Below is my column in The Hill on the recent disruptions of events featuring leading Democrats from President Joe Biden to Rep. Jamie Raskin. After years of supporting the censoring and blacklisting of others, these politicians are now being targeted by the very anti-free speech movement that they once fostered. Hillary Clinton last week became the latest Democrat targeted by protesters in a visit to her alma mater, Wellesley College.
Here is the column:
You are “killing people,” President Biden told social media companies a couple of years ago. He sought to shame executives into censoring more Americans. Biden has lashed out at disinformation by anti-vaxxers, “election deniers” and others. This month, those words were thrown back at Biden himself as a “genocide denier” by protesters who have labeled him “Genocide Joe” over his support for Israel.
After years of supporting censorship and blacklisting of people with opposing views, politicians and academics are finding themselves the subjects of the very anti-free speech tactics that they helped foster.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), for example, has been a leading figure in Congress opposing efforts to curtail massive censorship programs coordinated by the Biden administration. While opposing the investigation into past federal censorship efforts, Raskin continues to push social media companies to increase the censorship and silencing of Americans. Last December, Raskin sent a letter on behalf of other Democrats on the powerful House Oversight Committee demanding even more censorship, not only on election fraud, COVID or climate change, but also on abortion.
“We are troubled by the rapid spread of abortion misinformation and disinformation on your company’s social media platform,” he wrote, “and the threat this development poses to safe abortion access in the United States.”
When journalists and even other members testified in favor of free speech, Democrats attacked them as “Putin lovers” and fellow travelers supporting “insurrectionists.”
Last week, however, the left turned on Raskin. He was giving a lecture titled “Democracy, Autocracy and the Threat to Reason in the 21st Century.” According to the Maryland Reporter, the protesters accused Raskin of being “complicit in genocide.” After efforts to resume his remarks, University of Maryland President Darryll Pines finally ended the event early.
Pines then pulled a Raskin. While mildly criticizing the students for their lack of “civility,” he defended their disruption of Raskin’s remarks as if a heckler’s veto were free speech. “What you saw play out actually was democracy and free speech and academic freedom,” he said. “From our perspective as a university, these are the difficult conversations that we should be having.”
There was, of course, no real conversation because this was not the exercise but the denial of free speech. The protesters were engaging in “deplatforming,” which is common on our campuses, where students and faculty organize to prevent others from hearing opposing views.
So, after years of Raskin encouraging the censorship of others, the mob finally came for him. The yawning response of the university was not unlike his own past response to journalists, professors and dissents who have come before his committee.
The only “difficult” aspect of this conversation is for university figures like Pines who are called upon to defend the free speech rights of speakers or faculty. They need to show the courage and principle required to uphold the free speech commitment of higher education, even at the risk of being targeted themselves. That includes the sanctioning of students who prevent others from hearing opposing views in classrooms and event forums. These students have every right to protest outside such spaces, but higher education is premised on the free exchange of ideas. There is really no further “conversation” needed, just a letter of suspension or expulsion for those who deprive others of their rights.
Deplatforming is the rage on our campuses. Universities often use it to cancel events for conservatives or controversial speakers. Often officials will sit idly by, refusing to remove protesters or deter disruptions. And that can lead to self-help measures by others.
Last week, Walter Isaacson, former CEO of CNN and the Aspen Institute, was accused of assaulting a Tulane student protester, Rory MacDonald, during an event held off campus. Isaacson, 72, who teaches at Tulane, was attending the university-sponsored event and had had enough when MacDonald became the eighth protester to stop the event. He stood up and shoved MacDonald into the hall.
MacDonald insisted that he and his fellow protesters were merely “peacefully interrupting” the event to stop others from speaking. He displayed slight scratch marks and is quoted as expressing a fear of returning to campus after the incident. Protests have been held on campus to have Isaacson fired.
I have long criticized the growing anti-free speech movement in higher education. Yet these students have been taught for years that “speech is violence” and harmful. They have also been told by figures such as Pines that silencing others is an act of free speech. Academics and deans have said that there is no free speech protection for offensive or “disingenuous” speech. In one instance, former CUNY Law Dean Mary Lu Bilek insisted that disrupting a speech on free speech is itself free speech.
Even schools that purportedly forbid such interruptions rarely punish students who engage in them. For example, students disrupted a Northwestern class due to a guest speaker from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (after the class had heard from an undocumented immigrant). The university let the protesters into the room after they promised not to disrupt the class. They proceeded to stop the class and then gave interviews to the media proudly disclosing their names and celebrating the cancellation. Northwestern did nothing beyond express “disappointment.”
At Stanford, law students prevented a federal judge from speaking. When the judge asked for law school officials present to intervene, former Stanford DEI Dean Tirien Steinbach stepped forward and attacked the conservative judge for triggering the students by sharing his views. After a national outcry, Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne and Law School Dean Jenny Martinez issued a joint apology that notably did not include punishment for a single student.
These schools are enablers of the anti-free speech movement as much as figures like Raskin.
