reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal lines, which is dangerous for our democracy.

The speaker claims the media covers up violence by Antifa and ignores violence against Trump supporters. The speaker says that after a White House press briefing, they asked assembled journalists why they wouldn't cover violence against Trump supporters or demand that Democratic leaders disavow violence from Antifa, as they demanded of Trump regarding his supporters. The speaker states the journalists laughed at them, which the speaker took as proof that the media laughs at violence against people they don't like.

As a journalist who has covered world leaders, mass murderers, and war zones, the speaker says they have been targeted and falsely accused for almost a decade. They believe the media is in a crisis, facing an age of information warfare where propaganda is the entire battlefield, aided by advanced technology. The speaker contends that journalists betrayed free press principles by attacking one of their own for interviewing the Russian president, and that media companies and journalism schools have failed. Non-profit organizations are allegedly masquerading as non-partisan media watchdogs, acting as political propagandists who crush dissent and free speech. This "cancel culture" is a death sentence enabled by information dominance. The speaker claims that these non-profits are part of a censorship network including government agencies, using deception to mask their actions with goals like preventing misinformation and hate speech. Companies like Facebook, Instagram, and Google have monopoly power, controlling what billions see and hear. The speaker draws a parallel to apartheid South Africa, emphasizing the importance of the First Amendment and warning that the lights of freedom are going out, requiring action to relight them.

Prominent Democrats, including John Kerry, Tim Wallace, and Hillary, are allegedly saying that the First Amendment is a bad thing. These top-level Democrats view the First Amendment as an obstacle. The frequent use of the word "disinformation" is an indication that the speaker believes these individuals are creating disinformation. Those trying to suppress freedom of speech are considered the "bad guys." It is astonishing that this is happening in America in 2024.

My colleagues are trying to undermine and defund the FBI because they are investigating Donald Trump. Attacking the FBI and independent journalists undermines our democracy. By attacking these institutions, they can violate the law without consequences. The credibility of the FBI is being eroded by those on the other side of the aisle, and this needs to stop.

Hundreds of intelligence community members work at social media companies. Mainstream news outlets confirmed my reporting on the laptop story. The censorship was due to the truth being a threat to power. The US government's influence on corporations undermines the first amendment. Our response will determine the future of a free press. Thank you. Translation: Many intelligence community members work at social media companies. News outlets confirmed my reporting on the laptop story. Censorship was due to the truth being a threat. The US government's influence on corporations undermines freedom of speech. Our response will determine the future of a free press. Thank you.

The speaker discusses the role of media corporations in hiding important information and punishing whistleblowers. They argue that true journalists should celebrate those who expose government lies, but instead, media corporations collaborate with the government to keep secrets and punish leakers. The speaker questions how journalists can hide the fact that the US is in a direct hot war with Russia, suggesting that their loyalty lies more with the government than with the American people. They emphasize the importance of defending truth tellers and not abetting lies in a country built on falsehoods.

Thank you, Senator Johnson. It's an honor to discuss media censorship and the First Amendment. We are in a critical moment for free speech in America, facing unprecedented information warfare. Journalists must unite to defend truth and freedom, yet many have failed to support colleagues like Tucker Carlson, who faced unjust attacks for doing his job. Media companies and organizations masquerading as watchdogs are undermining free speech, using taxpayer funds to promote partisan agendas. This censorship is a danger to democracy and free thought. As a journalist with extensive experience, I've faced personal attacks for my work, particularly regarding the Benghazi reporting. It's time to stop allowing taxpayer money to fund these efforts against free expression. We must ensure that the lights of freedom are not extinguished. Thank you.

Over the past decade, I have been targeted for reporting on Benghazi by organizations like Media Matters for America. These groups, funded by taxpayers, aim to censor and intimidate those who speak out. This is a threat to journalists, scientists, and doctors. It's time for us, as the government, to stop funding our own suppression. Thank you.

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.

I have worked in high-profile media roles, faced danger, and been falsely accused. The media faces challenges in the age of information warfare, with censorship and propaganda threatening freedom of speech. Nonprofit organizations act as political propagandists, stifling free thought. Big tech companies wield immense power over what we see and hear. The importance of freedom of speech, especially in the United States, cannot be overstated. The fight for truth and freedom is crucial in the current media landscape.

Prominent Democrats, including John Kerry, Tim Wallace, and Hillary, are allegedly saying that the First Amendment is a bad thing. These top-level Democrats view the First Amendment as an obstacle. The frequent use of the word "disinformation" is an indication that the speaker believes these individuals are creating disinformation. Those trying to suppress freedom of speech are considered the "bad guys." It is astonishing that this is happening in America in 2024.

Speaker 0: Speaker 0 says that the blessing passage being cited is “not what Genesis says,” asserting instead that “it says, I will bless those who bless Abraham,” and that the person referencing it “couldn't even quote the passage properly.” Speaker 0 argues that the authority used to justify a required action is unreliable, describing it as “preposterous” that someone would misquote scripture while claiming it instructs what to do. Speaker 1: Speaker 1 says the “effect” is to “distort American politics” and references the “Russia hysteria of the last administration,” arguing it was wrong and illegal for a foreign government to control American politics. Speaker 1 contrasts that prior agreement with what they describe as current reality, stating that the focus of the national conversation is “this tiny, totally irrelevant little country” with “one great city, Jerusalem,” which Speaker 1 describes as geopolitically irrelevant yet “at the behest of a foreign government.” Speaker 1 claims a foreign leader is “openly saying, you don't agree with us? We're gonna censor you,” and asks how that “can stand.” Speaker 1 further claims that foreign calls for censorship of American citizens are supported by “all those little satellite groups,” naming the ADL and APAC, and that “the congress obeys.” Speaker 1 concludes that this situation “seems to me that's gotta be a red line.”

