Trump's Deranged Speech To Generals Was Crazy, Hegseth, Hasan Controversy, & Government Shutdown
PDS Published 09/30/2025
-
We’ve gotta dig into this insane speech by Trump and Hegseth that has the military’s top brass rattled.
Because It’s just crazy moment after crazy moment, and it signals what might happen to the country pretty soon.
Right, so you may remember that last week, Defense (or War) Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered hundreds of the military’s top commanders to Marine Corps [core] Base Quantico in Virginia for a speech today, leaving the topic a mystery. [Headline/image]
Which really confused a lot of people, because (1) it’s unclear why he didn’t just do it virtually, which would’ve saved a lot of money and travel time,
And (2) the announcement came very abruptly, with little time to prepare.
But two Pentagon staffers who spoke to The Daily Mail suggested at least one reason for the sudden meeting, and it’s Hegseth’s state of mind.
Right, according to them, he’s been “Crawling out of his skin” in recent weeks out of fear that he’ll be assassinated like Charlie Kirk. [Quote]
With them adding that he’s been erupting in tirades, raging at staffers and obsessing about matters related to his security. [Quote same link, find “raging”]
And one saying, “There’s a manic quality about him. Or let me rephrase, an even more manic quality, which is really saying something.” [Quote same link]
With both sources explaining that they’ve felt an extra duty to temper his abrupt decisions, but that “he takes things personally when challenged - like full-blown tantrums.” [Quote same link]
So whatever happened behind the scenes, Hegseth summoned generals, admirals, officers, pretty much everyone above a certain rank for this meeting, which was already extremely unusual. [Lead B roll into clip]
But then things got even stranger when he opened his mouth. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 13:28 - 13:34] Caption: “To our enemies, FAFO.”
With that acronym apparently meaning “fuck around, find out.”
And that summed up the tone and tenor of this event pretty nicely, because Hegseth came right out of the gate with some very aggressive rhetoric.
[Clip, 11:42 - 12:10] Caption: “to ensure peace, we must prepare for war. From this moment forward the only mission of the newly restored Department of War is this: war fighting. Preparing for war and preparing to win, unrelenting and uncompromising in that pursuit, not because we want war. No one here wants war. But it’s because we love peace.”
With him saying that the United States is the most lethal and effective military power on Earth, but it finds itself in an increasingly dangerous world. [Continue B roll]
And calling this a moment of urgency, saying enemies gather, threats grow. [Continue B roll]
So in terms of concrete changes, he called for increased spending on pretty much everything — troops, weapons, vehicles, AI, you name it.
But he spent the vast majority of his speech arguing that what the military really need is the right people and the right culture.
Which, to him, means de-wokeifying the armed forces. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Same clip, 19:01 - 19:13, 19:40 - 19:42] Caption: “For too long we’ve promoted too many uniformed leaders for the wrong reasons, based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called ‘firsts.’ … We became the woke department.”
With him clarifying that he doesn’t want to kick all women out of the military; he just wants to hold everybody to high, gender-neutral standards, and if a woman can meet that, great; if not, too bad.
And then clarifying again that the military doesn’t actually need new standards; it just needs the hard-nosed culture to enforce existing ones.
This of course as critics counter that there’s no evidence standards have been lowered for women or racial minorities, and if anything the military’s become more effective as it’s become more diverse.
But according to Hegseth’s telling, the U.S. has lost war after war since 1945 because it’s military has become infected with “social justice, politically correct and toxic ideological garbage.” [Lead B roll into clip]
[Same clip, 21:18 - 21:39] Caption: “No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses. No more climate change worship. No more division, distraction or gender delusions. No more debris. As I’ve said before and will say again, we are done with that shit.”
Then, his next target, which he really harped on, was fat people.
[Same clip, 26:33 - 26:46, 27:56 - 28:03, 28:24 - 28:27] Caption: “Frankly, it’s tiring to look out at combat formations or really any formation and see fat troops. Likewise it’s completely unacceptable to see fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon. … This also means grooming standards. No more beards, long hair, superficial individual expression. … We don’t have a military full of Nordic Pagans.”
So to professionalize the “War Department,” he announced directives mandating regular physical fitness tests and grooming standards for almost everybody, even if they’re not in active combat roles.
