BREAKING: LA Podcaster Arrested After Discovering ‘Kill Donald Trump’ Is Apparently Not A Great Free Speech Strategy

LOS ANGELES, CA: An LA-based left-wing podcaster has reportedly discovered the exciting limits of free speech after FBI agents showed up at his Westlake home to arrest him for allegedly threatening to kill President Donald Trump.

Azariah Southworth, 40, a gay Christian podcast host, was detained after allegedly making repeated threats against the president and stalking Trump's personal lawyer and the lawyer's family, according to the New York Post.

Apparently, Southworth had been operating under the increasingly popular California legal theory that anything can be considered protected speech as long as you say "free speech" loudly enough.

According to court documents, Southworth posted a video on Instagram on April 7 in which he declared, “I have been vocal in calling for the execution of Donald Trump. This government is illegitimate and out of control. It’s time for course correction. Kill Donald Trump."

Authorities apparently interpreted this less as a nuanced commentary on constitutional government and more as a threat, which is the correct interpretation if you understand English.

As police took him away, Southworth reportedly continued expressing his political opinions by yelling, “Donald Trump is a pedophile! The country has fallen!” Chances are Southworth is merely projecting.

Prosecutors said Southworth had called for Trump's assassination multiple times, both publicly and privately.

In a January text conversation with an associate, Southworth allegedly wrote, “If I encounter any Trump official in-person, I’m seriously afraid I will end up in Jail,” before immediately demonstrating an impressive lack of confidence in his own prediction.

“But if I could Kill him, I wouldn’t waste the opportunity," he added.

“I want to funnel this rage into street art. That’s my plan,” he continued. “But GOD I want that motherf*cker and his minions dead.”

Trump's minions

According to prosecutors, Southworth regularly used his podcasting platform to encourage violence against the president, apparently believing that the First Amendment includes a special clause covering people who really, really hate the president.

“I want to practice my free speech as a survivor of conversion therapy for five years,” he said in a video in March. “Kill Donald Trump. Kill that mothef*cking pedophile in the White House. Kill that traitor of the United States Constitution.”

The phrase "free speech" was reportedly invoked so frequently that somewhere, an actual First Amendment attorney quietly developed a migraine.

Then, in April, Southworth allegedly posted another video depicting himself teleporting into the White House behind Trump while raising a knife as though preparing to stab the president.

Southworth had apparently anticipated that his increasingly specific calls for the president's execution might eventually attract the attention of federal law enforcement.

On Instagram, he previously posted a statement to followers explaining what he believed might happen if he were arrested.

“I am making this video today in the event of my arrest. It has been a long-held belief that calling for the execution of the president of The United States will get you put on a list or arrested,” he said. “I have friends who are concerned this will happen to me as I have been vocal in calling for the execution of Donald Trump.”

It turns out his friends may have been onto something.

“It’s time for course correction,” he added.

“Kill Donald Trump.”

And thus concludes another fascinating chapter in the ongoing American experiment in which people discover that the First Amendment protects an astonishing amount of speech, but apparently does not come with a complimentary federal immunity package.

Thanks for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

HHS pronoun mandate [aka pronoun persondate] forces employees to 'deny reality,' violates law: legal eagle

Protecting our ships at sea

A new gender pronoun mandate has been instituted by the Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) that requires employees to deny reality and validate the leadership's mental illness. A Heritage Foundation expert who is also a former HHS employee says the mandate violates employee rights and will result in terminations for so called "misgendering."

[H/T Fox News Digital]

"HHS and the federal government is requiring its employees to speak falsehoods," Roger Severino, the Heritage Foundation’s vice president for domestic policy and the former head of civil rights at HHS during the Trump administration, told Fox News Digital. By 'falsehoods,' Severino means outright lies and he initially broke the story on X last week. 

He said that HHS "imposed a transgender pronoun mandate on its employees who will now be forced to deny biological realities with their own words or face firing" and he included a screenshot of an email sent to employees at the department.

