_WHAT’S HAPPENING_

Since Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the media has sounded the alarm over “free speech crackdowns” under Trump.

Four major narratives have taken hold: that Pam Bondi wants to prosecute “hate speech,” that liberal organizations are under siege, that Jimmy Kimmel was “cancelled” for speaking freely, and that labeling Antifa as terrorists somehow violates the First Amendment.

Here’s why these claims are false.

_THE FACTS_

CLAIM 1: Pam Bondi wants to prosecute “hate speech.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi never proposed outlawing opinions. She pointed out that existing laws already prosecute criminal acts like harassment, threats, and incitement.

Her comments — though ham-fisted, as pointed out by conservative commentators — were twisted into a call for “hate speech” prosecutions. Bondi later clarified that she believes “hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment.”

CLAIM 2: Trump is targeting liberal NGOs for speaking out.

Liberal groups insist Trump is attacking free speech, but that’s not what’s going on. After Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the White House began discussing whether some left-wing nonprofits are abusing their tax-exempt status to push partisan politics and will consider taking action using laws that are already on the books.

Left-leaning groups may label it a speech crackdown, but no one is banning them from advocacy — they’re just not guaranteed taxpayer subsidies if they act like campaign machines.

CLAIM 3: Jimmy Kimmel was “cancelled” for speaking freely.

Kimmel’s show was taken off the air by Sinclair and Nexstar, who own local ABC affiliates that air Jimmy Kimmel Live!, after falsely claiming Charlie Kirk’s assassin was a Trump supporter.

Sinclair and Nexstar preempted his show due to those statements, his plummeting ratings, and the fact that Kimmel was planning to double down on his false claims.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr reminded broadcasters that using public airwaves comes with a duty not to misinform, particularly after catastrophes. Kimmel wasn’t silenced for “free speech” — he lost distribution because he spread a lie.

CLAIM 4: Labeling Antifa a terrorist organization is anti–free speech.

Antifa is a clear example of crossing the line from speech to violence.

President Donald Trump’s new executive order labeling the group a domestic terrorist organization is aimed at targeting organized cells that coordinate riots, arson, and assaults. It specifically targets “illegal operations — especially those involving terrorist actions,” not legally-protected speech.

No one is being punished for waving a sign or chanting at a rally. Terrorist designations apply only when groups engage in or materially support violence, not when individuals exercise protected expression.

_INSIGHTS_

There’s a clear double standard at play: progressives applauded when Roseanne Barr was fired in 2018, when Trump was banned from social media, and when Tucker Carlson was pushed out of Fox News. Kimmel himself mocked those outcomes.

Now, when the same accountability reaches him, the narrative suddenly shifts to cries of a “free speech crackdown.” The reality is that Kimmel still has his platform and his audience, despite his plummeting ratings. What he lost was the ability to spread false claims on broadcast television without consequence.

See more Upward News in Google: add us as a preferred source

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

Avatar

Larry Hemmert1 year ago

We need to make example out of politicians and other persons/companies that knowingly spread false information and use hate speech that instigates violence, mass protests etc... Prosecute and imprison them. End tolerance for unpeaceful assembly that are actually violent riots. Blocking a sidewalk/road, and terrorizing people is a crime!+!

Avatar

Jim Harmon1 year ago

Agree completely, and Gavin Newsome should be at the top of the list. His comments are the very definition of "inciteful" and he should be accountable.

Avatar

Steve Baker1 year ago

I am with you 100%!! I still do not understand how politicians have been allowed to say the things they say with zero proof, because there is none. But there is enough proof to prove that they have and are inciting violence across the country and they should be kicked from office and in to jail. As for the news media, I believe they should be required to scroll across the bottom of the screen that "this content is entirely the opinion of the host and it's guests and has no basis in fact and should not be considered factual news programming"

Avatar

Janet Null1 year ago

There’s a difference in free speech and speech that encourages violence. I lived thru the 60’s and it would seem Bill Ayers is still in play with his weather underground chomping that the bit to be totally activated. This was deemed violence and revolution against our government NOT free speech. Remember the Weather Underground declared war on our form of government in 1970. Where have they been all these years you might ask!! teaching our children in grades 1-12 and Universities with Marxist ideology - to imbed our own offspring as our enemies and a long played out coup to destroy America and all of western civilization.

Avatar

Bonnie Hissom1 year ago

Have we forgotten the tremendous violence and destruction that occurred after George Floyd was killed? Funny how none of that occurred after Charlie was killed. I believe in free speech unless it is only expressed thru violence and destruction. Then it becomes anarchy.

Avatar

Fred Scott1 year ago

While I abhor some people's speech as despicable, our country has always allowed people to speak freely. I pray our country will not lower the standards of that right. During the Biden administration, we saw that unfolding to the detriment of our rights! Those on the far left have used terms to describe the conservatives and the Trump administration, yet they are the perpetrators of that HATE!

Avatar

Tracey Powers 1 year ago

Absolutely yes. Violence that comes from incitement is not protected free speech.