And then, calling this “liberation day” for the military, he declared that leaders are now free to enforce rigorous standards, whether that means cursing at soldiers or even getting physical with them.
[Same clip, 30:26 - 30:41; 36:01 - 36:17, 36:20 - 36:36] Caption: “That’s why today at my direction we’re undertaking a full review of the department’s definitions of so-called ‘toxic leadership,’ ‘bullying’ and ‘hazing’ to empower leaders to enforce standards without fear of retribution or second-guessing. … We are overhauling an inspector general process, the IG, that has been weaponized, putting complainers, ideologues and poor performers in the driver’s seat. We’re doing the same with the Equal Opportunity and Military Equal Opportunity policies. No more frivolous complaints. No more anonymous complaints. No more repeat complainants. No more smearing reputations. No more endless waiting. No more legal limbo. No more sidetracking careers. No more walking on eggshells.”
So many critics took that as him essentially giving officers a blank check to abuse their subordinates.
This as the Pentagon has long struggled to root out a well-documented culture of racism, sexual assault and even rape.
But Hegseth promised that racism and sexual harassment are still illegal, and will be ruthlessly enforced, with him adding: [Lead B roll into clip]
[Same clip, 36:56 - 37:04] Caption: “But telling someone to shave or to get a haircut or to get in shape or to fix their uniform or to show up on time or to work hard, that’s exactly the kind of discrimination we want.”
He also declared that soldiers are now free to fight the way they need to without bureaucrats tying their hands.
[Same clip, 51:59 - 52:08] Caption: “No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement. Just common sense maximum lethality and authority for war fighters.”
Which, again, critics took as him essentially giving soldiers a blank check to commit war crimes with impunity.
But finally, he claimed to know that the overwhelming majority of people in that room agree with everything he’s saying, and invited anyone who doesn’t to resign.
Which, on that note, he’s already promised to fire 20% of the military’s roughly 800 generals and admirals. [Quote, find “20 percent”]
So understandably, many of those in the room were reportedly afraid that he would sack them right there, though Hegseth didn’t end up doing that.
And throughout the entire speech, the crowd remained almost totally silent and stone-faced, upholding their commitment to be apolitical even in the face of such hyperpartisan comments.
Though behind the scenes, some people were a little more vocal.
With eight current and former officials telling The Washington Post that multiple top officers, including chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine, are privately critical of the new direction Hegseth’s taking the military. [Quote, find “eight”]
With them reportedly taking issue with the new National Defense Strategy, especially how it reorients focus away from foreign threats and toward domestic ones. [Quote same link, find “narrowing”]
As well as alll the partisan language in the document, including direct mentions of Joe Biden. [Quote same link, find “partisan”]
With several sources adding that dissent during the drafting process is normal, but the number of officials concerned, and the depth of their criticism, is unusual. [Quote same link, find “depth”]
But that covers Hegseth’s speech; we still have Trump’s.
And this felt like a relatively low-energy one for him, but it was definitely just as rambling as always.
Right, he talked about naming the Department of War, naming the Gulf of America, supposedly ending all the wars in the world, signing generals’ and admirals’ commissions himself instead of with an autopen, not getting the Nobel Peace Prize, his tariffs, how he won the election, and how he’s mistreated by the press.
But then, the most explosive remarks came when he explained how the military would become “America first.”
[Same clip, 01:58:59 - 01:59:22] Caption: “Only in recent decades did politicians somehow come to believe that our job is to police the far reaches of Kenya and Somalia while America is under invasion from within. We’re under invasion from within, no different than a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways because they don’t wear uniforms.”
With him then making clear who the culprit is for that invasion: the radical left Democrats
Same clip, 02:02:42 - 02:03:00, 02:04:00 - 02:04:13] Caption: “What they’ve done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places. And we’re gonna straighten them out one by one. And this is gonna be a major part for some of the people in this room. It’s a war too. It’s a war from within. … And I told Pete, we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military, national guard but military, because we’re going into Chicago very soon. That’s a big city.”
With him claiming that everybody in these cities loves the military being there, and when they don’t, it’s because they’re paid off by George Soros and others.
-
With how crazy America is right now, are you afraid to go to large events in public?
And connected to that question, we’ve now seen Hasan Piker, Valkyrae, QT Cinderella, and others announce that they’ll be skipping TwitchCon later this month over safety concerns.