For years, academics supported such mobs or remained silent as their colleagues were cancelled or fired. Now they are suddenly discovering the value of free speech as the mob comes for them.
Censorship and blacklisting create an insatiable appetite. While Democrats fostered such efforts to silence conservatives and dissenters on vaccines, climate change, abortion, transgenderism and other issues, they now find themselves pursued by the very mobs that they once led. Just two years ago, Biden was celebrated for denouncing social media executives as “killers” for allowing free speech. Now he, Raskin, and others are accused of killing others with “Zionist disinformation.”
It is an epiphany that often comes too late. During the French Revolution, journalist Jacques Mallet du Pan remarked that “like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.”
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
There are too many “public” spaces – those owned by government and its public educational institutions. When private property rights are respected and the government is allowed to have only the amount of space and ownership required for the administration of a justice system, including defense against foreign interference, freedom of speech can be had by anyone willing to put up the capital for their platform. (Truth Social is an example.) Lacking the backing of intrusive government, private universities that squelch free speech will lose their enrollment, a fate worse for them than any other. And there would be no public universities. See Rock Pig’s book Word from Future for the recipe.
Professor Turley Writes:
Last December, Raskin sent a letter demanding even more censorship, not only on election fraud, COVID or climate change, but also on abortion.
***
For years, the anti-abortion movement has spread lies claiming a link between abortion and breast cancer. This lie has been repeated so many times that it’s become a defacto truth amongst conservatives.
Yet this article below, from the American Cancer Society, cites numerous studies debunking the breast cancer lie.
***
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women (aside from skin cancer), and it’s the second leading cancer killer in women. Because it can be a deadly disease, it’s one that many women fear.
Linking these topics creates a great deal of emotion and debate. But scientific research studies have not found a cause-and-effect relationship between abortion and breast cancer.
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/medical-treatments/abortion-and-breast-cancer-risk.html
………………………….
Does Professor Turley believe that false medical claims like this deserve equal time in all forms of media? If indeed Turley does, then what is the distinction between truth and lies?
^^ Paid DNC troll. Ignore.
PUTIN WAS IN HOT WATER WITH RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICES!
(From a CIA bug in the room.)
Transcript:
Committee: President Putin, you slashed the budget for Disinformation Research. What do you have to say for yourself?
President Putin: No need for to spend money on that. Simply repeat DNC talking points and clowns on MSNBC. That kill America plenty quick. We send savings to GLSEN, ACLU, Southern Poverty Center, and BLM. They do work for us.
Committee: Standing ovation for Wise President Putin!
Floyd, show us an article from an established source verifying this claim.
I have forwarded your request to the CIA and the SVR.
So now we have a new RussiaGate story to convince us that censorship of social media is a desired goal. Oh alas the Russians and Donald Trump are at it again. Our leftist bloggers think that we should take seriously their Russia fear tactics after haven once given us a false narrative that disrupted the nation for six years. Undoubtedly some will be quivering in fear but not those with a brain to think.
Floyd, are we to believe Russians don’t consider trolling a cost-efficient form of warfare?
I mean, if they can make you think a Jewish leader, Zelensky, heads ‘Nazi’ regime, that’s a low cost achievement. Then you, in turn, come to this blog and keep repeating the Nazi lie. That’s how it works and Trump is totally complicit because he wants Putin to win.
In this article from last year, The Hill describes the workings of a Russian troll farm.
Interestingly the article notes that employees of troll farms don’t necessarily have any political leanings. For them, misinforming the west is just a job and nothing else.
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4101519-what-a-peek-inside-a-troll-factory-reveals-about-putins-russia/
Has anyone seen my comment? I’m sure I left in this thread, but now cannot find it… Such an absent mind I have. It was short and sweet, and absolutely civil — I am always (well, almost always) civil.
Perhaps it gored someone’s ox…
Lots of censorship going on, including today, at Truley’s “free speech” website.
Jonathan: By now everyone knows about TMTG that has now gone public–trading on NASDQ under “DJT”. The stock is already tanking. DJT is trying to prop up the sock with Russian investors so, in 6 months, he can dump his stock and leave his MAGA investors high and dry. And DJT is facing a number of investor lawsuits. But they are facing one big obstacle.
At the TMTG website, under “Terms and Conditions” it states: “”These Terms and Conditions of Use shall be governed by the laws and subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of the Republic of Argentina. Any dispute between the Company and its Affiliates in relation to the Website shall be submitted to the Competent National Ordinary Courts of the Federal Capitol, expressly waiving any other venue or jurisdiction that might be applicable”. Say WHAT?
If I read the above language correctly that means if you want to sue TMTG you can’t do it in the US. You have to bring your cause of action in the “Competent National Ordinary Courts of the Federal Capitol” in Argentina–where ever and what ever they are! Now I have seen a lot of contracts in my career but I have NEVER seen a contract like this! In the legal trade we call this a “contract of adhesion”, where one party has all the bargaining power and sets the terms and conditions without the other party having a say. Courts often strike down such contracts as being “unconscionable”. But its DJT’s way of depriving consumers of their rights–escaping liability and accountability for his fraud! Shouldn’t be a surprise for those of us who have watched how DJT operates his businesses.
