary, we see something similar there.

Where like Salvador President Nayib Bukele, Trump is a fan of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a man who most observers agree has overseen a crackdown on civil society, the press, and the LGBTQ community. But according to the State Department, there were also no credible reports of significant human rights abuses in the country there. Now with all that, I will say that countries, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE,

they could not say the same, but their reports were still significantly scaled back. And you know, focusing on Israel, the Biden administration, of course, didn't really call out Netanyahu or take any action, but its report did fairly extensively document allegations against the country. And it also said clearly in the executive summary that its actions in Gaza had resulted

in tens of thousands of deaths, displaced the vast majority of Palestinians in Gaza and resulted in a severe humanitarian crisis. Right, and then you fast forward to now and the Trump administration's report is way less detailed. It doesn't even mention the death toll or displacement.

It also ignores or downplays many of the serious allegations and I mean, it makes no mention of the Israeli government's restrictions on humanitarian aid, contributing to widespread hunger and starvation. With that said, it's not like these reports didn't criticize anyone. In the UK, as well as France, Germany,

and some other European countries, you had the Trump administration concluding that the human rights situation worsened during the year. With their reasoning there generally being rising antisemitism and restrictions on freedom of expression. And notably there, there was a specific emphasis on right-wing or conservative expression. Right just to zero in on the UK,

you had the report highlighting safe access zones meant to protect people accessing abortion services from harassment. With it saying that these and other restrictions could include prohibitions on efforts to influence others, even through prayer or silent protests.

Then most notably for many, you had the report claiming that government officials repeatedly intervened to chill speech online after the 2024 Southport stabbings. They're referring there to efforts to control hate speech and misinformation in connection to that attack that helps spur huge riots across the country.

Then the report also claiming there's a two-tier system with the censorship of ordinary Britons becoming increasingly routine. And there it kind of sounded like right-wing leaders such as Nigel Farage, who have called British Prime Minister Keir Starmer two-tier Keir. But then also according to the Trump administration

in this report, the human rights situation has deteriorated in Brazil last year. And there, as we've talked about, Trump's imposed massive tariffs and sanctioned a Supreme Court justice in response to the government's efforts

to tackle online misinformation and its case against ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of plotting to assassinate his rivals to stay in power after losing an election in 2022. And so you have this human rights report hitting the same notes, even alluding to the country's short-lived ban on X over Elon Musk's refusal to comply with court orders. And it specifically accuses the government

of disproportionately suppressing the speech of supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro, as well as journalists and elected politicians. Then finally, the State Department finding that the human rights situation had significantly worsened in South Africa,

which is another country that Trump has repeatedly criticized since he returned to office, while also making baseless claims tied to the myth of a white genocide. Falsehoods that he also used as a basis for his welcoming dozens of Afrikaner refugees to the United States.

And so with that, you have the country's report claiming the government did not take credible steps to investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who committed human rights abuses, including inflammatory racial rhetoric against Afrikaners and other racial minorities or violence against racial minorities. Which is arguably a very interesting argument to make

when violence against minorities has been de-emphasized in most other reports. But then on the other side of this, you had the Trump administration saying, hey, this is just about streamlining, making the reports more readable.

And then with that saying, they're just sticking to what the law explicitly requires. But hey, that's where I'm gonna leave that one and you can be the judge. But then finally today, I wanna end on a congratulations and a special clip. Starting with congratulations to Michael L, SeatGeek's latest weekly winner, and he'll be attending the Commander's opening game

against the Giants this fall. And for the rest of y'all, that's right, SeatGeek is still snag $500 towards seeing your favorite artists, sporting event, or play. And there's like over 70,000 events to choose from. All you gotta do is just add code PDS to your SeatGeek app profile for a chance at the weekly $500 prize,

no purchase necessary. Then finally, that brings us to the clip. And it really revolves around RFK Jr., the HHS, and Dr. Mike. a little under two hours for my podcast, In Good Faith. And it was really just so enlightening. It's been one of our best received podcasts over on Spotify. Well, there's like 50 important things

I could point to in the podcast, especially with how much we're seeing RFK Jr. and his decisions around the HHS popping up in the news. I wanted to share this bit. In what ways are we screwed, do you think?

The biggest way, and the way that people people probably don't feel yet is we're screwed on our innovation front, especially healthcare innovation. Because with this administration, they have come in raising all of these flags on issues that are important, that have been discussed, that have not been neglected, but they're complex issues that require time to solve,

like the chronic health issues that face America, the obesity epidemic that faces America. But instead of actually solving those problems, they just talk about them and then actually cut all the research funding and the labs that are evaluating the problem

and trying to find unique solutions for those problems. They talk about cancer rates going up and then they cut a half a billion dollars worth of research for mRNA vaccines, which can potentially be used to prevent cancer. So all the innovation that we could be having as a country

in order to prolong our lives, improve the quality of our lives, in order to give us the competitive edge in this very tough landscape against other countries that are trying to create their own innovation, we're losing that battle big time.

So the fear for me is when your viewers and listeners are gonna come to their doctor 10, 15, 20 years from now, hoping that there's a solution to their problem, there isn't one, we can all look back at this moment

and understand why. That's the thing that I always wonder is, will people actually look back, right? Because there's a number of times where people will, you know, they'll get a lot of likes or like retweets and it'll be like looking at a problem that we're seeing today and going like, oh, it's so crazy that this started with Reagan. It's like, but it's so far down the road and the impact's going to be felt.

But also then I guess one of my questions is why do you think that they're cancelling medical and scientific research? Like, what is the point? I know that when Trump went in, he was like, I'm going to let RFK Jr. just fucking run wild. But like, what do you, why do you think they're doing it?

I think that's a better question for a psychic rather than a physician like myself, simply because I can't even begin to understand what is the value of doing these things. I try and put myself in the shoes of other people quite often. I try to exhibit charitable thinking. I think that's beneficial for the world

and my own mental health. But in this scenario, there is no form of charitable thinking that I can imagine someone coming in and canceling these contracts, canceling the ability to do research,

harming actual preventive things that our healthcare system does well, instead of actually focusing on the problems of our healthcare system. Even in a recent Jubilee debate that I had, where I was surrounded by people

who were either vaccine hesitant or full on anti-vax, they agreed that our healthcare system is too reactive, not proactive. I'm like, great. They agreed that we need to do more prevention rather than focusing on cures.

Great, I'm on board. But vaccines check all those boxes and yet they're anti the thing that can accomplish those goals. So for all the issues that our healthcare system has, which there are many,

and I'm excited to discuss them with you, vaccines are not the problem. They're the solution and they've been doing great things.

But hey, that is where I'm gonna end today's show. If you wanna check out the full podcast and I highly recommend it, you can get it on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and even on YouTube. I got links in the description.

But no matter what you do, But no matter what you do, I'm closing this thing out the same way.