And people have some thoughts.
The latest person to drop out is Hasan, who announced he wasn’t going to the event and fleshed out his reasoning during this interaction on stream:
“‘I miss the social Hasan era.’”
“There is unfortunately an obvious setback there because of:
1 -- all the political incidents that have taken place.
And 2 - How those political incidents have had some pretty significant consequences in how much I can go out in the real world and socialize with other people.
As I've already said I’m not going to TwitchCon. Not because I’m worried about my own safety, but I’m worried about the safety of others. I don’t want to put them in the crosshairs of some psycho-freak who decides to go there. I’m very publicly not going to TwitchCon for that reason.” []
And his decision comes after Valkyrae and QTCindrella made it very clear over the last two weeks that they wouldn’t be attending the event.
Their initial thoughts about dodging TwitchCon was on their Wine About It podcast, where they said:
“Can I say something? I’ve been so sad and scared this last week with everything’s that’s been going on for a multitude of reasons that I told QT I’m kinda afraid to go to TwitchCon.”
“Yeah, we’re in a bit of a conundrum with TwitchCon. We may -- listen -- it’s not you it’s us. I’ve told -- we were supposed to do Wine About It live, we love Twitch for supporting our show. I have given them a soft ‘Hey, we’re in a bit of a panic mode right now.”
“Will we ever stop panicking?”
“That’’s the problem”
“I don’t think we will.”
“Becuase I don’t feel… the problem is I don’t -- respectfully I don’t feel irrational. I feel very scared.”
“Yeah, it just takes one person to… you know…”
They then mention Ay-ree Sato, who was a Japanese livestreamer that was stabbed to death in the middle of a stream by someone local media called an “anti-fan.”
Events like that, as well as the killing of Charlie Kirk and politicians, have obviously been at the front of their minds, which led to Valkyrae saying last week:
“I’m just really uncomfortable with the world right now. Just so you know QT and I are not going to TwitchCon anymore. We did back out…”
“But I’m just, I'm just really uncomfortable with the world right now. America is in a weird spot and it’s just I don’t feel safe. I’m just uncomfortable, you know?” @0:32
“I open up, see the news and I’m like ‘holy moly what is happening?’” @0:56
In general there was a sentiment that there’s a big overlap of people who hate-watch steamers and those who are extremely politically active on platforms like Twitter.
Here’s how Pokimane put it last week:
“Here’s the way I view it, especially with all the recent news surrounding Charlie Kirk. And of course a lot of political talk happens on Twitter. And of course also for us -- people like me, Rae, QT, other female streamers -- the people who feel the most negative and most passionately hateful towards us also tend to be on Twitter. And the streaming and Twitter communities have a lot of overlap. And when you see that kind of negativity you’re like, ‘do I want to tell people where I’m going to be in person? I actually don’t know.” Because I don’t… when I look at the replies I think ‘who the hell are you guys even talking to? You guys are not my community. I… how do you even know me? You post a selfie people start losing their shit.” @0:28 - end
And you just need to see the replies to the news that Valkyrae and QT weren’t going to see this overlap.
Right, people posted stuff like:
“Makes sense. Dating Hasan puts a huge target on your back because he supports terrorists and call for violence on others. Twitch should ban him.” []
(That’s in reference to the claims that Valkyrae and Hasan are dating. I don’t care either way if they are, but what matters is the PERCEPTION that they are and it puts her in danger).
Others like the streamer Tectone -- who has recently become extremely vocal about culture and politics -- used the opportunity to push the narrative that all the recent shooters are left-leaning and figures like Hasan are to blame.
Right, in reaction to Hasan dodging TwitchCon he wrote:
“Hasan, you’re the one who’s causing these consequences the most out of any streamer on the platform…” []
“Hasan and people like Hasan have been pushing violent rhetoric and supporting terrorists for years. He knows the dangers he has caused for others. He’s now too afraid to face the very beast he’s created.” []
[[NOTE: This is where I don’t get the argument.
Tectone says that Hasan is afraid of his own fans -- implying they’re the violent shooter types and would target Hasan.
Which is in-line with the right-wing narrative that recent shooters have all been on the left.
But why would a left-wing fan of Hasan want to shoot him?
Not to mention that Hasan is clearly afraid of those on the right who would target him over the claim that he supports terrorism]].
