California Assemblyman Ed Chau (Democrat, Monterey Park) appears to be finally running into opposition over one of the most chilling, anti-speech pieces of recent years. Chau is trying to criminalize “fake news” and in the process would curtail free speech for everyone from parodies to comedies to opinion writers. He is the latest example of how some of the greatest threats to free speech around the Western world today appears to be coming from the left of the political spectrum from speech restrictions on campuses to new criminal laws on inciteful or intimidating speech.
Chau has pulled his bill shortly before a hearing after long ignoring the outcry for civil libertarians that he was threatening core free speech value with his poorly drafted and poorly conceived measure.
Known as the California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act, Chau heralded his efforts as “an important step forward in the fight against ‘fake news’ and deceptive campaign tactics.” The Act would make it “unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on an Internet Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on an Internet Web site, a false or deceptive statement designed to influence” an election. The wording is shockingly broad and ill-defined. It is would impact a great variety of opinions and parodies. What Chau considers “deceptive” or influential on an election is anyone’s guess. Hyperbole could then be prosecuted as well as Onion-like publications.
Surprisingly, Chau is a lawyer who appears to have missed basic constitutional law as a course at Southwestern University School of Law.
As ambiguous as his law may have been, one thing is clear: constituents should think very hard about their decision to return Chau to the state legislature after the introduction of such a dangerous and reckless piece of legislation. Politicians have a host of areas that they can use to pander to voters, but they should at least leave our core freedoms alone. Chau’s “important step forward” was in fact a huge step back to criminalized speech and government enforcement of speech limitations. To proudly proclaim such an anti-speech measure raises serious questions of Chau’s commitment to basic constitutional values.
Easy target to blame it on so let’s try another. In a country where at least half the population or near half has indicated an acceptance of a hall mark of a foriegn political philosophy which is no moral standards needed and anything said in favor of that system is the truth as long as it supports that system and may be changed to a new truth in a moment’s notice.
What else could you expect but a complete lack of morals, values, standards, ethics, judges that over rule juries on a whim. Has nothing to do with any one individudal just the momentary whim of those last gasping a failed foreign ideology.
As you yourself just pointed in and proved. That will hold true until you receive tomorrows version from your programmers at Collective Central.
Don’t trust the media, and certainly don’t trust the government. This doesn’t require legislation of any sort.
The whole Fake News phenomenon stemming from the orange-snowflake in the White House in part has to do with the hardcore base.
Now that the nuts control the asylum, they need a new villain that isn’t the government, as it was the last eight years: so now they divert the rage onto the media.
It’s boring. The government whines about the media to avoid accountability and the media just loves talking about itself endlessly.
The solution is simple: Don’t trust either — which is a motto that should be bipartisan.
The whole Fake News phenomenon stemming from the orange-snowflake in the White House in part has to do with the hardcore base.
Yeah, Trump control Facebook.
Causality is something you just don’t get.
Surprisingly, Chau is a lawyer who appears to have missed basic constitutional law as a course at Southwestern University School of Law.
No. “Constitutional law” is a set of intellectual games which cadres play to get what they want in social policy contra public opinion or the judgments of elected officials. The whole point is to invent some specious reason for something which an appellate judge thinks utile for his purposes. There’s no indication that this man hasn’t got one up his sleeve.
“Utile” is a plus one in the lexicon game!
I am holding out for a “Ukase”, which I will store in an “etape” in Ulan Bator.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I got myself a parrot.
I talk to it. I sit around all day telling my bird “DDT is an idiot”. Now my talking bird repeats it. My bird tells me “DDT is an idiot”. It’s hard to imagine a better life.
When I dream at night, I am so lucky because the only thing I dream about is that “DDT is an idiot”. When I wake up, the first words I hear from my talking bird is “DDT is an idiot”. The words are magical. Hearing “DDT is an idiot” gives me permanent wood. I cancelled my Viagra prescription.
Do you know how wonderful it is to have breakfast and coffee with a talking bird that says “DDT is an idiot”? I’ll say to him, “Bird, is “DDT is an idiot?” Bird responds, “Squawk. “DDT is an idiot.” Seriously, can life possibly get any better than that?
After breakfast I sign on to my computer to come to this blog to make my daily post that “DDT is an idiot”. Dreaming every night that “DDT is an idiot”, typing here every day that “DDT is an idiot”, and teaching my talking bird to say “DDT is an idiot” may seem like a pathetic, psychologically unhinged existence to normal people. But it gives my life meaning.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/nintchdbpict000250343779.jpg?w=960&strip=all
issac – get a high school American civics book and read it. Take the tests. You are behind the curve, dude.
