TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The corrupt establishment is targeting me to maintain their power and control over the American people. They want me to renounce my beliefs, stay silent, and accept a corrupt Election. But I refuse to do that because I love our country too much. They're coming after me because I'm standing up for you, and they'll come after you too.

Host: You mentioned at one point that CDC management actually prevented you from interviewing Conservative leader Pierre Pauli on your show. Can you describe what happened there? Guest: Well we I mean I basically wasn't allowed to pick the phone and and talk to conservatives. I have some g chats here which I just want to you know read you part of this. I'm talking to my senior producer I'm saying okay, you know this is an editorial discussion. Can we get a Conservative perspective on this is essentially what I'm saying. It is a no to the Conservatives I'm told. We can't chase anyone from the entire party. The chase is with P and P. So if power and politics is not able to secure a conservative, or, you know, somebody that presents an alternate perspective, then we are not allowed to. I'm told at one point we're sure that there's a myriad of other types of interesting guests that you can chase outside of the Conservatives. Can I be included on conversations with power and politics? That's not how we work. I say to management by playing petty office politics we feed into Conservative narratives that we have a bias against them. Canada tonight is a melting pot of news of the day and politics and decisions, from it largely impact Canadians. So we need flexibility to to respond to emerging stories. So yes, I wasn't even allowed to pick up the phone and call to request Pierre Pauliev. Host: Look at what happened when I had Melissa Lanceman on my show, right? That I was threatened to be pulled off the air which CBC then said in a news statement they didn't threaten to do that. There are recordings of them trying to do this. Why Guest: I mean there's an effort to essentially, protect those in Ottawa in in terms of their perspectives on these things, in terms of who they want on the show. It should be about you know, we did an interview with Karen Johnson, my cohost on the new podcast I'm doing. She's another former CBC employee that is talking about the toxic culture. She said that she alleges that she was called a brown Barbie, a bimbo, but she says that it's it's a very high school culture. And these are things that this is fine if you if you have hosts doing that it's not fine but it okay but management you are responsible for dealing with that and so if management is not going to do anything, if the President of the CBC is going to come here and expect a tongue lashing and then be able to go back to the CBC and continue to get funding without accountability, these practices will continue. So shame is clearly not enough to get the CBC to a place where they will hold themselves accountable so it's incumbent upon this committee to do that.

I'm willing to collaborate with anyone serious about censoring Americans and pushing a progressive agenda, but the problem is they're just not serious enough. Try to violate our First Amendment rights, and we'll respond by exercising our Second Amendment rights.

Right. It's not illegal to say Charlie deserved to die and you're glad he did. They have a right to say that, but we have a right to fire you. You can't walk into the office and say you're into homicide. You can't work at CNN and tweet, I'm comfortable with cold blooded murder. Speech is free, but you're not free from the consequences. If you're glad Charlie's dead and thought he had it coming, I'm supposed to sit next to you in the break room, you're going to teach my kid at school or serve in government, and I'm supposed to just say, free speech. You're advertising that you're a maniac and that you have no decency, compassion, or humanity. That you're indifferent to death. That makes you a threat. What do we do with beasts? We leave them out in the wild. We're not saying these people should be put in prison. We're saying they're not walking into my office. I don't want to be anywhere near them.

This is, very abrupt. Very abrupt. The discussion centers on jawboning and public pressure: “This is all about jawboning. It's all about public pressure.” “license revocations are extraordinarily rare.” “The threat is not that the FCC's actually going to take away a license. It's about the public noise. It's about the shame and embarrassment.” “Brendan Carr going on podcasts and embarrassing ABC.” “Trump vowed retribution on the campaign trail, and he's getting it.” “For every reaction, there is reaction.” “Stephen Colbert has already been joking about getting hired somewhere else.” “Kimmel will probably end up somewhere else.” “We're gonna see more of that.” Van Jones: “There was nothing hateful about And what was even hateful speech is protected. This is this is not acceptable.” Congressman Garcia: “the idea that someone is gonna get pulled off a news program, off a news a channel that's supposed to be independent, and that ABC is making this decision because of possible political pressure through the president is is both stunning and outrageous.” “This is a red line that has been crossed for our industry, for the First Amendment, for the right of people to speak.” “Here's Jimmy Kimmel.”

I don't care if it's a small business or a large corporation; when the government threatens you, you should take it seriously. Blame the government for the issues we're facing. Those upset about free speech now are just mad they can't control the narrative anymore. For years, they've spread misinformation and now they're worried about others doing the same. It's not about the danger of misinformation; it's about losing control. They were wrong about everything and forced compliance, and now they resent others having the same freedom. It's absurd to pretend their concerns are about safety when it's really about power.

Well, there's free speech, but then there's also hate speech, and woe to those who engage in it because it's a crime. That's a lie, and it's a lie that denies the humanity of the people you're telling it about. And so any attempt to impose hate speech laws in this country, and trust me, there are a lot of people who would like them. There are a lot of people who'd like to codify their own beliefs by punishing those under The US code who disagree with their beliefs. Any attempt to do that is a denial of the humanity of American citizens and cannot be allowed under any circumstances. That's got to be the red line.