And many mocked the idea that Hasan was comfortable going to protests which inherently have a level of risk and now don’t want to go to TwitchCon.
The counterpoint there is that things have changed dramatically in America since then as well as the fact that Hasan is doing this to protect his fans.
Either way, Twitch is trying to reassure people that the event will be perfectly safe, with CEO Dan Clancy saying on a livestream:
“Just in terms of safety and security at Twitchcon in light of recent events: I want to be very clear, we take security at our events like TwitchCon extremely seriously. Every year we build on TwitchCon’s approach to safety and security, particularly as we’ve become aware of new or emerging safety challenges. We have teams on this year around.”
He went on to add how they limit who can attend and try to force attendees to behave appropriately with agreements in place when you buy a ticket.
But community figures like Asmongold did not buy this because Twitch reportedly failed to protect streamers in the past.
Right, he pointed to an incident last year when the massive streamer N.M.P.LoL was sexually live at the event and wrote:
“Last year, nmplol and wake were sexually assaulted by a streamer and Twitch didn't press charges or pursue any form of legal action against him.
If I was a woman, I would never go to twitchcon.” []
[broll of the incident 0:09-0:16 & 0:20-0:24 and have the tweet on top]
(some pointed out that it’s not Twitch’s job to press charges in that situation, but the point still somewhat stands that there were essentially no repercussions for that person).
With all that said, what do you think?
If you were a public figure at all would you be making appearances at events like TwitchCon?
Or even as a normal, everyday person. Do you feel safe in public?
(You’re a public figure. I’d really, really push for you to give how you feel right now. Especially because like it or not you do cover politics and that puts a spotlight on you).
Go to Plaud AI use code DEFRANCO for 20% off selected products!
-
Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu have agreed on a plan for Gaza.
And if Hamas doesn’t agree, Trump says Israel will have his full support to finish what it started — which, of course, is committing genocide according to many experts.
And with that, Israel is facing growing international condemnation.
Right, Netanyahu arrived in the US a few days ago for a meeting of the United Nations – taking a longer than normal flight to avoid countries that might arrest him for alleged war crimes.
You then had several new countries recognizing Palestinian statehood despite his objection.
And you even had dozens of delegates walking out during his speech – leaving him addressing a mostly empty room (BROLL: 0:48-0:55)
But all that? It’s seemingly meaningless when you’ve then had the American president welcoming him to the White House.
With the two meeting yesterday and Netanyahu agreeing to Trump’s plan to end the war in Gaza – noting that it ”achieves [Israel’s] war aims” – and adding:
"It will bring back to Israel all our hostages, dismantle Hamas' military capabilities, end its political rule, and ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.” (BYTE: 30:22-30:36)
And with that, you had Trump saying that Hamas falling to agree to this deal would mean Israel has his “full backing to finish the job of destroying the threat of Hamas.”
And, of course, that’s something Netanyahu was happy to hear:
“If Hamas rejects your plan, Mr. President, or if they supposedly accept it and then do everything to counter it, then Israel will finish the job by itself,”
“This can be done the easy way or it can be done the hard way, but it will be done.” (BYTE: 34:00-34:23)
But with all that, we should talk about what exactly is in this plan.
Right, it's a 20-point proposal reportedly drawn up by Trump's son-in-law and real estate developer Jared Kushner;
Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff – who also has a background in real estate development;
And former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair – who is perhaps best known internationally as an architect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
And it starts off by declaring that “Gaza will be a deradicalised terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbours” – adding next that “Gaza will be redeveloped for the benefit of the people of Gaza, who have suffered more than enough.”
It goes on to say that both sides agreeing to the proposal would result in an immediate end to the war, the suspension of all military operations, and the freezing of the “battle lines” where they are –
As well as the return of all the remaining hostages living and dead in exchange for Gazans held by Israel.
The plan also notably calls for ensuring humanitarian aid into Gaza, says that Israel will not occupy or annex the territory, and affirms that, quote:
“No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return.”
As far as Hamas? Members who “commit to peaceful co-existence and to decommission their weapons” would be given amnesty and allowed to leave Gaza.
With this being part of a broader disarmament and demilitarization effort that would also have the group agreeing to not have any role in the governance of the territory.
Which, of course, begs the question: who would be in charge?
