Will Rogers once said that “if you ever injected truth into politics, you’d have no politics.” In Wales, it appears that the government is challenging that assessment. However, if the new legislation criminalizing political lies is successful, the Welsh are likely to find themselves with the same abundance of lies but little free speech.
A proposal in the Welsh parliament (or the Senedd) would make it the first country in the world to impose criminal sanctions for lying politicians. Adam Price, the former leader of the liberal Plaid Cymru Party is pushing for the criminalization, citing a “credibility gap” in UK politics.
Astonishingly, this uniquely bad idea has received support from a key committee. Once on track for adoption, this is the type of law that can become self-propelling through the legislature. Few politicians want to go on record voting against a law banning political lies. The free speech implications are easily lost in the coverage.
The new law would make it a criminal offense for a member of the Senedd, or a candidate for election to the Senedd, to wilfully, or with intent to mislead, make or publish a statement that is known to be false or deceptive. There is a six-month period for challenges to be brought.
The law allows a defense that a statement could be “reasonably inferred” to be a statement of opinion, or if it were retracted with an apology within 14 days. If guilty, the politician would be disqualified from being a Senedd member.
The defense is hardly helpful. It creates an uncertainty as to which statements would be deemed an opinion and which would be treated as a statement of fact. It invites selective and biased prosecutions. After all, what does it mean to accuse a politician of trying to “mislead” the public?
Winston Churchill said “a politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
It is a standard heavily laden with subjectivity and potential selectivity in prosecution. It is more likely to determine not whether lies can be told but which lies can be told. The government and the majority of the public are likely to hold certain “misleading” claims of politicians to be true or opinion while holding a harsher view of the claims of the opposition.
Consider the massive censorship system in our own country. During Covid, you were labeled a liar, conspiracist, or racist for holding views now viewed as credible.
For example, academics joined this chorus in marginalizing anyone raising the lab theory. One study cited the theory as an example of “anti-Chinese racism” and “toxic white masculinity.”
As late as May 2021, the New York Times’ Science and Health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was calling any mention of the lab theory as “racist.”
Mandavilli and others made clear that reporters covering the theory were Covid’s little Bull Connors. She tweeted wistfully “someday we will stop talking about the lab leak theory and maybe even admit its racist roots. But alas, that day is not yet here.”
Now federal agencies have stated that they believe that the origin of the virus was indeed the Chinese lab.
If this law were in place, politicians could have been charged with lying and barred from the legislature — would have only served to diminish dissenting views further in the government.
Politicians have long been accused of lying to the public.
In this country, presidents routinely lie on matters great and small. Many of those lies cost citizens dearly, from “keeping your doctor” under ObamaCare to losing your life in Vietnam. Criminalizing lies in campaigns because of the spread of disinformation or disorder is a slippery slope that vests unprecedented power in the Justice Department.
There is obviously an abundance of statements from politicians that could be deemed as intentionally misleading. Officials can then simply pick and choose which politicians they want to tar with the allegation and potentially bar from office.
The proposed law is a continuation of the assault on free speech in the United Kingdom.
A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”
We also discussed the arrest of a woman who was praying to herself near an abortion clinic. English courts have seen criminalized “toxic ideologies” as part of this crackdown on free speech.
Scotland recently passed a new crime law covering “stirring up hatred” relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex. That crime covers insulting comments and anything “that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive.”
Free speech is in a free fall after years of criminalization of speech. Generations have been shaped in the educational system to fear free speech. The alliance of government, media, and academic forces have created generations of speech phobics.
The anti-free speech movement in the United Kingdom should be a cautionary tale for every American. The tide of this movement has reached our shores and the same alliance is working to reduce the protections for free speech.
As I discuss in my new book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, this international movement has left free speech in tatters in the West. Now there are law professors calling for the First Amendment to be rewritten to remove its “excessively individualistic” protections.
The free speech community in the United Kingdom has fought bravely to preserve this right against all odds. Wales is a reminder that this remains a global struggle that requires free speech advocates to unite against this rising tide.
Darren, what in the world are you doing?
Is it unfair to arrest someone just because you feel like it?
Bill lied. Said he didn’t intervene in Rawnda because he was unaware of what was happening.
Then, he lied and said had we acted sooner, we could have saved 300,000 lives.
Then he covered those lies by condemning the U.S. for being “shy” in light of the horror that was Rwanda.
Did he conspire to lie and falsify Whitehouse business records when he claimed he was spending time working on something when he wasn’t? We pay presidents to work. If he wasn’t working on the Rwandan Holocaust, he wan’t working as he described. That lie was proven to be just that. So, to make himself look good as a candidate for the 1998 election, he misrepresented the nature of the business he was conducting. 3 TIMES.
ILLEGAL
Yes, but he didn’t screw up some business paperwork so he’s a saint. Right, Gigi?
So whats new? The Biden administration has tried to do the same thing as the Wales government by trying to institute the Department of Disinformation. When will the public be outraged? A continual documentation of what the left has done to our nation should be instituted now and often. I offer you the first of many documents to come that should be recorded to make sure that future generations are made aware of exactly what they have done in an attempt to curtail our freedom. https://johnkassnews.com/hunter-joe-and-the-shameless-51/. I ask you not to be woke but awake.
