MSNBC Legal Analyst Calls for 'Common Sense" Speech Restrictions

So this woman, a law professor, went on the Rachael Maddow show (which is basically state run TV for the Biden administration), to say that there needs to be 'common sense' speech restrictions put in place. This must be done to stop 'disinformation'. The comedy gold in this is that she said it on the Rachael Maddow show, which is the showcase of 'disinformation' if ever there was one. Maddow wouldn't even show the audience Donald Trump making a statement at a court room because she said he'd just lie. The queen of partisan disinformation and censorship showcases a person calling for 'common sense speech restrictions'. Yeah ... like that isn't a disturbing thought.

MS NBC Legal Analyst Calls for 'Common Sense" Speech Restrictions

MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade argued Monday that the United States’ “deep commitment to free speech” makes Americans uniquely susceptible to disinformation campaigns.

“Actually, Rachel, I think we’re more susceptible to it than other countries, and that’s because some of our greatest strengths can also be our Achilles Heel,” McQuade said. “So, for example, our deep commitment to free speech in our First Amendment. It is a cherished right. It’s an important right in democracy, and nobody wants to get rid of it, but it makes us vulnerable to claims [that] anything we want to do related to speech is censorship.”

She argued, “Of course, the Supreme Court has held that all fundamental rights, even the right to free speech, can be limited as long as there is a compelling governmental interest and the restriction is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. But I think any time someone tries to do anything that might limit free speech, people claim censorship.”

We need to have a conversation and common-sense solutions to these things,” she said. “Instead, we throw out terms like ‘censorship,’ call each other names, use labels and retreat to our opposite sides. We need to be pragmatic and come up with real solutions.”

Limit free speech? Fantastic idea (sarc)! Why doesn’t she take the lead by shutting her mouth?! That’s a great start. Crazy to think that she actually teaches law.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I am sure many who are convicted of murder would say all the evidence against them is disinformation. Just because there are odd or opposing viewpoints does not mean information isn't true. We used to be able to use our brain and determine what we believe to be true and what isn't but I think that era has ended because of a massive psyop called Q and controlled opposition. Well controlled opposition has always existed but it seems to have really ramped up with Q and the virus, etc recently. Now the government can point to these things they engineered and say that we need to be censored because we can't be trusted to use our brains.

They're going full-on communist now.

If they keep pushing this is going to a very bad place.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
They're going full-on communist now.

If they keep pushing this is going to a very bad place.

The fact that they are brave enough to even mention it tells me that the "very bad place" is already upon us.

a reply to: FlyersFan

There's one problem; how to define common sense? What is common sense to me can be totally bats**t to you and the other way round. So who is to define it? The government? Governments change so the definitions of common sense will be changing every few years.

The same is with disinformation. We know that 2 and 2 is 4. Everyone probably agrees. All the rest is disputable.

a reply to: FlyersFan

The insane Liberals want total control over our lives.

We’ve already been through all of that with Biden’s now defunct Ministry of Truth and the whack job he put in charge of it.

Remember Mary Poppins?

Biden ‘disinfo’ czar Nina Jankowicz ripped over cringeworthy Mary Poppins TikTok

nypost.com...

MSNBC has become a parody in and of itself. They’re like the last network on the globe that should be talking about anything that has the words “common sense” in it. They’re nothing more than a propaganda network with ZERO credibility. They remind me of the one and only station in N Korea that plays nothing but propaganda 24/7.

a reply to: FlyersFan

even the right to free speech, can be limited as long as there is a compelling governmental interest and the restriction is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Last time I checked, flow of information didn't fall under that category, and it was mainly aimed at incitement of violence.

But what do I know, I'm not a biased pos on a disinformation platform talking with a lying scumbag on the tv equivalent of a podcast.

Strangely this was done on Rachel Maddow's show - an out lesbian.

Rachel is old enough to remember a time when enough people thought homosexuality was so dangerous, there were plenty of restrictive laws against it. I'm sure she remembers the Stonewall riots.

Just a few decades ago, the vast majority of people would have supported laws limiting the right to talk about homosexuality in public. Nothing would have changed because no one would have been allowed to discuss it.

Rachel is currently enjoying the benefit of change through what at the time was considered dangerous speech.

a reply to: FlyersFan

And to think these individuals with dream of America dictatorship under the democrat leadership are getting law degrees and become political trash later on.

On top of that they are influencing the minds of future lawyers and Judges to burn down our constitutional rights.

Wow only in America somebody can be on TV and promote from terrorism to hate speech and push for a state sponsored speech restriction.

She should be kept away from anything political and from our young minds in college.

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: FlyersFan

The insane Liberals want total control over our lives.

We’ve already been through all of that with Biden’s now defunct Ministry of Truth and the whack job he put in charge of it.

Remember Mary Poppins?

Biden ‘disinfo’ czar Nina Jankowicz ripped over cringeworthy Mary Poppins TikTok

nypost.com...

I always lmao whenever I see that clip. It’s cringe 2.0 on steroids.

What were they thinking? 🤔😂

a reply to: FlyersFan

Sometimes TRUTH is just a Belief in an Individuals Mind . It takes Facts to Prove Otherwise .

a reply to: FlyersFan

1st Amendment

But these people hate America and hate the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

originally posted by: twistedpuppy
a reply to: FlyersFan

There's one problem; how to define common sense? What is common sense to me can be totally bats**t to you and the other way round. So who is to define it? The government? Governments change so the definitions of common sense will be changing every few years.

The same is with disinformation. We know that 2 and 2 is 4. Everyone probably agrees. All the rest is disputable.

Our " Creator " endowed Us with the Ability to " Reason " from Birth . That Translates to " Common Sense " for those who are Capable of Comprehending it .

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: FlyersFan

Sometimes TRUTH is just a Belief in an Individuals Mind . It takes Facts to Prove Otherwise .

And sometimes we choose truth over facts!
This never gets old. 🤣

And yet you people want to install openly authoritarian person as president ...

It just look bit...hypocrites to me


I expect you still want your dose of pure authoritarianism, which usually has meaned limiting freedom


Openly authoritarian campaign’: Trump’s threats of revenge fuel alarm

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of democracy, civil liberties, and political plurality.[1] It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.[2][3] Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government.[3] Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military.[4][5] States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.[

Authoritarianism

a reply to: FlyersFan

In my opinion, the next step is the legalization of the Witches Hammer. We need to bring up the archives of Kent County.

a reply to: Kenzo


I'm not a smart person.

So can you go ahead and make a short list of authoritarian things Trump will do?

Like just the top 5.


You know, so I can see this hypocrisy you're speaking on.

originally posted by: Kenzo


And yet you people want to install openly authoritarian person as president ...

It just look bit...hypocrites to me

I expect you still want your dose of pure authoritarianism, which usually has meaned limiting freedom


Openly authoritarian campaign’: Trump’s threats of revenge fuel alarm

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of democracy, civil liberties, and political plurality.[1] It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.[2][3] Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government.[3] Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military.[4][5] States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.[

Authoritarianism

what do you mean "you people"?