Well, according to the plan, the Israeli military would gradually withdraw and hand over control to an international peacekeeping force led by Arab countries –
But notably, it would be allowed to maintain “a security perimeter presence that will remain until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.”
And it’s not clear what this perimeter presence would look like or how and when Gaza would be considered “properly secure.”
But in any case, while this peacekeeping force would provide security, Gaza would be governed under “the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee.”
A committee that would be overseen and supervised by the so-called "Board of Peace."
A board that would be headed and chaired by none other than Donald Trump – with Tony Blair also getting a spot.
And notably, according to the plan, it would not only be aimed at creating a system “that serves the people of Gaza” but one that is “conducive to attracting investment.”
And with that, the eleventh point in the twenty-point plan?
“A special economic zone will be established with preferred tariff and access rates to be negotiated with participating countries.”
With the one before that saying:
“A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energise Gaza will be created by convening a panel of experts who have helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East.”
With the plan also noting that “Many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas have been crafted by well-meaning international groups…”
Right, you may remember, we actually talked about one of those proposals which reportedly went around the White House.
It talked about relocating Palestinians and planned to turn the enclave’s western waterfront into a string of resorts called the “Gaza Trump Riviera & Islands” []
But with all that, this board? And this committee? Hypothetically, they would be temporary.
With the plan saying that the Palestinian authority – which is the body overseeing some parts of the West Bank – would not be involved until it has successfully carried out a number of reforms.
With the plan saying that when the reform programme “is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognise as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.” []
And with that, you actually had the Palestinian Authority welcoming what it called Trump’s “sincere and determined efforts” to end the war and affirmed its “confidence in his ability to find a path toward peace.” []
Also claiming that it wanted “a modern, democratic and nonmilitarized Palestinian state.”
And with that noting that it was committed to implementing reforms including updating textbooks critics argue demonize Israel;
abolishing payments to families of prisoners and martyrs;
and establishing “a unified social welfare system subject to international auditing.” []
But notably, there, you’ve already had Netanyahu saying he views the idea of these reforms being carried out successfully as an almost impossibility – with some arguing that he may see this as kind of a loophole.
And then, on top of that, he has also already straight-up rejected the idea that this plan could ever lead to a Palestinian state – despite it putting it forward as a possibility. . .
With him claiming today he has “absolutely” not agreed to that and adding:
“...we did say one thing – that we would forcibly resist a Palestinian state." []
And with that, you have one political scientist at Hebrew University in Jerusalem explaining:
“There is a lot of gray area in the deal and this is how Netanyahu wanted it.”
“He can tell the right wing he will never [fully withdraw], and he can show Hamas is the one saying no and he can continue the war.” []
You also had the Israeli opposition leader saying he supported the plan but is worried that there were “holes” that could be exploited to keep fighting, saying:
“Netanyahu is a seasoned and exhausting expert in saying ‘yes, but.’”
“Usually he says the ‘yes’ in Washington, standing in front of cameras at the White House, feeling like a groundbreaking statesman, and the ‘but’ when he returns home and the ‘base’ reminds him who’s boss.” []
And with all of that, of course, the question remains…is there any chance of Hamas actually agreeing?
Right, because it’s the type of plan Hamas has said in the past it would never be on board for.
But the group has now reportedly told mediators they will review it "in good faith" and there’s some who say the pressure is so high now there’s a chance.
Though, notably, even if they do agree, there’s still a lot that’s unclear with this plan – and ironing out the details would likely require further talks.
And any holdup would potentially be used by Israel to argue that Hamas is not cooperating and that it has no choice but to continue the war.
So we’ll see what happens but that’s where we’re at right now.
-
By the time you see this, the government may have shut down.
Right, Congress has until midnight tonight to reach a deal on a spending bill to fund the government and avoid a shutdown.
But with just hours to go, as of recording, neither side has budged from their demands, and all signs are pointing to a shutdown.
Right, the Republican majority has been pushing a short-term stopgap bill that would extend the current funding levels through November 21, giving lawmakers more time to hash out a long-term agreement.
And that proposal did successfully pass in the House a few weeks ago, with only one Democrat joining Republicans.
But the narrow Republican majority in the Senate has been unable to break the 60-vote filibuster, with Democrats there successfully blocking that legislation from passing earlier this month.
