Fact or Fiction? Kenan Thompson's Project 2025 Speech DNC 2024 Fact-Checked by A.I.

Alright Alright Alright What's up DNC? Alright y'all remember this big old book from before, when Colorado Governor Jerry Poland ripped  the page out of it. This is project 2025, the Republican blueprint for a second Trump term. It is a Yeah, yeah BOOOOO. It is  a real document that you can read   for yourself at Kamala Harris dot  com, forward slash project 2025. You ever seen a document that could kill a  small animal and democracy at the same time? You know how, when you download an app and there  are hundreds of pages there that you don't read,   it's just the terms and conditions,  and you just click agree, right? Well,   these are the terms and conditions of a  second Trump presidency. You vote for him.   You vote for all of this. Let's take a look. All right, we got Matt here with  us tonight. Is Matt here. Hey,   there. He is Matt. How are you, sir? All right, Matt, now, Matt, I understand  that you work as an AV tech in Nevada. Oh, I don't know if we can  hear Matt. Can we hear Matt? So who's gonna fix it. Keep speaking, Matt, so we can hear you.  I guess we're going to move on from Matt. And this is Becky. Becky, can we hear you? Hi Kenan and yeah great to be hear. Thank you. All right, good. now, Becky, you're married, correct? I am me and  my wife have been together for about eight years. Oh, that's amazing. Very, very cute. Thanks But I have got some bad news for you I hate that on page 584, Project 2025, calls for the  elimination of protections for   LGBTQ plus Americans. (Crowd Booing) He said on page 584,   Project 2025 calls for the elimination  of protections of LGBTQ plus Americans. So what we're going to do is  we're going to go to page 584, and this is from their actual website. The Link was on Kamala's page that ends  up sending you over to this page. So 584 Okay, so this is page 584 what we're going to do is we're  going to copy all of Page 584 Okay, so you copy page 584, thank you for sharing the content from the paper.  It appears to discuss several important points   related to discrimination and regulatory policies.  Let's break down some key aspects rescinding EO,   11246, the paper suggests that the  President should eliminate the Office of   Federal Contract Compliance Programs OFCCP  by rescinding Executive Order, 11246, EO,   11246, federal contractors would still be  bound by statutory non discrimination law,   but would no longer operate under overlapping  regulatory regimes. Contractors remaining   obligations under the Rehabilitation Act and the  Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act   (VEVRAA) could be enforced by other agencies such  as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,   EEOC or the Department of Labor DOL, sex  discrimination and Bostock versus Clayton   County, the paper highlights the expansion of sex  discrimination definitions based on The Supreme   Court's decision in Bostock versus Clayton  County, Bostock held that firing someone for   being homosexual or transgender violates Title VII  prohibition against sex discrimination. However,   the court's ruling specifically addressed hiring  and firing none other title seven issues like   bathrooms, locker rooms or dress codes, the paper  suggests restricting Bostock application to sexual   orientation and transgender status in hiring and  firing contexts. Withdrawal of unlawful notices   and guidance. The president should direct agencies  to withdraw unlawful notices and guidance's that   broadly apply Bostock reasoning beyond hiring  and firing, this would clarify the scope of sex   discrimination protections. Rescinding regulations  on sexual orientation and gender identity,   the paper recommends rescinding regulations  that interpret sex discrimination provisions   as prohibiting discrimination based on sexual  orientation, gender identity, transgender status   and sex characteristics. Overall, the paper  seems to advocate for streamlining regulations,   clarifying legal interpretations and ensuring  consistency in enforcing nondiscrimination   laws. If you have any specific questions  related to this content, feel free to ask. Okay, so Keenan said it calls for the  elimination of protections for LBGT. So now what we're going to do is   we're going to say, Does this information on page 584 call for   the elimination of protections for  LBGTQ plus Americans, Question Mark. The information on page 584 does not  explicitly call for the elimination   of protections for LGBTQ plus Americans.  Instead, it discusses regulatory policies,   the scope of sex discrimination  and potential changes to existing   rules. If you have further questions or  need clarification, feel free to ask. Okay, so that would be false. Let's go back. So, yes, right back to the Stone Age.  I'm afraid. That's terrible. Yeah,   it is. Thank you, Becky, for being here and  making that wonderful. point. All right, next up