♪ Welcome to the Philip DeFranco show ♪
♪ The show that is the best show ♪
♪ That's not really a show ♪
♪ But it's me talking to a camera ♪
♪ For 15 to 24 minutes ♪
♪ Yeah, yeah ♪
- 'Sup you beautiful bastard,
hope you've had a fantastic Thursday,
welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show.
Buckle up, hit that like button,
and let's just jump into it.
And the first thing we're gonna talk about today
is in very interesting entertainment and business news.
Let's talk about Zendaya.
And the reason for that is the news has now come out
that she actually filmed a movie during quarantine,
and this could actually be a big deal for the film industry.
Since March, when lockdowns began,
we saw productions on pretty much every film
and TV show just shut down,
leaving future and planned projects
in this kind of wonky limbo.
We started seeing headlines
that Hollywood could actually be losing $20 billion
due to Coronavirus delays.
And with all of this, one of the many projects
that had to stop was the filming of
season two of "Euphoria."
It's that fantastic show led by Zendaya on HBO,
it left the cast, the crew with nothing to do or work on,
so according to Deadline, one night during the quarantine,
she calls up the show's creator, Sam Levinson,
and asks him if he could write
and direct a movie during quarantine.
Just six days later, he churns out a script
called "Malcolm and Marie," he casts John David Washington
as Zendaya's co-star, shooting began on June 17th,
it was completed as of July 2nd,
the public then starts learning about this
thanks to a report from Deadline,
as well as the photo from Zendaya
posted yesterday from the film.
With all this, while there have been kind of
rumors and rumblings about what this movie is,
that's not the main interesting thing here.
The interesting part here is how they managed
to shoot an entire movie during Coronavirus lockdown.
Because there's been this big question for Hollywood
of "How do we actually get back to work?"
Especially because, as of recording this video,
we are seeing the number of Coronavirus cases
in the country continue to rise.
So how do you do it while trying to remain safe?
And so this movie may actually be the example.
According to reports, they worked with doctors,
lawyers, and film unions to make sure
that they were meeting safety requirements,
they found a location called the Caterpillar House
in Monterey County, California,
where, according the Deadline, it was legal to shoot
on private property, and that house sat on 33 acres of land,
which was important because it gave distance
between the cast, and the crew, and the outside world.
With the cast and crew going up to Monterey,
and then doing a two-week quarantine before shooting began.
And reportedly, during those two weeks,
everyone wore masks, social distanced
at individual dwellings, rehearsed in the parking lot,
ate in designated spots with food
only prepared by chefs who also quarantined,
and no one was allowed off property.
There were also several other rules as well,
such as no more than one person in a room at a time
unless people had been quarantining together,
no food delivery, no physical contact,
cast and crew were also tested for the virus
at the beginning and the end of quarantine,
and also, another major part of this
was having a fairly small crew.
Reportedly, no more than 12 people
were allowed on a set at a time
and the crew had to wear PPE
before coming into contact with the actors,
and there's more, I'll link to it down below.
It's all incredibly interesting.
The situation is very much gonna be
looked at as a test case.
I mean, hell, according to the Hollywood Reporter,
production last quarter fell by 97.8%
compared to the same time last year.
It's almost a full stop, so obviously,
studios are gonna be doing everything possible
to try to get back to filming.
That's why you're seeing things on different projects,
announcements like Universal will be spending $5 million
on COVID-19 safety, that to get Jurassic World Dominion
back in production in the UK,
but also, especially in the United States,
you have a lot of people wondering,
is that going to be possible because of these spikes?
That's why you have people like Christopher Miller,
a writer and producer behind things like
"Lego Movie" and "Spider-man: Into the Spiderverse"
tweeting, "There are a bunch of movies and shows
"that are hoping to start production soon,
"including some of ours, but they won't be able to go
"if the COVID numbers keep rising,
"so if you want fresh new content,
"please wear a damn mask and help stop the spread!"
But also, because the spike in the United States is unique,
we have Variety reporting that a number of projects
are looking to relocate.
But also, depending on a number of factors per project
that can prove to be a challenging move as well,
but ultimately, that's where we are with this.
It is gonna be interesting to see what happens
with the test case that is "Malcolm and Marie."
Does it become part of the new normal
for Hollywood kind of kicking things back up?
But from that, I want to share some stuff I love today
in Today In Awesome, brought to you by nordvpn.com/phil.
Whether you're working from home right now,
or you're taking advantage of those streaming services
to decompress and escape the world for a little while,
you are not alone.
We've all increased our internet usage
over these last few months,
but if you're online without a VPN,
you should probably fix that.
NordVPN makes it easy and affordable
to protect you and you connected devices.