For those on this blog who are thinking of investing in TMTG this should be a red flag. You better read the fine print! Otherwise, if you later want to sue you will have to bring your cause of action in a court somewhere is Buenos Aires! If you can find the court!
Looks like they are trying to evade lawfare from people like James, wise move I’d say. Thouugh I am amused by your frustreation.
This troll’s for you, dweebnik:
https://x.com/JesseASweeney/status/1777444569447014647
Democrats always forget the rule, “What comes around, goes around.” I always laugh when Democrats complain about conservative Supreme Court Justices being appointed by Trump, while always forgetting that it was Harry Reid who lowered the the number of votes required to approve federal judges from 60 votes to a simple majority after Democrats lost their 60 seat majority in the Senate.
Professor Turley Writes:
Raskin continues to push social media companies to increase the censorship and silencing of Americans.
***
Kremlin-linked political strategists and trolls have written thousands of fabricated news articles, social media posts and comments that promote American isolationism, stir fear over the United States’ border security and attempt to amplify U.S. economic and racial tensions, according to a trove of internal Kremlin documents obtained by a European intelligence service and reviewed by The Washington Post.
The campaign has attempted to paint Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as corrupt, emphasized the numbers of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, called for border security to be funded over any aid to Ukraine, and described “white Americans” as the principal losers because of foreign aid, the documents show.
One of the documents reviewed by The Post called for the use of Trump’s Truth Social platform as the only way to disseminate posts “without censorship,” while “short-lived” accounts would be created for Facebook, Twitter (now known as X) and YouTube.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/04/08/russia-propaganda-us-ukraine/
………………………………………….
KEY PASSAGE ABOVE:
One of the documents reviewed by The Post called for the use of Trump’s Truth Social platform as the only way to disseminate posts “without censorship,”
***
Every day Professor Turley is arguing that Russian trolls deserve unfettered access to gullible Americans. But can one really distinguish between ‘free speech’ and ‘troll speech’?
FROM ABOVE ARTICLE:
When Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a leading opponent of aid to Ukraine, warned of “a dangerous bipartisan consensus that is leading us into war with Russia” and slammed Washington’s initial $40 billion aid package for Kyiv in 2022 as coming “while Americans go without baby formula,” the Russians singled it out for their trolls as an example of the kind of message that should be amplified.
Sure. It is easy.
Using the WaPo as evidence of anything is clearly troll speech.
Include MSNBC, CNN, Rachel Maddow, NPR, NBC, CBS, AP, NYT, etc.
Farmer, it’s easy to ignore this if your only news source is Fox. What you don’t see isn’t there. And besides, Russians are too honorable to misinform patriotic MAGA types.
Those of us with a degree of common sense, logic, reason, we do not watch Fox. The assumption we do is a nothing more than a false narrative for some kind of MAGA like narrative.
We read independent journalists, like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, The Free Press, Sharyl Attkisson and others.
We have independent thoughts and thinking. We do not blindly believe what MSM narrative is pushing.
And that is why the DNC, MSM, fear us.
We only had 83% eclipse but I was able to confirm there is in fact a man in the moon.
I even have the proof since I took this photo !
He had a certain clownish look to him
😉
Farmer, you’re saying Russians would never try to influence us?
He’s saying that the US mainstream media does a better and more consistent job of gaslighting Americans and, thus, there is no need for the Russians to lead US citizens astray…
^^ Paid DNC troll. Ignore.
Many have wondered that the fascist faction now in control of out federal administration must be worried that their dismantling of the rule of law in aid of their short-term objectives will not become most difficult to reverse — that they will not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube. They just might not be worried about this because of (1) their lack of sophistication, (2) the singular importance that must be on their short-term objective of overthrowing the U.S. government and/or (3) that they do not have a long term objectives that the people of the United States never regain their previous level of civilization — their consumed by their hatred of us
Many have wondered that the fascist faction now in control of out federal administration is not worried that their dismantling of the rule of law in aid of their short-term objectives will not become most difficult to reverse — that they will not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube. A lack of concern might come be coming from some combination of (1) their lack of sophistication, (2) the singular importance of their short-term objective — the overthrow of the U.S. government and/or (3) one of their long term objectives is, in fact, that the people of the United States never regain their previous level of civilization.
From listening to any of them and observing their actions, it is quite apparent that you have hit the nail on the head – they are, for the most part, ill-educated, lacking in philosophical/moral depth and are not restrained by any real moral code of behavior (most are atheists). We know all that and yet the right can’t seem to get its act together to fight the most lethal disruption to this nation EVER. Why is that? I would think answering that question would be far more profitable than just rehashing all the ills of the other side yet I see little momentum in the general population to save themselves. Are so many of us glutted on food, media and other forms of self-indulgence to even notice the approaching collapse? I am certain that middle class America will be stunned when the actual “fundamental transformation” finally is installed and there is no way back short of a revolution – but we are so out of shape and lethargic I am wondering if it is too late.