'Sup you beautiful bastards,
hope you've had a fantastic Tuesday.
Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show.
Buckle up, hit that like button
and let's just jump into it.
The first thing we're gonna talk about today
is this controversy around Clint Eastwood
and Olivia Wilde.
And the focus of this story is around Clint Eastwood's
new movie, Richard Jewell,
which is actually based off
of a Vanity Fair article titled,
American Nightmare: The Ballad of Richard Jewell.
And the movie is based on a true story.
It follows Jewell, and for those who do not know,
Jewell was a security guard present
at the 1996 Centennial Park bombing at the Atlanta Olympics,
which ended up killing one person and injuring over 100.
And Jewell, for his part, reported a suspicious package
at the scene, clearing the area,
largely being regarded as a hero right after.
But the FBI later made him their main suspect in the case,
thinking that he may have actually planted the bomb himself.
And with this, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
ended up reporting the story
and kind of turning this whole thing into a media frenzy.
This ended up making Jewell look like a villain figure
in the eyes of the public,
even though it ended up turning out that he was innocent.
And before he died in 2007,
Jewell ended up filing several defamation suits,
all of which were settled, except with the AJC.
They ended up getting their lawsuit dismissed in 2011
with the courts saying that yes, even though Jewell
was innocent, what they were reporting was true at the time.
Now, as far as the movie, it doesn't have it's wide release
until this Friday, so a ton of you probably haven't seen it.
But, all in all, it has some pretty good reviews,
all things considered, and many think it has a decent chance
of receiving Oscar nominations.
Though, we have seen a number of big criticisms.
Some critics saying that it appears that Eastwood's
trying to make a movie slamming fake news media.
We have a Slate review saying that the journalist
in question, Kathy Scruggs, who's played by Olivia Wilde,
is portrayed as vampiric,
going on to say that it depicts a world view where,
quote, most dangerous threats to well-meaning,
ordinary-ish white guys like Jewell are big government
and an unscrupulous media.
Washington Post calling it the Trumpiest movie
you've ever seen and says that the press
is shown as the enemy of the people.
And going on to say, quote, there's plenty of room
for outrage over suspicions that fell on an innocent man
without resorting to demonizing reporters
and law enforcement officers as caricatures of corruption.
Right, and the reason I'm showing
and mentioning those reviews
is because it kind of plays a a part
in why we're talking about the movie today.
AJC and its parent company, Cox Enterprises,
wrote a letter to Warner Brothers, Clint Eastwood,
and the film's screenwriter Billy Ray.
And in it, they ask for a statement
and disclaimer in the film.
Including, publicly acknowledging that some events
were imagined for dramatic purposes,
and artistic license and dramatization
were used in the film's portrayal of events and characters.
We further demand that you add a prominent disclaimer
to the film to that effect.
And this is because in one scene, the film implies
that Kathy Scruggs traded sex for a news tip.
And so they say that this is not true
and there is no evidence of this ever happening.
Also noting that Scruggs died in 2001,
so she can't even defend herself against the film's claims.
With their letter saying, such a portrayal makes it appear
that the AJC sexually exploited its staff
and/or that it facilitated
or condoned offering sexual gratification to sources
in exchange for stories.
That is entirely false and malicious,
and it is extremely defamatory and damaging.
They also addressed the assertion the film makes
about the AJC acting unethically,
defending their reporting, saying,
AJC actually held that story for a day
to develop additional independent corroboration
of key facts prior to publication.
Law enforcement sources confirmed to the AJC
their focus on Mr. Jewell.
The accuracy of the story had also been confirmed
with an FBI spokesperson to whom the entire story
was read before publication.
They also posted an article
called The Ballad of Kathy Scruggs
which includes people who knew Scruggs
at the time of her reporting,
with one calling the film's depiction of her
complete horseshit, and just not true.
Another saying, It's obvious to me
they did not go to any great lengths
to find out what the real characters were like.
And the editor of the AJC, Keven G. Reilly,
also talked to Variety where he said,
the film literally makes things up
and adds to misunderstandings
about how serious news organizations work.
It's ironic that the film commits the same sins
that it accuses the media of committing.