Pets can be very therapeutic.
I’m glad that the attendants allow him a parrot.
tnash – it doesn’t sound like he is getting any professional help. Sadly, the parrot only reinforces his bigotry.
If Trump is an idiot, what does that make the Dems for nominating someone who got 40+% less electoral votes than an idiot?
Joseph Jones – ultrasubcretin?
I just acquired a second parrot that I am teaching ‘DDT is a lying sack of sh*^.’ This one’s a fast learner.
issac – you do not want to become the local parrot person who dies surrounded by 30 parrots and 2 feet of parrot guano.
Today’s left sees freedom of speech as just another manifestation of “white privilege.” See the violent attacks on Charles Murray, Milo and numerous peaceful Trump supporters.
Pretty interesting and pretty typical. Some two bit local Democrat in California make threatening noises about freedom of speech and you go nuts, where as Republicans in the House AND Senate of the United States of America PASS legislation to allow anything you do on the net to be sold to whoever wants to pay for it and you yawn!
As to freedom of speech, there is no monopoly by right or left on it’s importance to Democracy. You can try to divide all you want. And by the same token, especially given your kind of blind knee jerk tribalism, it will be sold out from under your feet by the right wing just as fast as the left in the service of their corporate pay masters. And as long as it’s done by your tribe, you will no doubt say exactly the same thing, “Uhhh, gooosh, geee, nothing to see here folks.”
Extremes in both directions are dangerous but necessary to identify and continue identifying those points where damage is done and freedoms are maintained. Passing blanket laws like this are the ideas of morons and, as we continually see coming from DDT and the right, there is no shortage of the ‘I’ the only one and this will fix everything moves. This idiot is simply that, an idiot. Freedom of speech, to be protected, must be constantly determined whether or not it is being used to damage society or enrich society. The person yelling fire in a crowded theatre or religiously advising some to kill others is of a greater threat to society than not scrutinizing our freedoms. In the context of a crowded theatre yelling fire is not free speech. In the context of Islamic terrorism, advising one’s disciples to kill others is not free speech. The only way to protect free speech is to take each instance and scrutinize it under the circumstances and in context. Allowing a person to influence others to kill for religious reasons as protected under free speech is equally damaging to society as allowing this idiot lawyer to influence our legal system. Idiots abound on the outer edges. What’s DDT up to?
WOW! Isaac took all of FOUR LINES before mentioning Trump! Congrats! Your meds are helping!
Joseph Jones – I think it is the time he is spending training the parrot.
The Democrats are simply jealous that they can’t always be the ones selling us out. Republicans have just sold out any last shred of privacy on the internet which seems a bit studiously ignored for some reason (possibly there just ain’t enough time in the day).
To Serve AT&T and Comcast, Congressional GOP Votes to Destroy Online Privacy
If you can’t take credit for selling out the fourth, why not go for the gold and sell out the first?
Anti-climactic. Google and Facebook already have everything and they’re re joined at the hip with the American Empire’s state security organs.
Pure nonsense if not intentional. You can avoid Google and Facebook. You can NOT avoid your ISP.
+1
They get virtually everyone with Facebook. They won’t get *me*, but I don’t have illusions about my importance.
…but I don’t have any illusions about my importance.
Right. Cattle mentality. Welcome to Bovine University.
With a VPN?
Pathetic. A VPN, as people will be discovering, is only as good as the already existing loop holes on your computer. I would be very concerned about my ISP capturing my key strokes which is all it would take to easily thwart a VPN, even The Onion Router.
Moreover, you usually have to pay for it.
Moreover, there are already high tech ways to thwart VPN as a protection against browsing history. ISP’s will be using them soon in a theatre near you.
Moreover, cause you couldn’t care less, ISP’s can sell your Social Security number to anyone they want. Good luck with your identity. No doubt Trump will make personal calls on your behalf. Ha, ha, ha,ha! 🙂
https://thenevadablog.com/2017/01/23/internet-service-providers-want-to-harvest-and-sell-your-social-security-number/
“Pathetic. A VPN, as people will be discovering, is only as good as the already existing loop holes on your computer.”
Not only that, all the information you did not want you ISP to have is now in the hands of your VPN provider.
No matter what you do, someone is in a position to collect a lot of information about you.
Enforceable regulations are necessary if you want protection from service providers collecting and distributing information about you.
Excellent point.
Brooklin Bridge – according to Sen. Flake there is still an opt out for the information. You just have to call your provider.
