Ketanji Brown Jackson MISSES ENTIRE POINT Of The First Amendment: Matt Taibbi On SCOTUS Case

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 18 бер 2024
  • Journalist Matt Taibbi weighs in on free speech being on the balance in the Supreme Court. #SCOTUS #speech
    About Rising:
    Rising is a weekday morning show with bipartisan hosts that breaks the mold of morning TV by taking viewers inside the halls of Washington power like never before. The show leans into the day's political cycle with cutting edge analysis from DC insiders who can predict what is going to happen. It also sets the day's political agenda by breaking exclusive news with a team of scoop-driven reporters and demanding answers during interviews with the country's most important political newsmakers.
    Follow Rising on social media:
    Website: Hill.TV
    Facebook: HillTVLive/
    Instagram: @HillTVLive
    Twitter: @HillTVLive

КОМЕНТАРІ • 1,9 тис.

  • @rworded1
    @rworded1 2 місяці тому +995

    "... having the first amendment hamstring the government." This is absolutely repugnant. That's EXACTLY why we have the first amendment. What are law schools teaching??

    • @astronautical1082
      @astronautical1082 2 місяці тому

      No, government is just another "party" with something at stake. Conservatives simply loathe the fact-based operation of agencies because they reveal unflattering things about right wing ideology and the people who endorse it.

    • @harnessriscallous7466
      @harnessriscallous7466 2 місяці тому +52

      Bjg and ketanji have literally the exact same worldview.

    • @ganndeber1621
      @ganndeber1621 2 місяці тому +122

      What else do you expect from the DEI hire?

    • @gbonkers666
      @gbonkers666 2 місяці тому

      Well, some of them do advocate it.....includling the ACLU....

    • @agwarden
      @agwarden 2 місяці тому +54

      The moment I heard that my eyelids nearly disappeared.

  • @needparalegal
    @needparalegal 2 місяці тому +160

    She doesn't know what a WOMAN is, NO ONE is surprised she does not know what the FIRST AMENDMENT is.

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому

      A actually watched that.
      I was set back into my chair.
      I'm not a biologist. Seriously.
      The DNA.
      PRETTY SIMPLE.
      1st A.
      Why is it the first Amendment in the Constitution.
      Kings have Stifled speech for Centuries. And be headed their citizens for opposing them if even in thought and speech.

  • @BajatheChickenMan
    @BajatheChickenMan 2 місяці тому +140

    How does a statement like that leave your mouth as a Supreme Court Justice? This woman is a disgrace.

    • @juanguzman3686
      @juanguzman3686 2 місяці тому

      By that smile of her, you can tell that she's not ashamed of being an affirmative & equity direct hire of the 🤡💩 administration. 🤫🤫

    • @KuptisOriginal
      @KuptisOriginal 2 місяці тому +4

      She should've never been confirmed as a SCJ let alone any judge.

  • @teck6974
    @teck6974 2 місяці тому +337

    Bri still towing the line that SOME censorship is OK. She's exhausting.

    • @kevinsommers0704
      @kevinsommers0704 2 місяці тому +35

      I can't stand her I only watch the show to keep my enemies close

    • @bobdavenport6127
      @bobdavenport6127 2 місяці тому +41

      I used to respect her. She's intelligent. A good debater. Attractive. Once she became full-time on Rising her authoritarian mindset really came out full bore. Every time she has a counter, you can see right before Matt responds he is trying to be polite, but his eyes are also saying, "I can't believe what I'm hearing."

    • @user-lh5re8jh7u
      @user-lh5re8jh7u 2 місяці тому +25

      Yeah, Brianna hasn't heard of the doctrine regarding prior restraints. She must have missed Constitutional Law that week.

    • @tcorourke2007
      @tcorourke2007 2 місяці тому +10

      I think she gets forced to play the role of "the opposition," but I agree it is tiresome.

    • @tcorourke2007
      @tcorourke2007 2 місяці тому +9

      ​@@bobdavenport6127 She totally contradicted him, citing VOX!

  • @frogsoda
    @frogsoda 2 місяці тому +641

    "Having the first amendment hamstring the government."
    Yeah Ketanji. That's the point.
    Of, by, and for THE PEOPLE.

    • @drisgorilla5382
      @drisgorilla5382 2 місяці тому +17

      Could then argue that the 2nd amendment hamstrings the criminal justice system.

    • @stevezilla68
      @stevezilla68 2 місяці тому +13

      Hey Ketanji, now do the 13th amendment.

    • @SikDigitz
      @SikDigitz 2 місяці тому +19

      Dei hire at best

    • @barryfleming8488
      @barryfleming8488 2 місяці тому +14

      She’s living up to my expectations.

    • @user-bp6wn4qt8b
      @user-bp6wn4qt8b 2 місяці тому +15

      @@SikDigitz we wuz judging and sheeeit

  • @sawyer4713
    @sawyer4713 2 місяці тому +556

    Abhorrent that a Supreme Court Justice would say this!

    • @bliglum
      @bliglum 2 місяці тому +40

      This is what happens when skin color is prioritized over knowledge and capability.

    • @painmonopoly6930
      @painmonopoly6930 2 місяці тому

      This is what Liberals folding to Progressives gets you. A load of DEI hires (Kamala, KBJ, KJP, lipstick luggage bandit) makes your administration look like a clown show.

    • @garydorfner6695
      @garydorfner6695 2 місяці тому

      Recall when Sotayamor stated as fact that 100's of thousands of kids were on ventilators due to Covid. There's a trend here.

    • @liberalismisaids9564
      @liberalismisaids9564 2 місяці тому +33

      She’s an activist not a justice

    • @johnadams1281
      @johnadams1281 2 місяці тому +26

      she's an activist, could you imagine if Democrats got to nominate more SCJ in the future? Would be a disaster for the country

  • @jencrews
    @jencrews 2 місяці тому +85

    How is it possible that I was a middle school social studies teacher 25 years ago and I understand the Constitution and the purpose of free speech better than a Supreme Court Justice?! What the actual f***. God save America

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому +6

      Well hopefully those students remember what you taught them today.
      And repeat your name to others.
      God Bless your responsibility to the children

    • @firehorse_44alpha-omega
      @firehorse_44alpha-omega 2 місяці тому +5

      You are spot on !
      Thank you for your vocation.