And actually, not only do they provide security
and privacy, they can also help keep you entertained,
and that's because streaming services like Disney+,
Amazon Prime, Netflix, they host different
content libraries based on country.
But, with NordVPN, you can actually
unlock those content libraries by just
choosing a server in the country that has the show
or the movie that you want.
So you set it, boom, you get it.
But, main thing, to protect your devices
and stream from anywhere today,
head on over to nordvpn.com/phil
and use code "PHIL" to get 70% off
a two-year plan and an extra month for free.
And the first bit of awesome today
is we had Bill Nye spittin' facts,
then we got an episode of Happier Hour,
featuring Hassan Minhaj and Maiteryi Ramakrishnan,
then we got a teaser for the new Hulu series, "Woke,"
featuring Lamorne Morris, easily one of the most
underappreciated people on "New Girl,"
then, this is probably just for me,
we got a dermatologist's entire routine
from waking up to skin care,
then we had Billy Eichner's guest host monologue
on "Jimmy Kimmel Live,"
we got Eric Andre on "Hot Ones,"
we got a peek at combat training for "the Old Guard."
If you want to 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, it's been one of the themes of the week,
let's talk about the Supreme Court once again.
And part of the reason we're talking about this today
is the Supreme Court has dealt a massive blow
to Donald Trump, ruling that he cannot
block his tax records from being released to a grand jury,
at least with his current defense,
and that ruling came in not five to four,
but actually seven to two, with both Trump appointees,
Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh siding with the majority,
which we actually have a clip of that announcement.
(crowd cheering)
(crowd drowning out announcer)
I don't think that was the right clip.
But look, this is a massive deal.
Trump's tax returns, what they contain,
whether they could even be released,
all of that has been at the center of a massive debate,
really since Trump was even just
a candidate running for office.
With him winning it also becoming one of the most
anticipated and detailed rulings
on presidential privilege in decades.
So, some background here for those who aren't familiar
or maybe just forgot some of the important details.
Today's ruling actually concerns two cases,
and both of them have different outcomes,
so keep that in mind.
The first of the two is a subpoena brought by
Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr.,
in there, Vance is seeking 10 years of documents
as part of a criminal investigation
into potential state tax law violations
by Trump prior to his presidency.
Notably, that investigation includes
looking into hush money paid to adult film star
Stephanie Clifford, AKA Stormy Daniels
during Trump's campaign run,
and whether that hush money violated New York state law
if it were filed as a false business record.
And then the second case here
was brought by three different house committees,
with those committees subpoenaing a sweeping array
of Trump's personal and business records,
also prior to his time in the White House,
including bank statements, engagement letters,
personal checks, loan applications, and tax returns.
And here, those committees have justified the subpoenas
by arguing that the information in them
is critical to drafting federal ethics
and anti-corruption laws involving presidents.
One of the big concerns here is whether Trump has
business deals with Russia, which would be
a major conflict of interest, and what some have argued
would explain some of his actions,
or at times, inaction.
Now, it is also important to know
that Trump himself was never personally subpoenaed,
with both Vance and these house committees
actually sending those subpoenas to Trump's personal
accounting firm, as well as three financial institutions
used by him and his business,
but nonetheless, we saw Trump filing lawsuits
against both sets of subpoenas,
trying to block those institutions from having to comply.
Trump also claiming, while president,
that he had absolute immunity from being subpoenaed
or being a subject of a criminal investigation.
Also, with this situation, one of the things
important to point out here is that
Trump didn't just lose in the Supreme Court today,
this hasn't been a back and forth issue,
he has lost in every single level of federal court
all the way up to the Supreme Court.
And notably, he's also the only president in modern history
to not publicly release his tax returns
or divest from major business interests while in office.
Now, regarding this latest court decision,
the Supreme Court actually heard oral arguments
all the way back in May,
and with both of these cases, it seemed like the Justices
were concerned about the potential for presidents
to face harassment from subpoenas.
However, they were also skeptical of
Trump's absolute immunity claim,
which, actually, today, regarding that,
we saw Chief Justice John Roberts
writing in the majority opinion,
"Two hundred years ago, a great jurist of our Court
"established that no citizen, not even the President,
"is categorically above the common duty
"to produce evidence when called upon
"in a criminal proceeding.
"We reaffirm that principle today
"and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune
"from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers
"nor entitled to a heightened standard of need."
But also, very notably, the Justices
didn't actually make a ruling on the case
involving subpoenas from the House of Representatives.
Instead, there, they said that neither side
had put forward a compelling analysis
of how to balance congressional subpoenas
with the separation of powers,
with them sending that case back
to the lower courts for review.