Senator Flake. What a priceless name for such a priceless fig leaf. And what a coincidence, Flake rhymes with fake! Very few people will have the knowledge, time, or energy to opt out and they will have to do it on a repetitive basis, all pretty much at the whim and control of the ISP.
And ISP’s can make it as difficult as they want for you to find or even be aware of the opt-out.
Wait till people fill in their social security number next time they buy a tee shirt with big bright letters on the front, “I’m one dumb ass.”
Brooklin Bridge – I give my SS number to my bank and the IRS. That is the deal I made with the government when I got my SS number to begin with. Anyone else who asks for it, I tell them N/A.
If you pay the IRS by Internet, you do so through a third party connection – they, in turn, give it to the IRS. It’s called Privatization. Now, look at their privacy contract. It will only take you a couple of hours to get all the pieces together since now-a-days they usually hide it all over the net and make you piece it together like a treasure hunt. As to the IRS, it can’t be bothered to do something when Congress critters can get paid big money to funnel such profits to their good friends in private business.
Also, if you pay your taxes on line, your ISP will get the SS number the minute you provide it for the private company that acts as a go-between for you and the IRS. Now you have two companies that can sell your SS. One to anyone, and the other to most anyone.
If you run a small business, you have to give your SS, or the SID of your business, every time you log in to pay a tax, or resolve some issue.
If not, there are countless ways most, perhaps not you, can be put in a position where not to give this information is almost impossible.
Brooklin Bridge – I mail my return.
Paul, good move on your part.
Here is one salient response in a comment section to the opt out. I include some preliminary remarks about the bill in general.
http://blogforarizona.net/sen-jeff-flakes-bill-wipes-out-the-fccs-landmark-rule-for-internet-privacy-protection/
Brooklin Bridge – Flake was a good Congressman, but being Senator has gone to his head. He has glued his lips to McCain’s ass.
Ha,ha, good one Paul. 🙂 I’ll take your word for it about Flake as a Representative. From here in crazy Taxxachusetts, I don’t follow Flake all that closely.
And VPNs, TOR, other methods are a pain in the neck. They slow down your computer. You must be constantly on guard that your ISP hasn’t figured a way around them – and of course you can never know for sure.
In many States you are now required BY LAW to use the net for many things, for instance, to pay your taxes. That is only going to increase.
And finally, as if it mattered to you, this is a direct assault on your Constitutional right to a reasonable expectation of privacy.
You need to g over to reddit if you think that is the case. People are furious.
Earth to Brooklin: I got news for you: Snowden revelations. Your Democrat overlord Obama has already enforced government ability to view everything on your computer. What is more threatening to society? The government viewing every key stroke, or business types wanting to extract profit from you?
Himmel and Hoover would literally kill for the NSA’s power. The “Deep State” are purely unelected officials who have exerted serious political control over Trump, committing obviously many felonies with reckless abandon. If you think that’s good for America and Americans, you’re wrong.
I’m not happy about this new law, not at all. But the deep state intrusion under Obama is infinitely worse, not even slightly comparable. BTW, do you realize all of that evil power is now in Trump’s hands?
I agree with you about the NSA, but I think you fail to appreciate all the negatives of corporate scrutiny and development of your on-line profile. BTW, that also applies to hacker, to mallware developer to banks to insurance companies, to every kind of crook that wants YOUR money or your identity. Remember, anyone with a little dough can learn ALL ABOUT YOU. Anyone. Let that sink in.
Do you ever surf the net about illness, or health issues? Your insurance company will be delighted to know. Does your boss hold different political views than you? He or she will likely soon be collecting that information simply from your comments on this or any other site you comment on. Remember, you can’t hide by a moniker. If your boss is a prick, even a bit of a prick, things could go badly. Do you want hackers to get a hold of your Social Security number? Once they have that, for a pittance, they can have one hell of a good time at your expense. Opening up accounts in your name, buying new cars. Don;t like that idea? Then don’t ever ever, ever, give your SS out over the net, not even to the government that insists on it when doing taxes on line. Just stop doing taxes on line. Don’t give it to your doctor, or insurance co., etc. Not to your bank either, when it asks for it to evaluate a possible loan. And that includes your credit card number and the number on the back.
In fact, be careful of what ever you say anywhere in any comment as the banks will be looking at that, all of it, to see just how credit worthy you really are. Traditional credit score services are notoriously bad. Now you are going to have online companies that specialize in learning every thing there is to know about you sucking up virtually every key stroke you type and evaluating it and selling that analysis, including how credit worthy you are, to anyone – such any bank you contact – that wants it.