    • @gomahklawm4446
      @gomahklawm4446 2 місяці тому +4

      Because you weren't a DEI hire....

    • @duncanidaho2097
      @duncanidaho2097 2 місяці тому

      Thank you. We have the new waves of teachers and their unions teaching marxism and hatred of our Constitutional Republic and way of life.

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      The purpose of these hearings is to challenge arguments with difficult and at times extreme questions.
      Your understanding of free speech isn’t at issue, your understanding of a Supreme Court hearing is.

  • @steverose3019
    @steverose3019 2 місяці тому +47

    Bri is the queen of "asking a question" but the question is about 70 seconds long, touches on three different subjects, and isn't really a question at all.

  • @peteblum2143
    @peteblum2143 2 місяці тому +369

    😡 How is this woman on the Supreme Court ???😡😡😡😡

    • @gbonkers666
      @gbonkers666 2 місяці тому

      Affirmative ac......Biden campained that he would nominate a black female...

    • @marialeach8960
      @marialeach8960 2 місяці тому +80

      DEI

    • @jaradshaw4723
      @jaradshaw4723 2 місяці тому +29

      Yes she also ruled before being on it that pedophiles were not criminals

    • @dashx1103
      @dashx1103 2 місяці тому

      @@jaradshaw4723 I don't think that is true, but please direct me to any information to the contrary. Thanks.

    • @jim6038
      @jim6038 2 місяці тому +6

      You know ....

  • @joer9276
    @joer9276 2 місяці тому +628

    It shows how unqualified she is for the position. It’s literally the whole point of the free speach portion of the first amendment.

    • @nyetzdyec3391
      @nyetzdyec3391 2 місяці тому +32

      It's baked into the whole thing, *before* the Bill of Rights was added.
      The Constitution exists/existed to tell what the Federal Government *could* do... which does *not* include regulating people's speech, etc.
      Fortunately, we had Founding Fathers who were smart enough to realize that wouldn't be enough (and it hasn't been), so some of them insisted on adding the Bill of Rights, to "double down" on it, by specifying it the other way... what they *cannot* do.

    • @id10t98
      @id10t98 2 місяці тому

      So you think anyone should be allowed to tell other people to inject bleach, swallow aquarium cleaner and take horse medication for any illness? Go for it.

    • @0giwan
      @0giwan 2 місяці тому +46

      Of course she's unqualified. She's in that seat because she checks boxes.

    • @WahkeenaSitka
      @WahkeenaSitka 2 місяці тому +17

      Well, No. If you understood who Biden is and what he represents, it demonstrates exactly how qualified Ketanji B Jackson is and why she was promoted to her position.

    • @nealorr5086
      @nealorr5086 2 місяці тому +3

      I think we're over-reaching here. She just put it forth as an argument, she didn't necessarily say that she agreed with it.
      Admittedly, it's possible that she does agree with it, but steelmaning is a a thing.

  • @coda3208
    @coda3208 2 місяці тому +39

    How can Brianna be so wrong? This is an open and shut case if ever there was one.

    • @AnthonyL0401
      @AnthonyL0401 2 місяці тому +6

      Briahna is wrong all the time

    • @tashalorm4313
      @tashalorm4313 2 місяці тому +2

      When you are too emotional about social issues, you can't be logical. Don't expect her to be logical.

    • @coda3208
      @coda3208 2 місяці тому +2

      @@tashalorm4313 but…b-b-b-but… she’s a Supreme Court justice!!!

    • @tashalorm4313
      @tashalorm4313 2 місяці тому +3

      @@coda3208 I was referring to Brianna. For the scotus I don't think we need to say much due to the fact: she can't define a woman.

  • @dinosaursnack
    @dinosaursnack 2 місяці тому +9

    Briahna: "I admit I have not read the briefings, and I did not read the Twitter files, but here is my completely uninformed opinion on this..."
    Isn't it her job to read this stuff?

  • @MIKEMIKE-te2dt
    @MIKEMIKE-te2dt 2 місяці тому +252

    DEI in action: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson regards the Bill of Rights as an inconvenience to the government.

    • @pmpscheduler
      @pmpscheduler 2 місяці тому

      When they are actually born in other countries (or 1st generation) they have no understanding of how the US government works, no matter where they went to school.
      She’s a perfect example. There are so many others.

    • @RawOlympia
      @RawOlympia 2 місяці тому

      The LSAC PLUS PROGRAM sucks. If you are DEI you go to law school of choice with no tests! Illiterates are now justices!

    • @elaineteut9579
      @elaineteut9579 2 місяці тому +15

      Barack Obama said the Constitution was a “troubling” thing.

    • @jerry42023
      @jerry42023 2 місяці тому +8

      ​@@elaineteut9579(s)he also said "we need to give up our rights to a sovereign."

    • @425HP
      @425HP 2 місяці тому

      Yeah good thing she took an oath to defend the Constitution otherwise she might make incredibly biased statements. Oh yeah, she just did. So, apparently she lied when she took the oath.

  • @GarfieldAllen
    @GarfieldAllen 2 місяці тому +179

    Briahna quoted vox as her source 😅...
    That alone shows that she had no intent of looking at facts or being unbiased.

    • @ClarkPotter
      @ClarkPotter 2 місяці тому

      Vox is propaganda.

    • @morganghetti
      @morganghetti 2 місяці тому +1

      The classic "I'm going to dismiss your source so I don't have to make a counter argument".

    • @GarfieldAllen
      @GarfieldAllen 2 місяці тому +10

      @@morganghetti nope... name an actual argument that she made and I will dismiss it. The point is that she made no argument really... she simply quoted a source known to be false. Even if it was a source that tends to be honest, she should have made an actual argument via her own assessment.
      She outright admitted that she did no assessment of her own.

    • @HH-ru4bj
      @HH-ru4bj 2 місяці тому +9

      ​@@morganghettiif the flat earth society proclaimed the earth is flat, and you are using them as a source of the earth being being flat, would you accept it as being credible, it dismiss it for bias?

  • @allanknox8216
    @allanknox8216 2 місяці тому +17

    In my seventy years on this planet the suppression of free speech is the one thing that truly frightens me.