And specifically, Democratic leaders have said they will not sign on to any legislation unless it extends key Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire soon and reverses Medicaid cuts made under Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill.
With the party claiming that if their demands are not addressed, 15 million people could lose their health coverage, and 24 million could see their insurance premiums increase by 75%.
But Republican leaders have refused to make any concessions, arguing that the healthcare demands are just a matter of policy.
Now, notably here, some key GOP negotiators have said they would be willing to discuss subsidy extensions — but only if Democrats agree to pass the stopgap bill first.
But 1) it’s very unlikely that the party will want to repeal the Medicaid cuts they just enacted.
And 2) Democratic leaders have said that they don’t trust Republicans to honor a spoken agreement to hold future negotiations on healthcare issues in exchange for passing the stopgap bill.
Right, they want their demands written into the spending package, and by agreeing to the stopgap bill without that, they would be giving up key negotiating leverage.
With Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer explaining:
“We think when they say ‘later,’ they mean ‘never.’ We have to do it now.” (11:58-12:03)
So with both sides at a stalemate, we saw Trump holding a last-minute meeting with party leaders yesterday.
A move that notably comes after Trump canceled a similar meeting with Democratic leadership last week, claiming that their demands were “unserious and ridiculous.”
But, as you could probably guess, that meeting did not produce any results, and leaders on both sides left the White House blaming each other for what seems like an inevitable government shutdown.
With Schumer accusing Republicans of punting the healthcare issue and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries telling reporters:
“[If] the government shuts down, it's because Republicans have decided to shut the government down and hurt the American people.” (5:27-5:34)
But, on the other side, we saw Republicans accusing Democrats of holding the government “hostage” over an unrelated policy matter that the GOP had agreed to discuss if they just passed the stopgap.
And meanwhile, we also saw Trump painting a different picture, telling reporters:
REPORTER: “If there is a shutdown, how many federal workers do you plan to lay off?”
TRUMP: “Well, we may do a lot, and that's only because of the Democrats... They want to be able to take care of people that have come into our country illegally.” 00:01 - 00:12
“But our country can’t handle people that come into our country illegally, and they want to give them full healthcare benefits.” 00:20 - 00:27
Right, Trump’s claim about Democrats trying to give healthcare benefits to illegal immigrants — it’s actually a narrative that has been pushed by top GOP leaders, including Vice President Vance and House Speaker Mike Johnson.
But Democrats and experts say that it is a false claim.
Right, illegal immigrants are banned from buying health care plans on government exchanges and thus receiving Obamacare subsidies.
And they are also ineligible for Medicaid, Medicare, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
But Democrats’ budget proposal doesn’t change any of that — all it does is restore Obamacare subsidies to certain groups of “lawfully present” immigrants who used to receive those benefits but were cut off under the BBB.
But, despite that, we’ve seen Republicans running with the false claims, and Trump taking it even further yesterday by sharing an absolutely WILD AI-generated video of Schumer and Jeffries that has been widely criticized as being racist.
Right, and that deepfake video depicts Schumer and Jeffries — who has a sombrero and a mustache — giving a fake press conference after their meeting with Trump, while Mariachi music plays in the background:
“Look, guys, there’s no way to sugarcoat it. Nobody likes Democrats anymore. We have no voters left because of all of our woke, trans bullshit. Not even Black people want to vote for us anymore. Even Latinos hate us. So we need new voters. And if we give all these illegal aliens free healthcare, we might be able to get them on our side so they can vote for us. They can’t even speak English, so they won’t realize we’re just a bunch of woke pieces of shit, you know? At least for a while, until they learn English and they realize they hate us too.” 00:01 - 00:33
And, unsurprisingly, that got a ton of backlash, with many people saying it was offensive and that it’s just insane for the president of the United States to be posting this kind of deepfake content of Congressional leaders.
And you also had the leaders themselves hitting back, with Schumer writing on X:
“If you think your shutdown is a joke, it just proves what we all know: You can’t negotiate. You can only throw tantrums.” []
With Jeffries also posting, “Bigotry will get you nowhere,” and adding that the Democrats “are NOT backing down.”
But, as far as what happens next, the Senate is set to vote again at some point this afternoon on each party’s spending proposals.
But unless there is some last-minute dramatic change, both are expected to fail.
And if the government does shut down, there could be some insanely consequential and lasting impacts.