With Chief Justice Roberts writing,
"The House's approach would leave essentially no limits
"on the congressional power to subpoena
"the President's personal records.
"A limitless subpoena power could transform
"the established practice of the political branches
"and allow Congress to aggrandize itself
"at the President's expense."
So Roberts here is saying that the power
for Congress to subpoena the President
isn't off the table, but that the specific way
in which the House wanted to go about doing so
would essentially open up a power vacuum.
What I will say is following this ruling coming out,
we got an unexpected reaction from Trump,
he seemed actually very understanding.
I'm kidding, have you even been paying attention
the last three and a half years?
Trump went to Twitter,
throwing out some of his fan favorites.
"Presidential harassment,
"political witch hunt,"
Trump also saying, "Courts in the past
"have given 'broad deference', but not me.
"The Supreme Court gives a delay ruling
"that they would never have given for another President.
"This is about prosecutorial misconduct."
But, on the other side of this,
we saw Vance calling the ruling,
"A tremendous victory for our nation's system of justice
"and its founding principle that no one,
"not even a president, is above the law."
We've also seen Senate minority leader,
Chuck Schumer issuing a statement saying,
"No matter how much he wishes it to be true,
"President Trump is not king.
"In a devastating blow to President Trump
"and his enablers in the Republican party,
"the Supreme Court today upheld a fundamental tenet
"of our democracy that no one is above the law."
Also, responding to the House case
being sent back to the lower courts,
we saw House speaker, Nancy Pelosi saying,
- Careful reading the Supreme Court ruling
related to the President's financial records.
It's not good news for President Trump,
so court has reaffirmed the Congress's authority
to conduct oversight on behalf of the American people.
As it asked for further information from Congress,
Congress's constitutional responsibility
to uncover the truth, specifically related
to the President's Russia connection that he is hiding.
The Congress will continue to conduct oversight
for the people, upholding the separation of powers
that is the genius of our constitution.
We will continue to press our case in the lower courts.
- We also saw Deutsche Bank, one of the banks
holding some of Trump's financial records
saying that it will abide by the US legal process
and the final decision of the courts,
but the big thing here, if you're like,
"Yes, I finally get to see Trump's tax returns!"
Chances are, no, you actually won't.
At least not right now,
or as far as this ruling is concerned.
To be clear, this information would be meant
for the Grand Jury's eyes,
and since Grand Juries operate confidentially,
documents there very rarely leak.
Though, I will say, anything's possible.
We live in unprecedented, especially leaky times.
I also think had the House received those documents,
very likely, that would have gotten out to the public,
which, on the note of that possibility,
right now, it's been pretty much all but guaranteed
that the House will not be able to get Trump's records
ahead of the election.
Though, to jump back, it's also not known
when exactly these documents would be handed over
to the Grand Jury, especially because as SCOTUS noted,
Trump can still fight the release
by raising defenses other than absolute immunity.
Which, I will say, with the Supreme Court,
it feels like more and more,
a lot of their decisions involve,
"You can't do that, but maybe for a different reason."
So regarding that possibility,
you have Axios saying that his lawyers
will now just have to use the same arguments
that they would use for a client who is not the President.
That's also why we've now seen White House Press Secretary
Kayleigh McEnany spinning this as a win for Trump.
This decision by the Supreme Court
only states that the President is not
immune to being subpoenaed,
but it doesn't stop him from challenging
the specifics of each of these cases.
So with all of that said, it's important to remember
that today, overall, is a loss for Trump.
He is still able to buy time.
Now, with all that said, it will be very interesting to see
what updates we get here,
also, I do want to pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts about
the Supreme Court decision here?
Even if we don't get to see those tax records,
are you happy to see that absolute immunity
for a President is getting knocked down?
Does it make you feel like there's almost
checks and balances like we were told
when we were growing up?
But while you maybe answer that,
the last thing that I want to touch on
is something else that the Supreme Court did today.
So over a year ago, back in January of 2019,
we put out a video called
"How a Horrific Murder in Oklahoma
"Might Turn Half The State Into An Indian Reservation,"
and we were like, "this case might be a big deal one day,
"and it's making its way to the Supreme Court,
"so we're keeping an eye out for it."
Well it eventually got deadlocked four-to-four
after Gorsuch had to recuse himself from the case,
but in the meantime, McGirt v. Oklahoma
made its way to the court and had similar circumstances
that would decide the fate of both cases.
And boom, here it is.
Today, in a five-to-four ruling, the Supreme Court ruled
that nearly half of Oklahoma
is a Native American reservation
in the eyes of the criminal justice system.
With the New York Times calling it
"potentially one of the most consequential
"legal victories for Native Americans in decades,"
and noting that it could have far-reaching implications
for the 1.8 million people who live across
what is now deemed "Indian Country."