    • @user-hz5rk5vy1t
      @user-hz5rk5vy1t Місяць тому

      Be afraid when 2A is clipped. We're fine because of 2A.

  • @carycunningham9510
    @carycunningham9510 2 місяці тому +29

    How come every time the government wants to keep me "safe," not that I asked, it proceeds to weaken my Bill of Rights? That does NOT keep me safe. The Bill of Rights keeps me safe.

  • @ruth4thetruth334
    @ruth4thetruth334 2 місяці тому +163

    We're not "kids" We're citizens with rights

    • @GenghisDon1970
      @GenghisDon1970 2 місяці тому

      only oligarchs have rights in this brave new world order

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому +3

      As are all people of the world.
      The foundation came from the Bible.

  • @davidsegal2236
    @davidsegal2236 2 місяці тому +452

    When she doesn’t know what a woman is, we can’t expect her to understand the first amendment. DEI at its best!

    • @paulasweeney7713
      @paulasweeney7713 2 місяці тому +9

      EXACTLY. !!!!! Hard to reason. After that, She is where she is. today , “professionally” .🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰

    • @rjmcco
      @rjmcco 2 місяці тому

      That's a disgusting distraction from the actual issue. She was extremely well qualified for the SC which doesn't mean she is good justice just like so many white men who came before her. Your racism only obscures the real issues

    • @markdavis7853
      @markdavis7853 2 місяці тому +5

      The times we live in our so confusing! It's important not to restrain the government and its ability to keep us free and safe! 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

    • @bradc6199
      @bradc6199 2 місяці тому

      ​@@markdavis7853take a Civics class.

    • @beerye9331
      @beerye9331 2 місяці тому

      These statements are precisely why Judge Joe Brown says she's unqualified.

  • @acatwiththreenames3658
    @acatwiththreenames3658 2 місяці тому +13

    Harvard Law must be so proud of Kentanji.

    • @stevensica5918
      @stevensica5918 2 місяці тому

      They're certainly NOT proud of you.

  • @bernooski5128
    @bernooski5128 2 місяці тому +8

    What a f***ing shock that Bre is taking a side against free speech. LOL

  • @jasonrossrealty
    @jasonrossrealty 2 місяці тому +133

    Matt Taibbi is the BEST of journalism!!!

    • @gomahklawm4446
      @gomahklawm4446 2 місяці тому +2

      Exactly why the establishment hates him.....

    • @stevensica5918
      @stevensica5918 2 місяці тому +1

      EXCEPT for The Musk Interlude.

    • @Don-md6wn
      @Don-md6wn 2 місяці тому

      No, he sucks and Mehdi Hasan humiliated him.

  • @irenemckenna3336
    @irenemckenna3336 2 місяці тому +288

    Matt Taibbi, you serve your country ethically, morally, educationally by your uncompromising principles to honest journalism and always to the pursuit of truth!

    • @drbrubent
      @drbrubent 2 місяці тому +15

      Matt is the Edward R. Murrow of our time. We are lucky to have his voice.

    • @zachsabbath1
      @zachsabbath1 2 місяці тому +1

      "Educationally," spoken like someone lacking an education.

    • @gomahklawm4446
      @gomahklawm4446 2 місяці тому +2

      That's exactly why the establishment hates him.....

    • @Don-md6wn
      @Don-md6wn 2 місяці тому +1

      Yeah, the Edward R. Murrow who agreed to let Elon Musk spoon feed him cherry picked content for money.@@drbrubent

    • @antonpiskernik7824
      @antonpiskernik7824 2 місяці тому

      "Surprisingly nearly all of the colleagues seem to have completely forgotten what role the truth should have in reliable journalism!! "
      They're thinking reporting can easily go without fact-basing/investigating into what took place/was 'realiter' happening..
      It has become a podium for retelling opinions of important people, too often becoming thus a "reproduction-machine" for unprovable narratives! 🤦‍♂️😡
      "Do away with the Pulitzer prize, unless you really give it to Matt Taibbi, Paul Schreyer,.. and similar outstanding players who struggle for the truth, giving a minute enumeration of what counts, affects me and you. Presenting dependable/reliable gems of important, often dissembled/hidden- away actions/events in society: something the public could unquestionably be fond of!" Such awesome investigation undoubtedly takes a lot of spine/character and courage...Thanks to God ther are still a few ones ❤️❗️🔆
      [Me also would have to say "Thank you", for that's what we really need]

  • @chungoman280
    @chungoman280 2 місяці тому +22

    She should be impeached and disbarred.

  • @tedjones2171
    @tedjones2171 2 місяці тому +21

    How is she considered liberal. Once upon a time the liberals were in favor of free speech.

  • @branchingoutnurseries4403
    @branchingoutnurseries4403 2 місяці тому +287

    BJG quoting VOX as a source pretty much sums up her bias.

    • @BlackhaloZ
      @BlackhaloZ 2 місяці тому +15

      I'm guessing that she is overly fond of Jackson.

    • @GbUSA321
      @GbUSA321 2 місяці тому +28

      She is a DEI graduate from Harvard

    • @otisfresh2719
      @otisfresh2719 2 місяці тому +10

      She is a Harvard graduate. Ftfy.

    • @heent7972
      @heent7972 2 місяці тому +3

      EXACTLY!!!

    • @j.s.3297
      @j.s.3297 2 місяці тому +1

      😂

  • @yoursoulisforever
    @yoursoulisforever 2 місяці тому +124

    I was shocked to hear a Supreme Court Justice suggest the free speech of American citizens should be censored...WOW! JUST WOW!

    • @GenghisDon1970
      @GenghisDon1970 2 місяці тому

      I'm not surprised at all. The court of supreme injustice & corruption serves the oligarchy ONLY, just as the other branches do. Enemies of the people, all

    • @Thorrnn
      @Thorrnn 2 місяці тому +7

      I’m not

    • @FindLiberty
      @FindLiberty 2 місяці тому +3

      REPORTED ;-)

    • @justwanderin847
      @justwanderin847 2 місяці тому

      Private companies can censor, governments can not.

    • @annabellepepper3319
      @annabellepepper3319 2 місяці тому

      She was chosen for such a moment as this! The moment she couldn't answer what a woman is, I knew from that moment she was hand picked by the swamp for "great things". Taking down free speech has been within government sights since forever but last few years its now within their grasp. Yeah not shocked was waiting when the shoe would drop as to her role towards the demoncratic authoritarian regime. Now it's plain as day.