"Speaker 0: 'You know, when you look at the conduct that has taken place by Jimmy Kimmel, it appears to be some of the sickest conduct possible.' He notes 'avenues here for the FCC' and says this is not an isolated incident, citing Swalwell's tweet that 'Charlie Kirk's killer was a straight white male from a Republican family that voted for Donald Trump.' He alleges Kimmel 'to play into that narrative that this was somehow a MAGA or Republican motivated person.' He stresses broadcasters 'have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest.' He explains two buckets: 'national programmers' and licensed TV stations, and says 'news distortion' and 'broadcast hoaxes' are prohibitions. Potential actions include 'suspension,' fines, or 'license revocation.' He notes Disney will have a chance to 'put in, their arguments' before a vote."

Imagine if the speaker had pulled Fox News' credentials or told law firms they wouldn't be allowed in government buildings for representing parties upset with the administration's policies. Imagine punishing dissent from the Affordable Care Act or the Iran deal, or ferreting out students protesting the speaker's policies. It's unimaginable that the parties now silent would have tolerated such behavior from the speaker or predecessors. This isn't partisan; it concerns the country's values.

Broadcasters are different than any other form of communication, including here. We're on cable right now. Fox News doesn't have an FCC license. CNN doesn't. ABC, CBS, NBC, those broadcast stations do. with that license comes a unique obligation to operate in the public interest. the FCC walked away from enforcing that public interest obligation. president Trump ran directly at these legacy broadcast outlets, and he exposed them to these market forces. Nexstar, as you noted, stood up and said, look, we have the license, and we don't want to run this anymore. Sinclair did the same thing. So there's more work to go, but I'm very glad to see that America's broadcasters are standing up to serve the interest of their community. We don't just have this progressive foie gras coming out from New York and Hollywood.

I believe in the freedom of speech, even if it means losing advertising dollars. It's acceptable to choose where your ads appear on Twitter, but it's not acceptable to dictate what Twitter will do.

Speaker 0: I began my journey into chronicling the censorship industrial complex. Speaker 1: Some of the most terrifying conversations I've had with some of my dear friends who work inside CIA, and their jobs is to go to other countries, get involved in elections, protests that will help overthrow a regime. It's no secret at this point. The CIA has been doing that for years, for decades. But the most terrifying conversations I've had are the ones where they would look to me and say, my god. Like, the twenty twenty election? We're doing to our people what we do to others. Speaker 2: CIA, the other intelligence agencies were exposed with projects like Operation Mockingbird. Speaker 0: The State Department, USAID, the Central Intelligence Agency went from free speech diplomacy to promoting censorship. Speaker 2: They created, purchased, controlled assets at the New York Times, the Washington Post, all of these top down media structures that used to control the information that Americans got. Speaker 3: I pulled into the driveway, opened up my garage door, these two gentlemen come out of a blue sedan with government license plates. And they came up to me and said, you're mister Solomon? And I said, yes. And they said, you're at the tip of a very large and dangerous iceberg. Speaker 4: Oh, yeah. The the FBI sent agents over to my home to serve a subpoena. They're questioning me about my tweets. How is that not chilling? Speaker 2: Our whole page on Facebook for the world Seventh day Adventist World Church was removed. Speaker 5: The level of censorship that we experienced from publishing this documentary was beyond anything I could have imagined, and we really didn't even understand why. Speaker 3: We are going to win back the White House. The Russian collusion started broken '16. That's where the big lie first erupted. Speaker 6: Russian operatives used social media to rile up the American electorate and boost the candidacy of Donald Trump. Speaker 0: That's why they went after Trump with the Russia gate and with the FBI probes and with the CIA impeachments and things like that. Speaker 3: My FBI sources told me there's nothing there. And I kept wondering to myself, how could it be that something that's not true be taken so seriously and be portrayed as true? Speaker 7: How do you expand sort of top down control in this society? How do we flip? How do we invert America? Speaker 6: The evidence that the Supreme Court recounts is bone chilling. The federal government would call a private media company and say, cancel this speaker or take down this post. Speaker 3: I mean, just think about this. A sitting president of The United States had his Twitter and Facebook accounts frozen. Our founding fathers could not possibly have imagined that. Is there a chance that this documentary will be censored? Speaker 1: I think there's a huge chance this documentary gets censored. Speaker 2: Yeah. So it's interesting when you look at so many of the big censorship cases in The United States involving COVID, Hunter Biden's laptop. They all go back to a common thread. What is that thread? National security. Speaker 0: Google Jigsaw produced world's first AI censorship product. Things the model were trained on, support for Donald Trump, Brexit referendum that the State Department tried very desperately to stop. These are all these sort Speaker 5: of component pieces of what you called the censorship industrial complex. Speaker 3: Censorship Industrial Complex. Censorship Speaker 2: Industrial Complex. Speaker 7: Censorship Industrial Complex. Censorship Industrial Complex. Speaker 1: I've long felt that it was a bubbling god complex.