I’ve only touched on a few sensitive subjects. There are many many more. Enjoy the good feeling of absolute transparency without your permission. And don;t worry about large corporations and politicians. Those poor dears will exempt themselves in all manner of ways.
He could be a decent fellow with a major brain glitch. It happens frequently.
Progressives fall into four categories:
1. Those not much invested in public affairs
2. People over 90
3. Harold Pollack and a handful of congenial policy wonks.
4. Jack-wagons.
It’s highly unlikely his in category 1, 2, or 3.
Maybe private schools like Georgetown University and its Law Center and Pepperdine University could use a refresher course on limitating speech:
https://www.thefire.org/free-speech-off-the-table-at-georgetown-university/
https://www.thefire.org/fire_speech-codes/pepperdine-events/
Pepperdine’s Standards of Conduct for Events, for example, prohibits: statements that disparage God, Jesus Christ, or religion; language that demeans and exploits women; explicit lyrics; and references to sex, alcohol, and narcotics/drugs. Under no circumstances will the Student/Performer/Group/Entertainer use profanity or tell obscene jokes or stories of any kind whatsoever during the performance. The determination of what is improper or obscene with respect to statements made by the Student/Performer/Group/Entertainer will be made in good faith by the University, and will be at the sole and absolute discretion of the University.
Pepperdine is a private institution with explicit standards of conduct.
dss:
Stop bothering Steve with all that legal – and accurate — stuff.
If you intend to portray JT and/or his school in a negative light, big fat fail. It’s a private U and their standards are 100% legal. Whether anyone agrees or disagrees, they can vote with their feet.
Conversely this lying sleaze ball Chau took an oath to uphold the C, which his proposed law strictly violates. Do you get the difference?
Someone send him the book titled: Three Spots On The Wall, by Who Flung Foo.
Quote: “constituents should think very hard about their decision to return Chau to the state legislature after the introduction of such a dangerous and reckless piece of legislation.”
Um hello, people get the politicians they want. Not sure it’s good for a law professor to make suggestions about which candidate a particular constituency should elevate or un-elect.
Kinda surprised by that comment given the standing of the host.
I think that it is quite right that JT wants to warn the constituents of someone who would curtail their speech. In fact, the whole state needs to be warned that these people are out there. There are two people on the FCC who want to curtail Drudge. We see fake news everyday by the MSM. Should they be curtailed? No, sometimes it is just bad reporting. Sometimes it is biased reporting. What should be criminalized are the supposed ‘fact-checking’ sites that are actually politicized or weaponized.
I’d be interested to see if any of the mainstream news organizations would be filtered out as “fake news” with some of the bad reporting done.
anarmyofficer – the idea is not to censor the MSM, but rather conservative sites like Drudge and Breitbart. The groups chosen to do the censoring are all Soros funded.
Yeah, but you know if they make the criteria general enough, anyone can fall victim to it.
I know it would be targeted at the fake news, but I’m curious if the wording would allow the wrong parties to be targeted. I believe that’s the worry that a lot of people have with respect to this spilling over to more people than intended.
anarmyofficer – they would NEVER charge the MSM because that is not the purpose of the legislation. For example: For the sake of argument, let’s say that Trump is right about being wiretapped. All those newspapers who have been saying that he has not been wiretapped are printing fake news. Are they going to go after them? No, of course not. However, they will go after the ones who said he was being wiretapped all along. The Democrats don’t send their own to jail, they want to crush the opposition.
Um… I assume that this isn’t a “Democrat only” bill – that being said, anything the Democrats did, the Republicans could do in response. So, everyone would be equally affected by the bill.
Or am I looking at it incorrectly?
anarmyofficer – it is/was (currently withdrawn) a California bill in a state with a Democratic super-majority.
Sure, because a state with mostly Democratic office holders, and a Democratic governor is going to fairly prosecute Democrats who have engaged in bad behavior and been pointed out by Republicans. Of course that would happen!
Plus, don’t forget, there are a lot of illegal Mexicans in California, and the kind of government they are used to is NOT a “government of laws” but a “government of personal political whims.” So this kind of free-speech curtailment stuff is no big deal to them.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I think my confusion stems from a misunderstanding of who in this case applies the punishments for infractions. Isn’t this with the courts, who are supposed to apply the law? It would stand to reason that if it was applied unfairly, it could be appealed all the way up the chain.
Would the governor be the deciding authority for some reason? If that’s the case, then I’m utterly baffled. California is a messed up state as far as politics go (I grew up there for about two decades), and I know there’s a liberal mindset there – but deciding law along party lines in this case seems like an easy target for appealing decisions that are made. Maybe it’s not all as easy as that (not sure).