Right, as we talked about last week, typically during shutdowns, non-essential government employees are furloughed on temporary, unpaid leave, and then given back pay when the shutdown ends.
But Trump and his administration have said that they would use a shutdown to fire — not furlough — thousands of government workers.
Now, that said, not every agency will be impacted, and many employees will be forced to continue working through the shutdown without pay until Congress can agree to a deal.
With that including active duty service members, people who work in immigration and drug enforcement, Secret Service employees, air traffic controllers, and TSA workers, among others.
And as for how every day Americans like you and me will be impacted, the shutdown will NOT affect essential services like mail delivery or social safety net benefits like Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.
Though some services around those benefits could be disrupted, such as if someone needs a new Social Security or Medicaid card.
But there are some incredibly important government agencies that are running low on funds, and their operations could be seriously impacted if the shutdown lasts for a long time.
With this including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children — or WIC — which reportedly doesn’t have enough funding left to accept new applicants starting tomorrow.
And experts say that if the shutdown goes for even a week, families already enrolled will be at risk too.
And while the broader food stamps program won’t be affected immediately, there could be disruptions if a shutdown drags on.
Additionally, while FEMA employees will largely be available for any emergencies or disasters, there are concerns about funding sources that could impact disaster relief reimbursements to states.
And then, of course, there are the economic impacts of a government shutdown.
Right, that’s also something we dove into last week, but all you really need to know is that government shutdowns — yeah, turns out they’re not super great for the economy, especially if they go on for a while.
And that’s actually notable here because the longest partial shutdown the country has EVER had was during the last Trump administration.
With that one beginning just before Christmas in 2018 and ending in late January 2019, setting a record for 34 full days.
And right now, we really have no fucking clue how long this standoff between Democrats and Republicans will last.
Go to Quo to get 20% off your first 6 months.
-
The big thing about Tilly, though, she’s not real: she’s AI.
She was introduced to the industry over the weekend during the Zurich Film Festival by her creator, Eline (eh-leen) Van Der Velden.
Right, Eh-leen is a Dutch actress and producer based out of London who started an AI production company called Particle6, which now has a spinoff AI talent studio that created Tilly.
And she recently explained that earlier this year, while trying to pitch Tilly:
"We were in a lot of boardrooms around February time, and everyone was like, ‘No, this is nothing. It’s not going to happen’. Then, by May, people were like, ‘We need to do something with you guys.’ When we first launched Tilly, people were like, ‘What’s that?’, and now we’re going to be announcing which agency is going to be representing her in the next few months.”
And she also previously said that she wants Tilly to be the next Scarlett Johansson or Natalie Portman.
According to Deadline, the studio who made her creates AI characters that:
“are developed with complete backstories, distinct voices, evolving narrative arcs and fully realized personalities.”
They can apparently engage in unscripted conversations, do monologues, and respond in real time to adapt to different audiences.
On Tilly’s Instagram you can see her doing screen tests, action sequences, and even parodying the Sydney Sweeney jeans video.
And in July, she posted that she landed her first “role” in a comedy sketch, but that sketch is really just a fully AI-generated comedic ad about using AI to develop television, where part of the plot is execs deciding to cast Tilly.
“Tilly Norwood! 100% AI-generated by some company called Particle 6! She’ll do anything I say, I’m already in love. Girl nextdoor vibes.” (1:23-1:33)
And as you can imagine, there is a ton of backlash to her existence, especially the fact that she could get representation, with actors saying things like:
“Hope all the actors repped by the agent that does this drop their a$$. How gross, read the room.”[]
“And what about the hundreds of living young women whose faces were composited together to make her? You couldn’t hire any of them?”
Many also saying that they are:
“not surprised that the first major ‘AI actor’ is a young woman that they can fully control and make do whatever they want.”
Right, with people adding:
“Ravaging our ecosystem to build a girl who can't age or say no.”
“tech guys love to be like "AI is a powerful tool that allows us to create anything we want" and the "anything" is a teenage girl.”][
And as all this criticism has built up, this morning, SAG, the actors union, ended up condemning Tilly, saying that the guild is opposed to human performers being replaced by synthetic ones, and adding:[]
“To be clear, “Tilly Norwood” is not an actor, it’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers — without permission or compensation. It has no life experience to draw from, no emotion and, from what we’ve seen, audiences aren’t interested in watching computer-generated content untethered from the human experience. It doesn’t solve any “problem” — it creates the problem of using stolen performances to put actors out of work, jeopardizing performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry.”