  • @x0rn312
    @x0rn312 2 місяці тому +9

    This is disturbing. Truly disturbing to see a Supreme Court Justice who lacks even the most basic understanding of what a constitutional republic is.

  • @bobbie4862
    @bobbie4862 2 місяці тому +12

    She won't define what a woman is, why would you think she would actually understand free speech.

  • @Widemouth1832
    @Widemouth1832 2 місяці тому +131

    It's a little sad that she was appointment to the SCOTUS and she doesn't understand the 1A.

    • @NowOffYouGo
      @NowOffYouGo 2 місяці тому +15

      A little!?!?

    • @benisrood
      @benisrood 2 місяці тому +17

      It's criminal that she was appointed.

    • @CharlieTWilbury
      @CharlieTWilbury 2 місяці тому +15

      It’s the style of the new SC justice. They’re appointed for their politics, not their judicial expertise.

    • @RawOlympia
      @RawOlympia 2 місяці тому

      The LSAC PLUS PROGRAM sucks. If you are DEI you go to law school of choice with no tests! Illiterates are now justices!

    • @Kissypooh
      @Kissypooh 2 місяці тому +6

      It's profoundly sad and tragic. She is the tip of the spear. The US is finished.

  • @jaelancaster5506
    @jaelancaster5506 2 місяці тому +151

    Bri goes on and admits she hasn’t read the case….and Matt runs circles around her and very adeptly and expertly stands his ground

    • @Gettothegone
      @Gettothegone 2 місяці тому +22

      Bri has spent too much time in academia. Anyone who graduates from an institution like an Ivy League law school tends to be book smart but lacks common sense.

    • @ganndeber1621
      @ganndeber1621 2 місяці тому +11

      All she needs to know is that she has to defend the DEI hire. To her black people are never wrong

    • @nickatnite85
      @nickatnite85 2 місяці тому +16

      If she hasn't read the case maybe she shouldn't comment on the case.

    • @bitburg40
      @bitburg40 2 місяці тому +7

      Bri the liberal demon says, “let me play devil’s advocate”. 😂

    • @tcorourke2007
      @tcorourke2007 2 місяці тому +6

      But she has a summary... from VOX!

  • @michelleerwin3833
    @michelleerwin3833 2 місяці тому +9

    It wasn't soft pressure, they were threatened and harassed, Bri isn't playing the Devil's advocate, she is playing right alongside the Devil.

    • @kevinmorris2182
      @kevinmorris2182 2 місяці тому +1

      As soon as she said “playing devil’s advocate” I was like, “yeah right”

  • @itsapittie
    @itsapittie 2 місяці тому +9

    It's not possible for the federal government to make "suggestions" without an implied threat. The power differential is so great that no private actor will feel they can refuse.

    • @TheBaumcm
      @TheBaumcm 2 місяці тому +2

      It’s why any boss who implies that a subordinate should do something, like sleep with them for a promotion, is considered coercive and to be abusing their power.

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      “I just need 11,780 votes.”

  • @j5her727
    @j5her727 2 місяці тому +81

    The "bully pulpit" argument by Matt is THE answer. Censorship is not. If the government disagrees with the content of someone's speech counter it and make your case.

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому +5

      The Essence of DEBATE.
      I learned that I'm highschool.
      Rebuttal with opposition of facts.
      NOT FEELINGS.

    • @ronbaker6000
      @ronbaker6000 2 місяці тому +2

      The quote by Madison ? " if men were angels they wont need a government " the government isn't angelic ,Still need the bill of rights

  • @KonigGustavAdolph
    @KonigGustavAdolph 2 місяці тому +153

    Official endorsement of "Nice shop you got here. Shame if something happened to it."

    • @coda3208
      @coda3208 2 місяці тому +8

      Exactly. Biden Mafia

    • @OnceUponaTimeline
      @OnceUponaTimeline 2 місяці тому +6

      Bri suddenly living in fantasy land trying to argue that if we can't find any overt specifically stated threats, then it's totally fine and the govt would never use any other forms of pressure or that the companies would never need to fear such pressure.

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому +1

      Straight Gangsta

  • @AdriennePaige
    @AdriennePaige 2 місяці тому +8

    The power imbalance between social media companies and the government is so great that even “soft” pressure is wholly unconstitutional.

  • @808tracygirl
    @808tracygirl 2 місяці тому +7

    Me:Does Bri have anything actual to say? Also me: Actually, no.

  • @Rosannananana
    @Rosannananana 2 місяці тому +114

    How can we have a Supreme Court Justice who doesn't understand the role of 1st Amendment regarding the government? These people are supposed to protect and defend the constitution and We The People not support government to exert more influence and power!

    • @WarningStrangerDanger
      @WarningStrangerDanger 2 місяці тому +9

      Republicans expressed concern that she was not competent for the job, but she is a product of the 'we need to pack the court' era where the goal was just to get bodies on the bench.

    • @GenghisDon1970
      @GenghisDon1970 2 місяці тому

      I'm sure she & they understand...but they are there to serve the oligarchs, and nothing else. They are enemies of the people. wake up

    • @Joe-mk3ii
      @Joe-mk3ii 2 місяці тому

      It's a Bolshevik revolution.

    • @Thorrnn
      @Thorrnn 2 місяці тому

      She is first snd foremost an “ACTIVIST”, she went into law to gain power to force her activism and “make systemic change for the cause of social justice”, she’s probably a soros pawn, and should never be anywhere near the levers of power. And no, she not only doesn’t understand the purpose of the 1st Amendment, if she did she would be completely opposed to it.

  • @goldenviolet4298
    @goldenviolet4298 2 місяці тому +137

    Love when Matt is on

    • @Daniel-yl5jl1bi6q
      @Daniel-yl5jl1bi6q 2 місяці тому +1

      Yes. First time I've watched this show on a day other than Friday in ages.

  • @williamadams4855
    @williamadams4855 2 місяці тому +9

    Bri went from "playing devils advocate" because she knows it's wrong or taboo to go against the 1st ammendment. Then later in the episode says "I do think". She does this consistently. It's in her nature to manipulate to push her narrative.