Avatar

JJW JJW1 year ago

yes

Avatar

sharon smith1 year ago

Let's go back to journalistic rules, learned in journalism school, take a deep breath and rephase what needs to be said in a way that isn't blatantly pugnacious. Some news headlines clearly want a battle, in an effort to sell their news - mostly the Left, unfortunately which is why they have continuted to make a bad name for themselves

Avatar

Kate Devaney1 year ago

When Roseann Barr, Trump and Carlson were persecuted Americans were shocked to find that they had no mechanism to respond to these injustices. The levers of justice were denied to the People. That is what needs to be fixed so that we will never again be sideline.

Avatar

Brenda Hammers1 year ago

Yes, especially after years of repetitive false accusations. The parrots are brainwashing those that are listening to them daily.

Avatar

Bob Hrebec1 year ago

It's well known you can't shout FIRE in a theater, nor can you slander. With today's media there are lots of ways to shout fire. Inciting violence is one. Knowingly spreading lies is just another way to slander. The left have started to turn both of these into an art form! It must stop.

Avatar

Laney B1 year ago

My thoughts exactly.

Avatar

Rich Henke1 year ago

Leaders should be held to a higher standard! Those in elected office and the media should be held accountable. We've listened to the Democrats label conservatives as deplorables, nazis, fascists, threats to democracy and Hitler for a decade and somehow when it leads to political violence, they feign innocence. Weak-minded individuals seize this kind of rhetoric as a call to action. Even some Democrats have been calling out those in their own party. Those engaged in that type of rhetoric should be banned from public office. To be fair this has to go both ways. Using a picture of an autopen in the White House in lieu of Biden's portrait among the presidents, while funny, may be a bit over the top.

Avatar

Fred Fitzgerald1 year ago

Common sense. Who ever came up with the idea that inciting violence should be protected as free speech? And how about the famous court decision "Crying FIRE in a packed theater is not free speech".

Avatar

Vicki Small1 year ago

Yes. Of course, that would mean holding some members of Congress accountable, including Maxine Waters and Chuck Schumer, both of whom have, over 10 years, quite specific in inciting acts of violence against Trump, members of both administrations, and their supporters. Jeffries, Newsom, Walz and anyone using language that foments hatred which too often results in mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other violent acts.

Avatar

Jim Powers1 year ago

Spurring people to violence is NOT protected. End of story.

Avatar

Robert Baublitz 1 year ago

And with the ICE shooting in Texas, the lib left continues to murder. Tell me Gavin, just what is the purpose and the Duty, of I.C.E.? He and the likes of "Mad" Max Waters must be held accountable. And what of the Lois Lerner I.R.S. ? And the Biden-Harris FBI labeling catholics and parents as "domestic terrorists? As bad as repubs have been (1995-96) we should never vote democrat again. Not after these last 9 years. Never again.

Avatar

Jorge Rios1 year ago

There must absolutely be consequences when anyone pushes a narrative that incites violence, it does not matter how wealthy or high up the ladder they are. We are either going to have law and order or mob rule.

Avatar

Terry McCall1 year ago

Yes! It has always been against the law to incite violence. We should come down hard on those that do so!

Avatar

Jim Ahern1 year ago

To entertain the the idea of anything that comes out of the Lefts mouths these days is an outright joke. They spit on The Constitution and at the same time hide behind it. The time for talk with these treasonous and despicable parasites is done.

  • Remove and Prosecute any and all Congress and Senate members who defend and subscribe to this Leftist ideology (Same goes for Governors and Mayors)
  • Shutdown/Prosecute all NGO's who support and fund domestic terrorist groups (Antifa, BLM, Muslim Brotherhood)
  • Remove/Prosecute all non law abiding activist judges who pervert the rule of law (that goes for the Supreme Court also)
  • Hell of a good start and solves many a problem. Lets see if our fearless leaders can actually follow these simple guidelines which the rule of law and The Constitution ultimately demand..

    Avatar

    Robert Daniels1 year ago

    If an individual is attacked, harmed, or killed we need to look at "why". If there was or has been loads of talking points about a person being a terrible individual, and then they are killed, we will need to subpoena these individuals to a Senate committee to answer for their words and work. If they don't show up it is 90 days in jail. While they are incarcerated we drag them into this committee again in their jump suits and have them testify. There needs to be teeth to this, actual consequences.

    Avatar

    Patricia Campbell1 year ago

    If it can be proven that a particular incident actually incited violent action, then it should be prosecuted. Otherwise, our first amendment freedom of speech is absolute.

    Avatar

    Donna Marks1 year ago

    Yes. There is a difference between giving your opinion and calling for violence. Antifa is no question a violence creating organization.

    Avatar

    Paul R1 year ago

    Yes, current laws address incitement to riot, let alone murder!

    Avatar

    Jeff Rutowski1 year ago

    I have said it before: Everything the Left accuses the Right of is exactly what they are doing and/or have done. Political memories (both sides) are extremely short. The depth of hate coming out of some in the left is deeply alarming.

    Avatar

    Joan Smith 1 year ago

    Yes

    Avatar

    Fred Rogers1 year ago

    Depends on how you define incites violence