And this is not too surprising to hear the union say this, right, one of the major issues during the recent actors strike was AI protections.
But Eh-leen, her creator, has already addressed some of this backlash, taking to Tilly’s Instagram to publish a statement saying:[]
“She is not a replacement for a human being, but a creative work - a piece of art. Like many forms of art before her, she sparks conversation, and that in itself shows the power of creativity.”
“I see Al not as a replacement for people, but as a new tool - a new paintbrush. Just as animation, puppetry, or CGI opened fresh possibilities without taking away from live acting, Al offers another way to imagine and build stories.”
“She represents experimentation, not substitution. Much of my work has always been about holding up a mirror to society through satire, and this is no different.”
And so while she did say over the weekend that many companies were quietly embracing AI and that major projects were soon to be announced, we will have to see if this backlash changes anything.[]
But I would of course love to hear your thoughts, right, would you watch a show or movie starring Tilly? Or would that be an automatic dealbreaker for you?
-
were soon to be announced. So then from that, I have one final thing today. I'm very excited about it, and that is that I want to announce that I'm
launching a brand new podcast with Alex Pearlman called Crashing Out. It's a once a week Wednesday podcast on YouTube, Spotify and Apple.
The Philip DeFranco show is 90% news and 10% reactions and opinion. This is kind of the flip of that going back and forth.
That new friend in the space about the state of the world and the last week of news. And I recently had Alex on as a guest for my In Good Faith podcast.
I had such a great time. I was like, let's do this every week. We actually just finished recording the first episode. It comes out tomorrow morning, so one definitely go subscribe to that channel.
It's the top link in the description, top link in the comment section two here's a small taste. Let's talk about the Saudis who
oh. What do you want to say about the Saudis? Those those the people that are actually sponsoring today's show?
Oh, no. The Saudis have bought this show as well. Is already sponsor. Yeah, yeah.
Opening sponsor. We already immediately been. Guys, Riyadh season is here. And make sure that you hop on a plane directly over there
where you can have a great time. You can see such comedians as guy who said he can say whatever he wants
and no one can stop him. And, dude who is just facing a lot of charges.
So off it, it seems like he doesn't know what is actually happening, or in that case, maybe real. I think I think the thing is, I think he's such a liar
that he believes his own lies. And when you start stacking them on top of each other,
it ends up becoming like an aura. Boras of lies, right? So, like, inside of these different things, like there's the med bed thing is crazy.
I'm so I, I'm, I this one, this is going to be one of the the real the I know they're real Alex.
But he was a video of himself like, everybody's obsessing about the fact that he shared that he shared a video about a conspiracy theory called Med Beds.
And for your listeners who didn't watch your show from Monday where you covered this? Because I did. I watched your show.
And because I enjoy I enjoy that Franco show guy. It's like. And subscribe and make sure you follow Phil wherever he is on YouTube.
But he the, the med bag conspiracy theory, that's one thing.
Yeah, and that's crazy. If a normal politician. Right. If a normal congressman, if a normal governor shared a med bed video.
Okay. But we're we're we're glossing over the fact that there was an AI video of Donald Trump himself
saying med beds are good and real, and that he has signed legislation giving everybody med bed tickets or whatever it was.
And then his daughter in law is in the video, and he was just like, I guess I did that. That sounds like a thing I do.
I sound like a good president. What a time. And he just hit like he was.
He just hit send. And like the question I keep having between this and then last night with the Charlotte with the Chuck Schumer,
oh yeah, the Chuck Schumer Hakeem Jeffries sombrero video.
Where the where are these coming from? And well, that it brings us to the end of this video. You've also got more click away.
Got my brand new In Good Faith podcast with Tim Miller. Fantastic episode. You've also got the newest episode of The Philip DeFranco show you haven't watched yet right here.
And or if you want to subscribe to the new channel, our first video is going out tomorrow, my new podcast with Alex Pearlman crashing out.
You can subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, and Spotify links in the description down below. I think this is just how I make new friends now.
I just do podcasts, but it is a good one. I think you'll love it. Definitely subscribe. That said, thank you for watching.
I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.