  • @williambrown1451
    @williambrown1451 2 місяці тому +5

    sickening, how have we gone so far astray... everyday more freedoms are in jeopardy or lost, how easily we have forgotten what freedom is and that once a freedom is taken away it's almost impossible to get it back.

    • @alemswazzu
      @alemswazzu 2 місяці тому +1

      It's all on purpose, and watching so many choose to be useful idiots - who clap like seals, while drool drips down their face, chanting DEI slogans, is so very sad.

  • @amygargan8077
    @amygargan8077 2 місяці тому +28

    Anyone else remember Bri’s little tantrum’s when Matt Taibbi first started exposing all this with the Twitter Files? How, no matter what he found, her response was always “what about Trump?”. At least she’s consistent with her partisanship.

    • @Don-md6wn
      @Don-md6wn 2 місяці тому +1

      The Twitter files? LOL. That was a complete fiasco for grifting lisping Matt.

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      Trump did tell Twitter to remove Chrissy Teigen’s tweet.

  • @julianciahaconsulting8663
    @julianciahaconsulting8663 2 місяці тому +201

    Didnt the Democrats say that Censorship is good for Free Speech?

    • @utah_koidragon7117
      @utah_koidragon7117 2 місяці тому

      The Democrats and the left of today are open advocates of censorship. It's shocking.

    • @drisgorilla5382
      @drisgorilla5382 2 місяці тому +23

      They definitely implied that lack of censorship is a threat to democracy.

    • @brentwaits954
      @brentwaits954 2 місяці тому +2

      They still are

    • @scottmcloughlin4371
      @scottmcloughlin4371 2 місяці тому

      Fed Govt Agencies. The "democrats" are just a front organization for Fed Govt Agencies. Agencies like USDA and FDA. DOD? NIH? ATF? CDC? More Fed Govt Agencies. Remember lockdowns? FDA? CDC? Obvious, right? @@drisgorilla5382

    • @julianciahaconsulting8663
      @julianciahaconsulting8663 2 місяці тому +1

      Funny how we had little or no censorship for decades and Democracy seemed to do just fine...@@drisgorilla5382

  • @light9999
    @light9999 2 місяці тому +5

    "Can you define what a First Amendment is?" "No I can't. I'm not a legal expert."

    • @tuxcollins2718
      @tuxcollins2718 2 місяці тому

      Lol, is this a joke? What do you mean you can’t define what the Fiirst Amendment is? The First Amendment provides that Congress make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting its free exercise. It protects freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition our Government!!

  • @pieintheskyguy1130
    @pieintheskyguy1130 2 місяці тому +9

    Matt Taibbi is the reason I watch The Hill. And Glen Greenwald too.

  • @vicnighthorse
    @vicnighthorse 2 місяці тому +148

    As usual it sounds a lot like Bri's prime directive is - 'must defend other DEI beneficiaries whatever the cost'.

    • @mikahundin
      @mikahundin 2 місяці тому +4

      Based on the provided transcript, there is no explicit mention of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in the discussion. The focus of the conversation appears to be primarily on First Amendment rights, government coercion, and the role of social media companies in regulating speech. Therefore, there doesn't seem to be a direct connection to DEI topics in this particular discussion.

    • @harnessriscallous7466
      @harnessriscallous7466 2 місяці тому +14

      ​@@mikahundindei is a tool of the CIA and govt in conjunction with major corporations. Which is the topic at hand.
      You have a very basic view of the English language if you think a control f search means anything about topic discussion.
      You're making this comment on UA-cam, where we talk about "grape* because the actual word can get you censored. Learn what a homonym is.

    • @ganndeber1621
      @ganndeber1621 2 місяці тому +9

      yep black people can not be wrong

    • @ericward284
      @ericward284 2 місяці тому +22

      ​@mikahundin this has to be the dumbest most pretentious comment of the day lol you don't have to explicitly mention something for it to be a factor to consider in a discussion. We all know people who weren't qualified that got jobs because of DEI or affirmative action. And considering this video is about KJBs incompetence, that's kind of the point

    • @jim6038
      @jim6038 2 місяці тому +6

      ​@mikahundin it is implied that dei is impose to 'protect' people, but is really to curtail speech. Legal arguments include implied affects, the implications of express text is actually what legal argument/law is about.

  • @jaelancaster5506
    @jaelancaster5506 2 місяці тому +25

    You killed it Matt….wonderful expert commentary

  • @teresabarrett8339
    @teresabarrett8339 2 місяці тому +21

    Hey, Justice Brown, it is NOT the government's job to know what is best for the people, and therefore do what they want. That's a nanny state or better yet a totalitarian state!!!!

  • @PB-or2fd
    @PB-or2fd 2 місяці тому +4

    Scary hearing that from a member of SCOTUS. Great to hear from Matt.

  • @JoeBeThere
    @JoeBeThere 2 місяці тому +113

    Repressive acts of governments are often shrouded in “we must protect the people.”

    • @liberalismisaids9564
      @liberalismisaids9564 2 місяці тому +9

      Like gun control , climate change and the rona

    • @theofulk5636
      @theofulk5636 2 місяці тому +2

      Yes, and notice how obvious it is that we call it "CONTRADICTORY" ! WE THE PEOPLE have got to claim our JURISDICTION ! ! WE THE PEOPLE are the supreme court of this Republic.

    • @RM-lk1so
      @RM-lk1so 2 місяці тому +2

      Like whats now happening in the NYC subway.
      We're here to protect you.
      😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @patrickday4206
      @patrickday4206 2 місяці тому

      I watched a video where a cop tackles a 19 year old off his bike because he didn't have a light and that was dangerous 😮

    • @annabellepepper3319
      @annabellepepper3319 2 місяці тому

      Nicely put. And now "moderation" of speech is the softly weaponized language of censorship. I'd love to see the distinction between them where free speech is not curtailed in anyway...

  • @bonnieenright
    @bonnieenright 2 місяці тому +135

    WHY DO YOU THINK DOCTORS SUPPORTED THE COVID BS. BECAUSE YOU CANT BE A PRACTICING DOCTOR WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENTS SAY SO AKA LICENSE.