Now on the other side of this,
Warner Brothers is standing by their movie.
And in a statement to Fox News, they said that the film
is based on credible material,
and adding, it is unfortunate and the ultimate irony
that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
having been a part of the rush to judgment
of Richard Jewell, is now trying to malign
our filmmakers and cast.
Richard Jewell focuses on the real victim,
seeks to tell his story, confirm his innocence
and restore his name.
The Journal-Constitution's claims are baseless
and we will vigorously defend against them.
They also noted that there is a disclaimer
at the end of the film
which is standard for all films based,
at least partially, on true stories.
With the disclaimer saying that the film is based
on historical events but some elements were created
for dramatization.
With that said, even before the AJC published their letter,
we saw Olivia Wilde defend the film and her character,
telling the Hollywood Reporter that Scruggs's legacy
has been, quote, unfairly boiled down to one element
of her personality, one inferred moment in the film.
And adding, I think that people
have a hard time accepting sexuality in female characters
without allowing it to entirely define that character.
We don't do that to James Bond,
we don't say James Bond isn't a real spy
because he gets his information sometimes
by sleeping with women as sources.
To which, we saw a number of people, including journalists,
essentially respond, that's a bullshit statement.
Right, James Bond isn't a real person.
Yes, you are an actor acting in a movie
that is based on real events
and you have a number of people very angry
that you're depicting a real person
as having slept with a source, doing something unethical
to get information.
A person that also cannot defend themselves.
Right, it's like if I did a story based on real events
around Olivia Wilde, and for some reason I include
a scene where I inferred that Olivia Wilde
was a big fan of butt chugging,
or she slept with someone to get a role.
Olivia Wilde, her friends, her peers,
would likely be very offended.
Especially if the main argument
is that it's not based on any real information.
Now, as far as the other criticisms of how the media
is portrayed in general, I'm gonna have to wait
to actually see the movie to have an opinion on that.
Which, I will say, this controversy probably does nothing
but help the movie.
But, with all that said, based off of what we do know now,
of course, I'd love to know your thoughts
in those comments down below.
Then, in quickie entertainment news,
we need to talk about Nick Cannon and Eminem
and no, this is not a video from 2010.
And in this story, you had Nick Cannon
of Drum Line and host of The Masked Singer fame
deciding he was going to take a shot at Eminem,
putting out a diss track on Eminem with such zingers
as calling Eminem Elvis Pussly,
seemingly taking a shot at him
for adopting a daughter that is not his.
And quote, I heard your chauffer
got a video of you sucking a cock.
And ultimately, it was just kind of sad.
Really, for two reasons:
one, I feel like we all collectively learned
that Nick Cannon doesn't have anyone in his life
to tell him when he comes up with bad ideas.
Which also, isn't the most surprising,
I don't know if Nice Cannon's ever turned down an offer.
And two, 85% of the internet collectively came together
to say, that was trash.
Like, at least with Rap Devil, right, Machine Gun Kelly,
there was a debate.
Debate on its own, comparatively in my opinion,
weaker to Killshot by Eminem.
You know, in its own right, you could be like,
I see the appeal.
I think a good example of how poor of a job Nick Cannon did,
when Eminem ended up responding with a throw away tweet
and just 14 minutes, that tweet had more likes
than the damn official music video five hours after.
And also still more likes than the official audio
that was released on Nick Cannon's channel.
And as far as those responses go,
one, Eminem tweeted, you mad bro? Stop lying on my dick,
I never even had a chauffer, you bougie fuck.
Followed by, I demand an apology Nicholas,
you've made my gardener so jealous!
Now, with all this happening, you saw the hashtag,
#ripnickcannon trending.
50 Cent responding, I don't understand to save my life
why someone would pick a fight with EM.
He is a different kinda animal.
And adding, Nick that shit was trash,
I oughta kick you in yo ass when I see you PUNK!
And as far as what happens next, hey,
while I and any other Eminem fan are like, yes,
I would love to see another diss track from Eminem.
You know, I end up thinking back to the lyrics
in The Ringer, it ends up kind of being of a lose, lose.