And the lands included in this conversation
include much of Tulsa, which is
Oklahoma's second biggest city.
And as far as who is the conservative justice
that joined the liberal justices in this five/four decision,
it was not John Roberts, but rather, Trump-appointed
Neil Gorsuch, with Gorsuch writing,
"Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised
"remains an Indian reservation for purposes
"of federal criminal law.
"Because Congress has not said otherwise,
"we hold the government to its word."
Now, on the other side of the Supreme Court,
in the dissenting opinion,
we saw Justice John Roberts write,
"The State's ability to prosecute serious crimes
"will be hobbled and decades of past convictions
"could well be thrown out.
"The decision today creates significant uncertainty
"for the State's continuing authority
"over any area that touches Indian affairs,
"ranging from zoning and taxation
"to family and environmental law."
This ruling is massive for a number of reasons,
including that it prevents the state
from being able to prosecute offenses
in the Creek Nation Reservation
that involve Native Americans.
Though, notably, that does not stop federal authorities.
Also, I mean as far as other impacts we might see,
you saw republican senator, James Linford
issuing a statement saying that he looked forward to
working with the five tribes affected by the ruling
to craft legislation that ensures that the ruling
has a minimal impact on individuals
and businesses throughout Oklahoma.
With republican senator Jim Inhofe saying that
moving forward, the focus will be working with
tribal and state officials to, quote,
"find a workable solution for everyone
"that ensures criminals are prosecuted
"and brought to justice in the most appropriate manner."
But yeah, for now, we have to wait
to see what happens in the State.
Gorsuch did appear optimistic in his opinion,
writing that Oklahoma and its Tribes have proven
they can work successfully together as partners.
With people also noting that the case
didn't change any ownership of land,
it doesn't change the prosecution of non-native Americans,
it's a very specific thing, but we're gonna have to wait
to see what this all actually looks like.
Also, if you want to know how we got to this point,
like I said, I'm gonna link to when we talked about this
last year, back in January, but yeah,
that's where this one ends,
and of course, I'd love to know your thoughts on it.
And the last thing we're gonna talk about today,
I've seen people requesting this,
let's talk about the heartbreaking news around Naya Rivera.
She's a 33 year old actress,
best known for her role on "Glee,"
and reports coming in right now as we're filming
is that she is missing and she is presumed dead.
According to reports, Naya took her four year old toddler
out on a boat in Lake Piru yesterday afternoon,
and about three hours after they left the dock,
someone else on another boat noticed this boat
kind of just drifting, and upon inspection,
finding the four year old alone, sleeping in a life vest,
with reports also going on to say,
"An adult-sized life jacket, presumed to have been Rivera's,
"was discovered on the boat.
"Her identification was also onboard
"and her car was found nearby."
According to authorities,
the four year old is in good health.
Also he reportedly told investigators
that his mother was swimming
but did not come back up to the boat.
Also, according to Ventura County
Sheriff's Department Captain, Eric Buschow,
there's no evidence of foul play,
also adding this may well be a case of drowning.
And as far as where we are with this right now,
the authorities have said this is
a search and recovery effort.
With some reports claiming that she went missing
in water with only five to nine inches of visibility,
with authorities saying the lake is filled
with trees and debris on the bottom,
and right now, according to the Ventura County Sheriff,
there are more than 80 people involved in the search.
That is ultimately where I'm gonna end this story for now
until we know more information.
We're seeing a lot of theories and conjecture popping up,
I do not want to add to that,
so where I'll end this story is just to say
that my heart and my thoughts go out
to Naya's loved ones, her friends, her family, her fans.
This is just a totally unexpected and horrible situation,
and it's what feels like almost a daily reminder
when we look to the news of just,
love who you have while you have them.
You never know what's gonna happen,
a lot of things in this world
are far more fragile than we...
Actually, I think we know.
We try to distract ourselves with the millions of things
that we can put in front of our face,
but it's always there in the back of our head.
I don't know, that's where I'm gonna end this story.
And that heartbreaking and somber note
is actually where I'm going to end today's show.
Though, you know, if there is something
I can tack onto this, when I say,
"Love who you have while you have them,"
of course, the main thing that I'm thinking of
is your family, your friends, stuff like that,
but I actually want to extend that
to you watching right now.
Thank you for being a part of this.
You make me feel less alone in this crazy world
and a lot of you believe in me more than I believe in me.
I'm saying that to you, if you're one of the three people
still here watching at the very end of the video.
You're who I make this show for.
But with that said, thanks for watching,
I love your face, and I'll see you next time.
- I hope you like the video.
Subscribe if you like it.