    • @astronautical1082
      @astronautical1082 2 місяці тому

      Doctors are scientists and so they heed facts, evidence, and vaccination. Science-illiterate people say what you say.

    • @terryritter7065
      @terryritter7065 2 місяці тому

      @@user-oc2qk3er5r but most practicing physicians were doing what they were told because they had to if they wanted to practice. There wasn't some gravy train keeping them attached to the vaccine narrative other than losing their careers.

    • @noneyabizz8337
      @noneyabizz8337 2 місяці тому +1

      It was the money

    • @john5516
      @john5516 2 місяці тому

      💯💯💯🎯🎯🎯

    • @steverose3019
      @steverose3019 2 місяці тому

      I worked in the medical field for a long time, and you'd be shocked by how many things doctors say without any evidence at all. For example, how effective is hand-washing and masks, REALLY? Nobody knows, it's just been repeated so much that people accept it. I'm not saying these things are bad, mind you, I'm simply saying some aspects of medicine literally haven't changed in 500 years because little actual research has ever been done.

  • @markbures3190
    @markbures3190 2 місяці тому +10

    Bri showing her authoritarian streak.

  • @jackthisout9480
    @jackthisout9480 2 місяці тому +7

    Soft pressure? When the WH sends you a letter, you call that 'soft pressure' Brie?

  • @Beatsandmma
    @Beatsandmma 2 місяці тому +34

    Brianna, the governments preference should have no consequence on what you're allowed to post, share or publish. No matter how you try to talk around it fire her. Geez

  • @laureencriss8220
    @laureencriss8220 2 місяці тому +41

    Every time I hear Robbie start to speak, I hear, "I feel this and that way, but I'm afraid of Bri, so I'll just say this".

    • @tomsmith2340
      @tomsmith2340 2 місяці тому +4

      I think Bri is part owner or has a very strong influence in this company because Robbie shakes in his boots when is petrified to stand up to her.

    • @laureencriss8220
      @laureencriss8220 2 місяці тому +2

      @@tomsmith2340 Very strong influence!

    • @gomahklawm4446
      @gomahklawm4446 2 місяці тому +1

      @tomsmith2340 Explains the lack of balance. No wonder it sucks.....

  • @mattyj4852
    @mattyj4852 2 місяці тому +9

    BJG, your final question simply ignores the very thorough answer Matt gave you when you asked it the first time - read the case, not Vox. I thought you were a former lawyer.

  • @jamesberlo4298
    @jamesberlo4298 2 місяці тому +5

    Matt is the Man, His Dad was a loved Reporter here in Boston,

  • @harnessriscallous7466
    @harnessriscallous7466 2 місяці тому +40

    Briannas role is indistinguishable from Bernie sanders.
    Just vaguely defending state power over you with cosmically ungrounded claims and statements of feeling.

    • @davidjooste5788
      @davidjooste5788 2 місяці тому +1

      So Schumer's office leaned on Bri but she's still soft on that behaviour. Job hunting I guess.

  • @krystabelle36
    @krystabelle36 2 місяці тому +54

    Soft pressure? If the govt suggests it.. its not a suggestion

    • @ganndeber1621
      @ganndeber1621 2 місяці тому +7

      The DEI hire defends the DEI hire

    • @heent7972
      @heent7972 2 місяці тому +4

      I caught the "soft pressure" reference as well ! Bri is exasperatingly duplicitous!!!

    • @a.d.3606
      @a.d.3606 2 місяці тому

      Uhhhh this is America. If the government suggests something, it's usually a suggestion. Matt Taibbi himself explains within this interview that he understand that there's such a thing as soft-pressure and suggestion.

    • @gentlemantramp7528
      @gentlemantramp7528 2 місяці тому +3

      Soft pressure, as in suasion, or a persuasive argument, is "soft" in comparison with the "hard" pressure of compulsion, or brute force.
      That's one valence. Another is that it matters a great deal whether such pressure is being applied publicly or covertly.

    • @gomahklawm4446
      @gomahklawm4446 2 місяці тому +1

      Indeed. This shouldn't be happening and the people trying it should be jailed for treason against the bill of rights and the constitution.

  • @kurtisgibbs6698
    @kurtisgibbs6698 2 місяці тому +3

    Bri: my associates didn’t demand you pay them money in order to not burn your store down. They just said they’d like you to pay them some money and that it’d be a shame if something were to burn your store down.

  • @robertrose81
    @robertrose81 2 місяці тому +3

    I mean it's fine to have freedom of speech but you don't want the government to be unable to tell people what to think, say and hear 😂. Sounds legit

  • @davidwatson9495
    @davidwatson9495 2 місяці тому +54

    Does anybody really believe that the government can call a person and say "Hey no pressure but..." and that not be understood as "If you don't do X your life might get more difficult."

    • @benisrood
      @benisrood 2 місяці тому +1

      It's an absurd question.

    • @1D4ever
      @1D4ever 2 місяці тому +2

      My boss can't ask me to do something directly with out causing pressure

    • @TheBaumcm
      @TheBaumcm 2 місяці тому +2

      Everything they do is done at the point of a (not so) metaphorical gun.

    • @FindLiberty
      @FindLiberty 2 місяці тому

      @@TheBaumcm Yep, 100% coercion and force.

    • @ThorsMjollnir0341
      @ThorsMjollnir0341 2 місяці тому

      The government is the mafia.

  • @steveclapper5424
    @steveclapper5424 2 місяці тому +60

    The entire basis of the Constitution is limit what the MAJORITY can do.

    • @sfcablecar
      @sfcablecar 2 місяці тому

      Exactly! We live in a Constitutional Democracy. The minority has protections and rights that the majority can not take away.

    • @dashx1103
      @dashx1103 2 місяці тому +3

      That is the fundamental basis of the Bill of Rights. A lot of the remainder of the Constitution conveys powers to the "majority."

    • @esposexy2210
      @esposexy2210 2 місяці тому +1

      No. the constitution promotes plurality and balances power based on a system of checks on power, it doesn't limit what the majority can do ihnerently.

    • @steveclapper5424
      @steveclapper5424 2 місяці тому

      @@dashx1103 you are right it's the bill of rights that defines what it means to be free.

