Your News Talk America with Jake Smith – 10/17/2024
There is no video today.
Your News Talk America with Jake Smith. Welcome to the digital and interactive program.
To participate live by asking and voting on questions, chatting with viewers, and watching the show, got to RealNewsTalk.com and click the "Watch Here" button. You can view questions by clicking on the "Recent", "Popular", or "On Deck" buttons at the top of the left column.
To ask a question fill out the field on the left. You may vote on questions by pressing on the up and down arrow to the left of each question. You can watch the show in the middle and see current questions below the show window. You are the "Producers", ask questions and your votes count. There will be way more questions than time which makes voting important.
You can chat with other Producers and comment in the chat which is in the right column. You can keep notes by clicking the link to the right of your name in the upper right corner. If you asked your question in Mukana, and there is an issue with ti or we run out of time we will send your question back to your notes. Show notes will be posted on https://www.RealNewsTalk.com and the shows will be posted the following week.
10:10 AM ET
Segment Topic:
Jake and the Judge:
Who Cares What the Government Thinks?
In 1791, when Congressman James Madison was drafting the first 10 amendments to the Constitution -- which would become known as the Bill of Rights -- he insisted that the most prominent amendment among them restrain the government from interfering with the freedom of speech. After various versions of the First Amendment had been drafted and debated, the committee that he chaired settled on the iconic language: “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech.”
Madison insisted upon referring to speech as “the” freedom of speech, not for linguistic or stylistic reasons, but to reflect its pre-political existence. Stated differently, according to Madison -- who drafted the Constitution as well as the Bill of Rights -- because the freedom of speech preexisted the government, it does not have its origins in government. The use of the article “the” reflects Madison’s and the Framers’ understanding of that preexistence.
The First Amendment also reflects the framers’ collective belief that the freedom of speech is a natural right. It has its origins in our human nature. We all yearn to speak free from restraint, and we all understand that we can use our speech to express any idea we want to express without fear or hesitation. Those yearnings and understandings are universal -- hence, natural.
The framers wrote the First Amendment to codify negative rights. That is, the First Amendment recognizes the existence of the freedom of speech for every person, and it negates the ability and the power of Congress -- and after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, of all governments -- to infringe upon it. The First Amendment does not command Congress to grant the freedom of speech (it is not Congress’ to grant); rather, it commands that Congress shall not interfere with it.
The Bill of Rights guarantees negative rights. Their essence is not grants of liberty. Their essence is restraints on the government from interfering with preexisting liberty.
I offer this brief understanding of the freedom of speech in our constitutional government as an introduction to a discussion of the dangers of government exercising free speech. We know that all persons have the freedom of speech. But what about the government?
Does government have the freedom of speech?
That is not an academic question. The short answer to it is: Under the theory of the Declaration of Independence -- that our rights come to us from the Creator and are inalienable -- and consistent with Madison’s understanding of the Bill of Rights, the government has no freedom of speech. Government only can exercise the powers we have given it. Nowhere in the Constitution did the states give such powers to the feds, and nowhere did the people give such powers to the states. We don’t elect government to identify ideas it loves or hates. We elect it to protect the expression of all ideas.
Stated differently, who cares what the government thinks?
Last week, the California Coastal Commission -- once notorious for taking land without just compensation -- reminded us that in California, one needs to care. The CCC denied the request of SpaceX for launching permission because members of the Commission disagreed with the politics of SpaceX’s principal shareholder, Elon Musk. One Commission member even stated that she voted against the launching request because Musk himself had tweeted “political falsehoods” about FEMA and climate issues.
This is sophistry. Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false political idea.
Surely, the folks who work in government have free speech rights, and they are free to exercise them. However, they cannot commandeer the government and use it as an instrument to reward or punish speech. Why not? Because when the government speaks, it chills the rights of others to speak who disagree with it, and that chilling constitutes the very infringement that the First Amendment was written to prohibit.
Chilling occurs when the government makes it easier for some to speak freely or more difficult for others to do so. Government does that when it expresses favoritism or hatred in the marketplace of ideas.
Whatever one thinks of Musk, the government has no business exercising the levers of power against him based on his political speech. Can government condemn McDonald’s as a health menace for selling fatty foods? Can it condemn pro-life groups as domestic terrorists for publicly attempting to dissuade young women from having abortions? Can it condemn young socialists as “enemies within” for demanding confiscation and redistribution of property? Can it condemn the free press as a public enemy when the press criticizes it? The answer to all these hypotheticals (the last is not so hypothetical today) is: No.