Biden is the best president EVER and I can’t wait to vote for him in November!
Indeed you are correct. Joe Biden is 42 years old, he’s at the top of his game mentally and physically. He has never plagiarized a speech, his IQ is higher than Einstein’s, he’s strictly enforcing the immigration laws with flawless security at the border, he runs up stairs to a plane and has never stumbled, he has never fallen down or spewed slurred gibberish, and his withdrawal strategy for Afghanistan was brilliantly conceived and executed. He always knows how to walk off a stage, he has never drained the nation petroleum reserve for short term political gain or suppressed domestic energy production, nor has he supported reckless spending that drove inflation way up.
Anonymous – don’t be a Hiding Biden protege – admit your name !
Surely, you jest.
I do not jest. And don’t call me Shirley.
Your commitment to mendacity, insanity, and corruption is most impressive. Have you sacrificed to Satan to seal your bargain?
The obvious problem with the Welsh law is that the ‘truth’ will end up in the hands of people like ‘Mengele’ Fauci and 51 top intelligence experts who told us what to believe about the Hunter laptop.
Considering the assault on reputations and employment and professional licenses don’t think for a moment these people wouldn’t throw you in prison for speaking unwanted truths.
REGARDING ABOVE:
“and 51 top intelligence experts who told us what to believe about the Hunter laptop”.
……………
Those experts said, “Be careful. The laptop is coming from Giuliani who visited with a Putin-friendly member of Ukraine’s parliament; all of which was true.
Have you been living under a rock the las four years?
No, I live at a bath house in West Hollywood. I post comments on here between tricks. Since I post often, it means I do not get many tricks. By the way, how hung are you, or are you only into little boys with small 🍆?
He is obsessed with pedophilia. He projects his fantasies with his casual accusations in cornholing little boys, a truly sick old pervert
Lmao cornholing is my term. That guy is a gay fvck. Learn the difference.
Anonymous, even the FBI now says that the laptop is real and has not been altered. You’ve got your story and you’re sticking to it no matter what. At one time in history you would have been known as a Flat Earther. Just like you are now. Forensic science was used to verify the content of the laptop. Weren’t you one of the ones who told us to believe the science on covid masks? Now we have you not interested in the science concerning the laptop. Shallow mind shallow thoughts.
Fauci is more of a Gosnell, Cecile, Whitmer et al tasked to reduce “burdens”. A better match to the trans/neo-gender experiments would be Levine’s Dreams of Herr Mengele.
But since Levine is a man, it’s dreams of Hiss Mengele (ba-da-bum).
Is the Consitution all about fairness? Should people interested in legal matters have a sense of fairness?
Yes. Equity is part of our common law inheritance. However, as Blackstone warned too little equity and the law is sometimes too harsh but too much equity and there is no law.
The Constitution is ALL about ensuring the maximal rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities of individuals, and imposing severe and comprehensive limits and restrictions on government.
The Founders had only recently overthrown the dictatorship of the monarchy and had absolutely no intention of imposing the “dictatorship of the proletariat” or any other rendition.
Equity is the absence of bias and favoritism; welfare, affirmative action, quotas, forced busing, unfair “Fair Housing” laws, discriminatory “Non-Discrimination” laws, DEI, etc., are all forms of bias and favoritism.
The Constitution does not guarantee acceptance and success.
The Constitution does not prevent rejection and failure.
People must adapt to the outcomes of freedom.
Freedom does not adapt to people…
dictatorship does.
That’ll work
And so now a trend evolves with black judges and legislators. A black entitled judge abusing her own staff, playing the race card and disregarding the law. So fricken predictable
“Douglas County Probate Judge Christina Peterson is charged with felony willful obstruction of a police officer by using threats or violence”
https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/atlanta-police-releases-bodycam-footage-showing-arrest-douglas-county-judge-buckhead-nightclub/85-4e175575-7028-4a31-94ef-5f70413d9723
An officer of the court, a bar member, a lawyer and a judge, asked by police to ID herself tells them to “google me”?
If this b itch isn’t removed from the bench and her law license revoked there is no justice in this world. However she is black and AS LONG AS SHE DIDN’T MISUSE PUBLIC FUNDS SHE’LL PROBABLY GET AN ALL EXPENSE PAID VACATION TO THE DESTINATION OF HER CHOICE!
If you like the pursuit of happiness so much, then why do you have a problem with transvestites, who are only pursuing happiness.
Yes, they are all for the pursuit of happiness, as long as you do it in a way that they approve of.
Wait, who are we talking about? The groomers who have avowed in a cute little musical number to go after children? The drag queens performing for little 6-year-old girls? The butchers chopping off middle school girls’ breasts and teenage boys’ penises? Are they the people who are only pursuing their own happiness?
The goal of this fallacy is to make the rule seem like the exception.
Correction: To make the exception seem like the rule.
You just said a meaningless thing.
No, he didn’t.
Your right to pursue happiness can’t be at the expense of someone else’s happiness. Especially children’s happiness. Hands off the children! This isn’t hard.
Government officials deciding what is truth. What could possibly go wrong?
Karl Marx and “Crazy Abe” Lincoln could possibly go wrong.
Oops!
They did.