    • @patrickday4206
      @patrickday4206 2 місяці тому

      A balance of power! one person's rights are as valid as 1,000 people's rights

  • @forevertoons9022
    @forevertoons9022 2 місяці тому +5

    Let's be realistic: no one conceivably believes that Ms Jackson is qualified/competent enough to sit on the Supreme Court.

  • @FirstLast-di4zi
    @FirstLast-di4zi 2 місяці тому +3

    Matt is a True American!!!😇🧡👍
    God bless you Matt!!!😇👍

  • @markdimeo7060
    @markdimeo7060 2 місяці тому +48

    " All the government did was make them an offer they can't refuse. What's the big deal?"

  • @AngelOfClans
    @AngelOfClans 2 місяці тому +31

    There is no problem Bri, the government can not sensor speech period. Does not matter if the speech is true or not.

    • @IHateItHere1312
      @IHateItHere1312 2 місяці тому

      That is until it is affecting you personally, where are you going to run to when that happens, yer mommy!?

    • @ganndeber1621
      @ganndeber1621 2 місяці тому +1

      Unless the supreme court rules otherwise. The DEI hire will vote to rule otherwise

    • @missano3856
      @missano3856 7 днів тому

      But I as a private individual can correct your spelling.

  • @kvasnaik8920
    @kvasnaik8920 2 місяці тому +4

    Love Matt thank you having him on,he is a freedom fighter period

  • @Kingfisher1215
    @Kingfisher1215 2 місяці тому +5

    She thinks it’s the government’s job to not only curtail free speech, but to decide what speech to curtail. How would the government know what speech to censor, if someone wasn’t making decisions about what to allow and what to censor. Censoring all speech would be bad, censoring some speech is even worse.

  • @sawyer4713
    @sawyer4713 2 місяці тому +17

    More Matt Taibbi! He is the king of truth.

  • @rebeccarydberg7566
    @rebeccarydberg7566 2 місяці тому +23

    This is incredibly frightening!

  • @EverettBurger
    @EverettBurger 2 місяці тому +2

    "The company's choice to succumb to soft pressure"
    Whether the government states "Do what we tell you." or "Do what we tell you!" does not matter.

  • @robertstein3770
    @robertstein3770 2 місяці тому +3

    She couldn’t tell you what a woman is. Do you think she understands the first amendment?

  • @teambenjamin1
    @teambenjamin1 2 місяці тому +77

    If the government is talking directly to you for any reason, and you’re not scared, you’re a fool.

    • @meta_mod
      @meta_mod 2 місяці тому

      That’s the problem with the average American citizen, they’ve been brain washed into compliance
      “Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty." - John Basil Barnhill

    • @drisgorilla5382
      @drisgorilla5382 2 місяці тому +13

      Soft pressure from the federal govt is an oxymoron.

  • @lucasjonesgamedesign
    @lucasjonesgamedesign 2 місяці тому +34

    The government “making its opinion known” is more or less the same as a mafioso saying "sure would be a shame if something were to happen to it".

    • @reneepleasant3933
      @reneepleasant3933 2 місяці тому +1

      EXACTLY!

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      As long as you viewed Trump’s tweets and his phone call in Georgia the same way.

  • @christopher2215
    @christopher2215 2 місяці тому +2

    This could be one of the worst supreme court decisions in decades.
    Chilling.

  • @mikecorbeil
    @mikecorbeil 2 місяці тому +1

    It is welcome to hear from Matt again.

  • @DoorToWindow
    @DoorToWindow 2 місяці тому +36

    Bri-Ketanji school of thought: "It's not about Gov't pressure it's about Others GIVING IN to Gov't's pressure." Me:😳

    • @chipsterb4946
      @chipsterb4946 2 місяці тому +1

      It’s a bit like saying “the parents are at fault because they paid the ransom the kidnappers demanded.”

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      Where do you rank “I just need 11,780 votes”? Or when he called Monica Palmer and told her not to certify the election and he’d pay her lawyer fees?

    • @chipsterb4946
      @chipsterb4946 2 місяці тому

      @@Geewasright your comment has nothing to do with the subject of this video or the comment here.

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      @@chipsterb4946 - It has everything to do with government pressure and exposing how your opinion of it depends on who is leading the government.

    • @chipsterb4946
      @chipsterb4946 2 місяці тому

      @@Geewasright you could not be more wrong. My opinions relating to preserving our First Amendment rights have *nothing* to do with who is running the government. I object to federal government officials censoring speech regardless of whether Democrats, Republicans, capital “c” Communists, or actual Fascists are in power.
      Do you think censorship is “OK” if, and only if, your preferred politicians are in power? That is NOT what the First Amendment says, nor should it be.

  • @irenemckenna3336
    @irenemckenna3336 2 місяці тому +83

    Ketanji Brown Jackson is a prime example of woke equity, chosen not on merit but on woke agenda. Meritocricy did not apply here when she was appointed

    • @dashx1103
      @dashx1103 2 місяці тому +3

      How so? Where was she lacking in terms of "merit?"

    • @andrewsidelo8221
      @andrewsidelo8221 2 місяці тому +12

      I dunno, maybe the inability to define a woman . 😂😂😂😂

    • @dashx1103
      @dashx1103 2 місяці тому +4

      @@andrewsidelo8221 So no serious answer. Got it.

    • @coblogan75
      @coblogan75 2 місяці тому +6

      ​@dashx1103 you don't believe that being able to define substantive (aa well as objective) reality as a Supreme Court Justice is important?...🤦‍♂️

    • @dashx1103
      @dashx1103 2 місяці тому

      ​@@coblogan75 Not sure what you are asking. Are you saying that the Justice can't "define substantive reality?' If so, set out your thesis and I'll consider it.

  • @timmeyer9191
    @timmeyer9191 2 місяці тому +5

    There is no way to distinguish the line between soft pressure and an overt threat. A scowl from someone in power could be a way to communicate a threat. Because there is no way to distinguish that line, soft pressure by government agents must go as well.

    • @Geewasright
      @Geewasright 2 місяці тому

      Trump’s phone call in Georgia?

  • @garyweglarz
    @garyweglarz 2 місяці тому +3

    "Terrifying" - exactly! You can't have a woke circus without clowns - and boy do we have clowns - even on the Supreme Court.