"there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that ever, and there never will be." "Because if they can tell you what to say, they're telling you what to think, there is nothing they can't do to you because they don't consider you human." "Hate speech, of course, is any speech that the people in power hate, but they don't define it that way." "Any attempt to do that is a denial of the humanity of American citizens and cannot be allowed under any circumstances." "That's got to be the red line." "Because, again, when they can do that, what can't they do?"

"A human being with a soul, a free man, has a right to say what he believes, not to hurt other people, but to express his views." "that thinking that she just articulated on camera there is exactly what got us to a place where some huge and horrifying percentage of young people think it's okay to shoot people you disagree with, to kill Nazis for saying things they don't like." "Well, there's free speech which of course we all acknowledge is important so so important." "But then there's this thing called hate speech." "Hate speech, of course, is any speech that the people in power hate, but they don't define it that way." "They define it as speech that hurts people, speech that is tantamount to violence." "And we punish violence, don't we? Of course, we do."

You can't sue me for criticizing you. The US Constitution protects my right to speak freely. I'm quoting Supreme Court case law that allows for robust debate, even if it's harsh. You can't silence me. If you don't like it, move to Russia. I demand the immediate termination of Dr. Charissa Gibson and the resignation of the school board for unconstitutional censorship. We have the right to critique you in any lawful way. This is America.

"President President Trump ran directly at these legacy broadcast outlets, and he exposed them to these market forces." "It would it was not remotely market market forces. The market was operating before. It was pure government coercion and threats from Brendan Carr and from Donald Trump and the brow beating of corporations who need the FCC's approval for various broadcast licenses and so on to go and do this." "He is openly broadcasting the fact that this was what we call under the First Amendment viewpoint discrimination. He doesn't like what they're saying." "Under the First Amendment to the constitution of The United States, you have the right to engage in speech that is distasteful and offensive and disagreeable to other people."

Speaker 0 thanks people who don't support his show but back his right to share beliefs, naming Shapiro, Clay Travis, Candace Owen s, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz, who 'believe it or not, said something very beautiful on my behalf.' Speaker 1 declares, 'I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said. I am thrilled that he was fired,' then corrects, 'Oh, wait. Not that. The other part.' They warn that if the government bans media for not saying what it likes, 'That will end up bad for conservatives.' Speaker 0 agrees, 'Ted Cruz is right. He's absolutely right,' and muses, 'If Ted Cruz can't speak freely, then he can't cast spells on the Smurfs.' Despite disagreements, they praise those who spoke out against the administration, credit their courage, and urge followers that government cannot be allowed to control what we say on television and that we must stand up to it.

Well, apart from multiple Democrats calling for my ouster, wanting to jail me, strip my companies of government contracts, nationalize them, deport me as an illegal immigrant, and arrest me for supposedly being Putin's best friend, there's been no pressure to shut things down or censor anything. So, besides all that, I'm free to do as I wish.

Imagine if I had pulled Fox News' credentials from the White House press corps. Imagine if I had told law firms representing parties upset with my administration's policies that they would not be allowed into government buildings and would be economically punished for dissenting from the Affordable Care Act or the Iran deal. Imagine if I had tried to ferret out students who protested against my policies. It's unimaginable that the same parties silent now would have tolerated such behavior from me or my predecessors. This is not a partisan issue, but has to do with who we are as a country and what values we stand for.

"Please keep doctor Martin Luther King Junior's name out of your mouths." "How about we'll quote whoever we wanna quote? How about that's my first amendment right? We will quote who we please to quote, and we will continue to speak freely because, yeah, I'm a veteran." "That's the country that I serve. That's a constitution I sworn allegiance to, and that oath has no expiration date." "When I started off in radio, we would get complaints, complaints about words or phrases or crossing the line, ideas, we would offend people." "If somebody complained about something you said, they were always from the religious right that wrote a letter to your program director saying, you need to be canceled." "Now, that sounds quaint and comical now."

in the last twenty four hours, you locked the accounts and shut down the accounts of two guys, Nick Fuentes and Alex Jones. it's better if you unlock those accounts and let the guys be heard. censorship isn't good for America. It's antithetical to our culture. If you tell people they can't speak, that's when they scream. And if you tell people they can't scream, that's when they tear things down. free speech is a precondition for peace. There's a different category of saying that you may demonetize certain people. What I'm talking about is not a legal point. It's just a cultural point. because of who you are, you deserve not to be heard. restore the accounts of those guys, believe me, it will be a down payment on beginning to reunite this country.

Ten years ago, this sounded crazy. Brendan Carr, the chairman of the FCC, telling an American company, we can do this the easy way or the hard way, and that these companies can find ways to change conduct and take action on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead, in addition to being a direct violation of the First Amendment, is not a particularly intelligent threat to make in public. Ted Cruz said he sounded like a mafioso. Although, I don't know. If you wanna hear a mob boss make a threat like that, you have to hide a microphone in a deli and park outside in a van with a tape recorder all night long. This genius said it on a podcast. Brendan Carr is the most embarrassing car Republicans have embraced since this one, and that's saying something. The FCC