Also, almost the entirety of the internet
was clowning on Nick Cannon before Eminem even responded
with throwaway tweets.
This feels like Nick Cannon wants it too much.
But, that's the story.
In my opinion, of course I'd love to know your thoughts.
But from that, I wanna share some stuff I love today,
in Today in Awesome brought to you by Squarespace.
Whether you need a domain, a website, an online store,
a whatever, make it with Squarespace.
Squarespace empowers people
to create their online web presence
or launch their passion project.
From entrepreneurs and small business owners
to photographers, restaurant owners,
bloggers, musicians, actors, fashion designers,
and so much more, they all trust and use Squarespace
for their website needs.
And their reasoning is simple,
creating a beautiful website
with Squarespace's all-in-one platform
has never been so simple.
It's extremely intuitive and easy to use,
there's nothing to install, patch, or upgrade ever.
Websites and online stores to marketing tools
and analytics, Squarespace is the place
to build a beautiful online presence
and run your business.
You also don't have to go it alone,
thanks to their personalized support
from their award-winning customer care team.
Email or live chat, whatever you need,
they're available 24/7 to help out.
So if you wanna make the smart move like many
from the nation already have,
go head and start your free trial today
over at Squarespace.com/Phil.
Then make sure you enter in offer code Phil
to get 10% off your first purchase.
And the first bit of awesome today
is perfect if you're looking for more news
after today's show.
We have the Rogue Rocket team
doing a deep dive on how police deal with protests
and riots all over the world.
Then we had Sheryl Crow on NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert.
Wired gave us an architect explaining how 3D printed homes
on Mars and Earth could work.
We have the Red Band trailer for the Grudge.
First We Feast gave us another episode of Gochi Gang,
which I loved, although I do have a Reina Scully bias.
We had Ninja collabing with Bon Appetite.
If you wanna see the full versions
of everything I just shared,
the secret link of the day, really, anything,
all links, as always, are under the description down below.
And then, of course, you're seeing the news today
around President Trump.
And while this first part will not be the focus,
it would be odd if we did not mention or include it.
The House has officially announced two Articles
of Impeachment against President Trump.
The articles will now go to the judiciary committee
for debate and approval before being sent
to the house floor for a full vote.
And if approved, they will be sent to the senate
for the trial portion, which would likely be set in January.
And there, with a republican controlled senate,
and unless something crazy happened,
that's probably where this would end.
Now as far as the articles in question,
notably, this did not include a mention
of obstruction of justice from the Muller Report.
But today, we did see Representative Jerry Nadler,
the chair of the house judiciary committee,
make the announcement.
- The first article is for abuse of power.
It is an impeachable offense for the President
to exercise the powers of his public office
to obtain an improper personal benefit
while ignoring or injuring the national interest.
That is exactly what President Trump did
when he solicited and pressured Ukraine
to interfere in our 2020 presidential election.
And when he was caught, when the house investigated,
and opened an impeachment inquiry,
President Trump engaged in unprecedented,
categorical, and indiscriminate defiance
of the impeachment inquiry.
This gives rise to the second Article of Impeachment,
for obstruction of congress.
- And there, the obstruction of congress
is also somewhat connected to one of the heavy criticisms
from republicans.
We've seen some from the republican side
saying that democrats are moving forward too fast
with the impeachment process
and they should wait to collect more evidence
from material witnesses and relevant documents.
But there, we've seen people
like Representative Adam Schiff,
the chair of the house intelligence committee,
explaining that democrats have tried
to get those witnesses and documents,
but they were unable to because the Trump administration
blocked subpoenaed witnesses from testifying
and refused to hand over documents.
And going on to say that going through the legal process
of trying to get those witnesses and documents
would take months, if not years.
- The argument, why don't you just wait, amounts to this:
why don't you just let him cheat in one more election?
Right, and so for the most part today,
I think all these other places are gonna be running,
understandably, with the two Articles of Impeachment.
But today, for the final story, I really wanted to focus
on the Justice Department inspector general.
There's a lot about this story online
that I've seen misrepresented, whether
it be from regular people or politicians or news outlets.
And so, yeah, let's talk about that.