  • @leahmorency7881
    @leahmorency7881 2 місяці тому +9

    Judges please uphold the constitution and our free speech!

  • @602davido
    @602davido 2 місяці тому +6

    Congratulations BRG! You are on record with the longest sentence in the history of man! Subject/object light years apart. A filibuster unto itself!

    • @alemswazzu
      @alemswazzu 2 місяці тому +3

      No sh**, I could have read War and Peace 2x by the time she got to the end of that meaningless word salad. Few big words thrown in to make herself feel like she's such an intellectual.

    • @lisacollins3304
      @lisacollins3304 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@alemswazzu
      Nicely said. Thank you!

  • @j.s.3297
    @j.s.3297 2 місяці тому +4

    That judge doesn't understand the constitution is there to restrict gov. overreach and not the other way around.🙄

  • @luanaconley6871
    @luanaconley6871 2 місяці тому +3

    “Kids don’t do it.” She’s dumbing down free speech for children, which shows her what she thinks of the populace.

  • @utah20gflyer76
    @utah20gflyer76 2 місяці тому +15

    The government shouldn’t have an opinion, they exist to serve us and keep their mouths shut! Are we in charge or are they?

  • @2337baxter
    @2337baxter 2 місяці тому +17

    Soft pressure where government can choose to investigate you if you speak out. LOL

  • @KenMac-ui2vb
    @KenMac-ui2vb 2 місяці тому +2

    A Supreme Court Justice. She can't even define a 'woman'. What did we all expect? What a joke.

  • @butternmayo
    @butternmayo 2 місяці тому +3

    the main responsibility of the federal government is to ensure the Bill of Rights, any other function is optional

  • @raymondgilbourne112
    @raymondgilbourne112 2 місяці тому +12

    Matt Taibi: Briahna, that's a good question?
    Really Matt?
    The first 'question' went on for approximately 1min 42secs.
    Bet you couldn't repeat it.
    Why does BJG do this?
    She makes a point, meanders onto a semi-related point mid-speech & then ends with an unrelated question?

    • @UnderworldInferno
      @UnderworldInferno 2 місяці тому +1

      Thank god you did that work I was going to comment on how long her questions are, I would have no clue where to start when answering and I feel like that’s done on purpose so nothing can be attacked head on.

    • @benmeltzer
      @benmeltzer 2 місяці тому

      The best is when Greg Lukinoff said, "I have no response to your comment."

  • @gs8136
    @gs8136 2 місяці тому +12

    Why would Brianna be threatened by the correct use of the first amendment?
    And Supreme Court justices make mistakes sometimes, just not on fundamental issues like what the first amendment is in there to protect.
    It’s not there to protect the government, it is there to protect the population from the government.

  • @bobmikewillie
    @bobmikewillie 2 місяці тому +2

    She didn't know what a woman was. Why would anyone be surprised that she doesn't understand the meaning of the 1st amendment 🤷‍♂️

  • @mparantha
    @mparantha 2 місяці тому +45

    We need civil libertarians on the supreme court asap

    • @Kshthymyla
      @Kshthymyla 2 місяці тому +1

      Several are, but not enough. If trump is elected, sotomator and roberts retire, and maybe the other democrat appointees, it could be done.

    • @MIKEMIKE-te2dt
      @MIKEMIKE-te2dt 2 місяці тому +1

      We need to stop selecting judges based upon their gender or the color of their skin. Competence and integrity should be the determining factors.

    • @mparantha
      @mparantha 2 місяці тому +2

      @MIKEMIKE-te2dt while i agree that race/gender should not the only qualifications considered when hiring for any occupation, this is not a DEI issue. The issue is that our politicians typically nominate people who seek to preserve government and corporate power instead of civil liberties

    • @drewskij2175
      @drewskij2175 2 місяці тому +1

      @@Kshthymyla Sotomayor aint retiring in 4 years, that bat has a good 15-20 years left.

    • @CharlieTWilbury
      @CharlieTWilbury 2 місяці тому +1

      @@KshthymylaElecting Trump would only continue to hasten the SC seats for sale structure we are currently in.

  • @VTAcraft
    @VTAcraft 2 місяці тому +53

    Diversity hire doesn't understand something we literally teach in elementary school social studies.

    • @scillyautomatic
      @scillyautomatic 2 місяці тому +10

      No! We are not biologists, so how can we know! 🤣🤣

    • @CharlieTWilbury
      @CharlieTWilbury 2 місяці тому +1

      @@scillyautomaticit’s embarrassing that she was right about that and half the country didn’t understand it. Tribalism knows no brains.

    • @scillyautomatic
      @scillyautomatic 2 місяці тому

      @@CharlieTWilbury No, myfriend. We DO understand it. That's the problem. You people think that no one understands you and your little games. The gig is up.

    • @VTAcraft
      @VTAcraft 2 місяці тому +2

      @@CharlieTWilbury Imagine thinking you need to be a biologist to know what a woman is.. lol

    • @CharlieTWilbury
      @CharlieTWilbury 2 місяці тому +2

      @@VTAcraft Imagine not understanding that from a legal perspective, that's the only path to certainty.

  • @W1ZY
    @W1ZY 2 місяці тому +3

    Wow. I agree with Robbie. Bri is a danger to the 1st Amendment on this one. The SC is about to shut down her podcast, but she can't understand this.

  • @catblack184
    @catblack184 2 місяці тому +3

    "Kids, it's not safe."
    The government is not my daddy.

  • @jersey4life31
    @jersey4life31 2 місяці тому +34

    Bcuz we know the government never lies….lol

  • @randallharrison3254
    @randallharrison3254 2 місяці тому +8

    Bri : "We should really just conform to banana Republic status."
    Basically

  • @docsavage8640
    @docsavage8640 2 місяці тому +2

    Shocking that an Affirmative Action justice selected solely based on skin color and genitalia could be unqualified.

  • @RisingSun0203
    @RisingSun0203 2 місяці тому +4

    Affirmative Action Jackson. DEI at it’s best.

  • @terrathunderstorms3701
    @terrathunderstorms3701 2 місяці тому +15

    So in response to "soft federal pressure" social media companies can just "softly" say No or what? How would that go?

    • @TheBaumcm
      @TheBaumcm 2 місяці тому

      That would be like me telling my mom “no” as a kid. 😂