I also know it was repealed, but that doesn’t mean someone else wont put forth the same bill here, or somewhere else.
Especially with full knowledge that any such legislation, if ever enacted, anywhere, would be DOA at SCOTUS. Period
No, people get the politicians which they’re willing to tolerate. They put up with these shmucks. The question is why the applicant pool is filled with shmucks and why this sort of schmuck is more tolerable to them than some other sort.
You tell the audience nothing about JT, and everything about yourself.
Still wet behind the ears. Pablum dribbling from his chin.
Put Ed in the ring with someone like Bruce Lee & see if those punches are fake.
If laws like this are ever actually passed, CA will be at the forefront. With a super majority of democrats running the state, there is little they don’t dream up and propose, and little the rest of us can do about it. They are ruining this once great state with their wackadoodle propositions and ideas.
He pulled the bill
As Mespo says below, Stop bothering folks with facts. You’re interrupting a sacred tribal dance.
You mean everyone’s evaluations are invalid because his chief of staff told him what the tracking polls said?
You thought that up all by yourself??? Under-Toads, or Uber-Toads, or whatever, your paint is coming off…
That’s exactly what Brooklin meant!
What the heck? Do you give him credit? Your screws are looser than Chau’s.
Please tell us exactly why you think he pulled the law? Because he repented of his error or because it was doomed to fail? At this moment, tell us if you believe Chau would prefer his law be passed or fail.
Earth to Dave, c’min Dave, you’re about to leave the earth’s gravitational field, FOREVER! Did you miss that Chau is a “LOW-yah?” Do you know what is the “oath of office” for a CA legislator and all public officers? Have you ever read it? Ever hears of the US Constitution.
Chau is the equivalent to an MD who intentionally poisons his patients, a LEO who intentionally plants false evidence on a known innocent person, a soldier who wrongly fags an officer, etc.
I respectfully suggest you crawl back into your safe space progressive hole and stay there.
And you should resume hopping and chasing butterfly’s and ghost bills that no longer even exist…
How, exactly, do you conclude a pulled bill “no longer…exist(s)?” You lie as smoothly and easily as Chau (oath to uphold C).
Opps, I forgot. It exists in your head. Allez-opp! You almost caught that one…
Dems have a super majority in California. Look for some more moonbat legislation even worse than this. Chau is merely channeling Mao.
“…constituents should think very hard about their decision to return Chau to the state legislature…”
Good luck with that. He won in November with 70% of the vote.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_State_Assembly_District_49
Wonderful! Now the government is going to read the news and figure out which is fake so we don’t have to.
What could possibly go wrong with that?
The Democratic Party has become a harbor for Mooncalfs, there should be no surprise.
This I believe has no party borders.
But will be brought up again and again, like others labeling descent of popular thought into hate speech. This will go forward because the corporate overlords who control 90% of the media want NO competition.
https://youtu.be/eWrWt27p5I4
Going nowhere with the legislature or the federal courts:
“A legislative proposal aimed at outlawing “fake news” websites was sidelined in the California State Legislature at the eleventh hour Tuesday upon drawing fire from free speech advocates over its certain implications on the First Amendment.”
~Washington Times, 3/29/2017
Chau is loon.
Yes, Chau is a loon, but a visionary loon! Somebody has to break the ice on legislation like this, and with the Brave Chau having led the way, others will follow! Soon, it will seem quite normal and mainstream to want to curtail free speech in the name of whatever. And ppor innocent citizens will be scooped up for having a contrary opinion!
I think he deserves an Irish Poem! While I can still do them, legally!
Chau Down???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
There once was a martyr named Chau!
Whose bill, it went nowhere, no how.
But the Left didn’t quit!
They kept doing this sh*t!
Crap! The cops are at my door now!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Hoping you are out of jail now. 😉
He’s not a loon. He’s a perfectly unremarkable progtrash type, and likely the modal type among school administrators. A small shift in the culture of the legal profession, and he gets what he wants. See Canada.
Sorry vague reference. I meant he’s a politician who reminds me of a winged swamp creature who flies off the handle at any slight and calls incessantly and annoyingly for a utopia he’s never seen but only imagined. You know a loon: http://www.loon.org/assets/images/AboutLoons-chick.jpg
I respectfully disagree. Chau is in no way as cute as that sweet fluffy little loon chick. How adorable! Since I don’t have to listen to wild loons all day, I can admire them from the no longer anonymous internet.
True dat Karen
🙂