So the office of inspector general
released a report called:
Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects
of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane Investigation.
It is 476 pages, I will link
to the whole document down below.
99.9% of people that know about the document
will not read it, so let's try and talk about it.
Right, in more plain terms, the real focus of this were,
what are the origins of the 2016 Russia probe?
We've seen Trump and his allies claiming a number of things.
They made accusations that the FBI opened cases
into Trump campaign officials because of political bias
or improper motivation.
However, the inspector general concluded that
it was not influenced by political bias
or improper motivation.
This, regarding George Papadopoulos, Carter Page,
Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn.
Although, as Axios pointed out the inspector general said
that there were significant inaccuracies and omissions
in their surveillance applications used for Page.
And adding,
had FBI officials notified Justice Department leadership
of certain relevant information, inspector general said
it may have undercut the claims supporting probable cause
in Page's application.
Also in the past, we've seen Trump and his allies
claiming that the Steele Dossier,
right, that controversial thing,
that was the reason that the FBI opened its investigation.
It turns out, the inspector general deteremined
that the dossier didn't actually play a role
in the FBI's opening of the investigation,
but as reports pointed out, it did play a, quote,
central and essential role in FBI lawyers' decision
to support the Page surveillance request.
The inspector general essentially concluding
that the FBI didn't do a good enough job
ensuring that Steele's information was accurate.
If you haven't noticed the trend at this point,
I'll make it abundantly clear,
a lot of this boils down to no purposeful wrongdoing
was found based off of political bias
or anything like that.
But, the FBI, and a number of individuals in it,
seem to be incredibly flawed.
We'll continue, there was also a dispute in this.
You know, you've seen Trump and his allies claiming
that Steele is essentially an anti-Trumper.
And according to the inspector general,
Steele disputed a number of things.
One, he defended his report,
saying they were not designed to be finished products.
And two, on the note of bias, he said that if anything,
he was actually favorably disposed towards the Trump family.
This, reportedly, because he had been friendly
with one family member for years,
which ABC News has reported is Ivanka Trump.
Also, regarding surveillance, the inspector general
reportedly found no evidence
that the FBI sought warrants for Manifort or Flynn.
But, while the FBI was interested in obtaining them
for Papadopoulos, ultimately they did not.
Also, in the past, we had seen Trump and allies claiming
that the FBI had placed, essentially,
an informant in their group.
Regarding that, the inspector general's report said
that the FBI did conduct,
quote, several consensually monitored meetings
between FBI confidential humans sources (CHS)
and individuals affiliated with the Trump campaign,
but, adding that those operations received
the necessary approvals under FBI policy.
Going on to say, we found no evidence that the FBI attempted
to place any CHSs within the Trump campaign,
recruit members of the Trump campaign as CHSs,
or task CHSs to report on the Trump campaign.
Which, and this actually kind of goes back
to the accusations of bias,
reportedly, the inspector general's report, quote,
notes that key figures including agents and sources
were actually supportive of Trump.
And there were two key things here.
One, as the Washington Post points out,
one supervisory special agent (SSA) describes
believing a confidential human source's information
because the source was a Trump backer.
With that part of the report reading,
he added that, because the CHS was a Trump supporter,
he was, quote, not worried about the source
trying to provide information
or getting dirty information on Trump.
He said, any suggestion the CHS, quote,
was directed to damage
or investigate the Trump Administration is just absurd.
And two, reportedly, it turns out that not only
was the source a Trump supporter,
so too were the agents involved in cultivating him.
With reports saying, we reviewed the texts
and instant messages sent and received
by the Handling Agent, the co-case Handling Agent,
and the SSA for the CHS,
saying the agent contacted another FBI employee,
saying, if you hear talk of a special prosecutor,
I will volunteer to work on the Clinton Foundation.
That agent also sent out instant messages
stating he was so elated with the election,
compared the election coverage
to watching a Super Bowl comeback.
Also referring to Hillary Clinton as a criminal.
As far as the Handling Agent
and the co-case Handling Agent,
on November 9th they had a text exchange reading,
Trump!
Haha, shit just got real.
Yes it did.