The speaker claims they are attacked for not believing in democracy, but the most sacred right in the U.S. democracy is the First Amendment. They state that Kamala Harris wants to threaten the power of the government, and there is no First Amendment right to misinformation. The speaker believes big tech silences people, which is a threat to democracy. They want Democrats and Republicans to reject censorship and persuade one another by arguing about ideas. The speaker references yelling fire in a crowded theater as the Supreme Court test. They accuse others of wanting to kick people off Facebook for saying toddlers shouldn't get masks.

That is why we exist, not to knuckle under, not to do what we're told, but to stand up and to say, listen, if you want to pull these licenses, then we're going to go to court and we'll be in the court of public opinion. But you don't get to go on a podcast and set policy for American media, for an American media institution that's been around a lot longer than me, you or Donald Trump. This a red line that has been crossed for our industry, for the First Amendment, for the right of people to speak. There was nothing hateful about And what was even hateful speech is protected. This is this is not acceptable.

Speaker 0 argues that the biblical quotation is being misrepresented, saying that instead of “I will bless those who bless Israel,” the relevant wording is “I will bless those who bless Abraham,” and claims the passage is not even being quoted properly by those using it to justify action. Speaker 1 says the effect is to distort American politics, stating that it was agreed during the “Russia hysteria” of the last administration that it was wrong and illegal for a foreign government to control American politics. They assert that now the national conversation is centered on a “tiny, totally irrelevant” country with “one great city, Jerusalem,” described as geopolitically irrelevant and “at the behest of a foreign government.” Speaker 1 adds that the foreign government is said to be openly threatening censorship of those who disagree—“you don’t agree with us? We’re gonna censor you”—and questions how that can stand. They state that they see a pattern in which small satellite groups, including the ADL and APAC, push the position, and that “the congress obeys.” They conclude that a foreign leader calling for censorship of American citizens, along with related organizational and congressional responses, must be a “red line.”

The speaker expresses frustration with the current state of the country, emphasizing the importance of the First Amendment and defending Donald Trump's right to free speech. They warn that if they are targeted for their beliefs, others will be too, particularly liberal individuals who express their grievances. The speaker urges listeners to consider the sacrifices made by soldiers who fought for the right to use the First Amendment, and criticizes politicians who they believe are influenced by George Soros.

"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."

Thank you, Senator Johnson. It’s an honor to discuss media censorship and the First Amendment. We are in a critical moment for free speech, facing unprecedented information warfare. Journalists must unite to defend the truth, yet many have failed, attacking colleagues like Tucker Carlson for simply doing their jobs. Media companies and organizations masquerading as watchdogs have become tools of censorship, undermining free speech and manipulating narratives. This includes government-funded NGOs that promote partisan agendas while silencing dissent. The power of technology has allowed a few companies to control information, reminiscent of oppressive regimes. We must remember that the First Amendment is foundational to our freedom. If we don’t protect it, we risk losing the light of freedom both here and globally. We, the people, must hold our government accountable and stop funding those who undermine our rights. Thank you.

The speaker believes there have been attacks on the Constitution, particularly the First Amendment, with Democrats claiming it enables disinformation. The speaker argues the First Amendment exists because the founders came from countries where free speech was punished. The speaker asserts the Second Amendment is there to stop tyranny and protect freedom of speech. They have debated this, especially with people in LA who want to take away guns. The speaker asks if anyone can guarantee the U.S. will never have a tyrannical government, and since no one can, people need to keep their guns to prevent it.

The speaker criticizes the media, particularly the CIA's influence on it. They mention specific journalists like Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, Joy Reid, and Sean Hannity, accusing them of lying. The speaker also expresses their belief in the effectiveness of vaccines. They claim that the media's morals and code are a joke and that they will turn on each other when faced with difficulties. The speaker emphasizes their commitment to preventing America from failing and providing better representation. They believe that the media is driven by money and that the country deserves better.

Who raised these people? They weren't part of my middle-class neighborhoods or schools. The America I knew wouldn't laugh at the idea of press members being harmed. It's shocking to see reactions to incidents like an elderly man being attacked or comments about shooting the press met with applause. Where do these attitudes come from? Donald Trump has twisted perspectives so much that brutalization is treated lightly. At rallies, threats against the press are increasing, raising serious security concerns.

Two years ago, we were labeled as bought-off journalists for questioning digital censorship. I was shocked to see my party seemingly endorse censorship. John Kerry even lamented that the First Amendment hinders the government's ability to control information and build consensus, essentially complaining that people choose their own news sources. Building consensus isn't the media's job; it's our job to make governing hard, and many of our allies have already embraced draconian speech laws. The EU's Digital Services Act is the most comprehensive censorship law in a Western democracy. USAID is funding organizations that promote unified messaging and discourage diverse opinions, spending millions of dollars to transform the free press into a consensus machine. You've taken taxpayer money to tell people they're wrong about what they can see, you sold us out.