The First Amendment was written to keep the government out of the marketplace of ideas. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to encourage and foment open, wide, robust, unbridled -- even caustic and hateful -- speech about the government; speech without fear or favor from the government; speech without government interference; speech without government challenge or reward.
In the most liberal state in America -- where free speech was once sacrosanct -- it is now subject to official government disapproval. That is, until the courts do their job of protecting the free speech of an unpopular minority so that individuals can decide for themselves what to hear and believe, free from government interference.
In America, thanks to the First Amendment, no one should hesitate to express any opinion publicly for fear of incurring the wrath of the government. And no government can constitutionally punish or isolate any person or group because of their exercise of the freedom of speech. Government officials not faithful to those first principles have violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution. Why do we repose constitutional principles for safekeeping into the hands of those who reject them? If unchecked, where will this take us?
Panelist:
Judge Andrew Napolitano
Sample Questions:
- Judge, why have so many surrendered to the government and handed over their Constitutional protections?
- What will it take to recover that which government has taken from us?
10:35 AM ET
Segment Topic:
Kamala sits down with Bret Baier:
- Kamala Cut 1: Illegal Immigration
- Kamala Cut 2: She is a uniter
- Kamala Cut 3: Trump: The enemy within
- Kamala 4: Trump is unstable
- Kamala 5: Trump is unfit to serve
- Does Joe Biden have cancer?
- Kamala 6: Iran
- Kamala 7: Trans Surgeries
Panelist:
None
Sample Questions:
- Did Bret Baier hold Kamala’s feet to the fire last night?
- What was her worst moment?
- Did she answer any direct question?
11:10 AM ET
Segment Topic:
- Kamala at a PA Campaign stop claims that Trump is unfit to serve and props up RINOS to support her claims.
- Biden threatens Trump with prison. Perhaps, he himself should worry about serving in prison?
Panelist:
None
Sample Questions:
- Kamala presented several RINO’s at her PA campaign stop yesterday; will they inflict any damage on Trump’s chances?
- Joe Biden appeared to threaten Trump with prison after he loses in November; is that a good idea for an un-convicted felon – such as Joe Biden?
11:35 AM ET
Segment Topic:
The Biden Regime announces another round of student loan forgiveness.
Panelist:
None
Sample Questions:
- Why has the Biden Regime continued to forgive student loans when the SCOTUS has ruled against this?
- What is behind this latest round of loan bailouts?
- Why can’t I have my car loan or mortgage forgiven?
Community Guidelines
Thank you for being part of the DTDMedia Community. We value our producers and encourage an active participation by having everyone ask questions vote and chat. In order to keep the DTD Media Community and this platform engaging and respectful to all members we request all commenters adhere to our guidelines.
Respectful Debate: We encourage a variety of opinions and open debate but please refrain from using threatening language or making direct threats. Civil discourse is key.
Accuracy and Ownership: Ensure that your contributions are either factual or clearly presented as your own opinions. Posts containing illegal, discriminatory, offensive or misleading content will not be tolerated."
Use Real Names: For a better and more respectful experience we encourage participants to use their real names rather than nicknames. People tend to be more considerate when their identity is known.
Language: Please use English when posting comments or questions as this is the primary language of our event.
Stay On Topic: Keep discussions relevant to the event topic. If you have a different topic in mind please wait for an appropriate session or thread."
Question Submission: When asking questions please use the designated questions field and select the appropriate category from the dropdown menu. Do not add comments in the question field; they will be removed. All comments should be posted in the chat section.
Be Respectful: Engage in discussions with kindness and respect for others. Differences in opinion should be addressed with civility to maintain a constructive environment.
Avoid Negativity: If you encounter negativity or hostile behavior consider your response carefully. Engaging in a positive and constructive manner helps foster a better community."
Moderation: We reserve the right to moderate and remove comments that are abusive, spammy, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate. Even partial violations may result in the removal of a post.
Reporting Issues: If you notice inappropriate content please report it to our moderation team at the following email address: Event.Moderator@WGMD.com. Include a direct link or reference to the specific session or chat where the issue occurred. While we may not respond to all reports individually please know that your concerns are reviewed and taken seriously.
By following these guidelines you contribute to a positive and enjoyable experience for everyone. Thank you for your cooperation and for making this event a success!