I saw a lot of scared motherfuckers
on my way to work this morning.
Start looking for new jobs fellas, haha, lol.
Right, and all of that was a notable inclusion
since a lot of the way that Donald Trump
has kind of painted this picture
that the FBI was essentially filled with people like,
what, Peter Strzok,
a former senior Counter Intelligence Officer,
and Lisa Page, a former FBI attorney,
who have messaged negative things about Trump.
Although notably, they were found to not have acted
out of bias, nor did they unduly influence the beginning
of this investigation.
Now with all that said, this situation
is not completely over.
I mean that because, one, reportedly,
there's an unnamed FBI lawyer who
is currently under investigation mentioned in the report.
This, reportedly, because he doctored an email
that he sent to a supervisory FBI agent
as they tried to determine whether they needed
to inform a special court overseeing surveillance warrants
that Page had been a US government source in the past.
So, reportedly, the report notes, the information
was not included in the surveillance warrant applications,
but it could have been exculpatory
because some of Page's past contacts with Russians
were approved by the US government.
And two, because after this inspector general report
came out, we saw Attorney General William Barr disagree,
calling the Russia investigation completely baseless.
Saying he doesn't agree
that there was sufficient predication
to open this counter intelligence investigation
into the Trump campaign.
And notably here we also heard from US Attorney John Durham.
He was appointed by Barr
to conduct a parallel investigation,
and he released a statement saying he disagreed
with some of the findings
from this inspector general report.
Saying, our investigation is not limited to developing
from within component parts of the Justice Department.
Based on the evidence collected to date,
and while our investigation is ongoing,
last month we advised the Inspector General
that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions
as to predication and how the FBI case was opened
Right, so likely what we're gonna see
from a number of people who are not happy with this report
is people saying, "Well, let's wait for that one."
Though, I do wanna note here, connected to Barr
who, you've maybe seen headlines,
has said it's possible agents acted in bad faith
in Trump probe.
Following Barr's comments, we saw reports,
is that a group of attorneys
from the conservative group Checks & Balances
have slammed Attorney General William Barr.
With Donald Ayer, a former deputy attorney general,
for deputy solicitor general
and former U.S. attorney, saying,
Bill Barr has grossly mischaracterized
and subverted the findings of the IG investigation report
addressing the FBI investigation
into Russian interference in our 2016 election.
With former associate deputy attorney general Jonathan Rose
saying, the attorney general has returned to his playbook
of distortion and obfuscation
in a transparent effort to undermine the IG's meticulous,
fact-based conclusions.
Also, another part of this story,
and it's a notable reaction and update,
involves current FBI director Christopher Wray,
who, notably, was nominated by President Trump
after he got rid of Comey.
And Wray, while noting that a number of things
in this report are unacceptable.
Right, the report lays out
what they call 17 significant inaccuracies and omissions.
He went on to say, it's important that the inspector general
found that, in this particular instance,
the investigation was opened with appropriate predication
and authorization.
Which, it appeared that Donald Trump was not a fan of,
because this morning he tweeted,
I don't know what report current director of the FBI
Christopher Wray was reading,
but it sure wasn't the one given to me.
With that kind of attitude,
he will never be able to fix the FBI,
which is badly broken
despite having some of the greatest men
and women working there.
And following that, you had a number of people
really focusing on him saying current.
You know, Wray was appointed to a 10 year term,
but technically the president could get rid of him.
Though, a number of experts say
there is political risk there, so would he do it?
Honestly, who knows.
Yeah, with all of that said,
hopefully it gives you a better understanding
of just the weird, all-over-the-place mess
regarding the story.
And of course, with this one,
I would love to know your thoughts
in those comments down below.
And that is where I'm going to end today's show.
And hey, if you like jumping into the news with me,
make sure you hit that like button.
Also, if you're new here,
definitely hit that subscribe button,
tap that bell to turn on notifications
so you don't miss these daily weekday videos.
Also, if you're looking for more to watch after this video,
you can check out a brand new deep dive,
or maybe just missed the last Philip DeFranco show,
you wanna catch up, you can click or tap right there
to watch either of those.
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.