Severino told the outlet that the First Amendment protects federal employees from being required to speak falsehoods, being compelled to adopt a state-approved ideology, and requiring people to deny their own faith.

"These policies would require all of those things," said Harvard Law School graduate Severino.

"All employees should be addressed [by] the names and pronouns they use to describe themselves," the email to HHS employees stated as part of its push for "Gender Identity and Non-Discrimination Guidance" that it says protects "employee rights and protections related to gender identity." 

For example, even though Rachel Levine isn't a real Admiral [rear or otherwise] he gets to call himself a woman, wear dresses, training bras, pearls, sensible shoes, and deny biology. If you refuse to refer to him as her, or she, or whatever pronouns he wants you to call him, you're fired faster than Rashida Tlaib can shout an anti-Semitic slogan.

Severino said the policy pressure started with two White House executive orders in January 2021 and June 2022. They were framed to combat "gender discrimination" on the base of "gender identity."

"All applicants and employees should be addressed by the names and pronouns they use to describe themselves. Using correct names and pronouns helps foster workplaces free of discrimination and harassment," the U.S. Office of Personnel Management guidance states. So taken to an extreme, if a female applicant wanted to be addressed as "King Henry," for example, others must address her as such. If, say, a male applicant wanted to be called "Superslut Mary," well that's his prerogative. 

"This practice also creates an inclusive work environment where all applicants and employees are treated with dignity. The isolated and inadvertent use of an incorrect name or pronoun will generally not constitute unlawful harassment, but, as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has explained, continued intentional use of an incorrect name or pronoun (or both) could, in certain circumstances, contribute to an unlawful hostile work environment."

The lunatics have taken over the asylum. 

In an unlisted YouTube video linked in the email to HHS employees last week that features Assistant HHS Secretary and Rear Admiral Rachel Levine, who thinks he's a woman, says "who you know yourself to be is valid."

With that rationale, if a person with a severe mental disorder believes him or herself to be a flower, it should be perfectly reasonable to water him or her several times a week. How you do the watering is open to your creative thinking.

Severino explained to Fox News Digital that the "Orwellian" policy means that "misgendering" someone would qualify as violating anti-discrimination law which "gets you fired."

The video also states that employees "can wear clothing" and "use restrooms" based on what gender they identify as regardless of the genitals and chromosomes.

"Men who identify as female have the right to get naked in front of female colleagues in the locker room," Severino said about how this rule relates to HHS locker rooms and bathrooms. Let's not forget how Lia Thomas, a dude who says he's a woman, got sexually aroused in the woman's locker room at swim meets in which he beat actual women.

"It used to be that if you allowed a man to get naked in front of a woman in the workplace that is instantly a violation of civil rights law," Severino said. "That's the quintessential hostile work environment, subjecting women to that. Now, the policy says to the women who may be uncomfortable with that situation, they're the ones who have to leave."

Severino, who said it was "breathtaking" the Biden administration would unveil this policy, said that there are "strong arguments" that employees have legal recourse against policies like this and can "exercise their rights." And hopefully they will by bringing these anti-free speech cretins to court.

"Governments cannot compel speech and certainly cannot compel false speech," Severino said, citing West Virginia vs. Barnette in which even though children being told to say the pledge of allegiance during World War II was a good thing, the Supreme Court ruled that parents and students have a right to dissent from that view. 

Some of those students are now teaching today's students how America is the problem while they support the terrorists.

"We protect the right of political dissent and here it's a pledge of allegiance to the Rainbow flag that's been essentially required," Severino said.

Severino also said that employees have a "right to their faith" and "your boss cannot force you to deny your faith as a condition of working there." 

Tell that to the judge, because it's going to go that far.

Tweet

Leftists are feeling the evil of Tampa Bay Rays players refusing to bend over backwards for them for Pride Month

Like the intrepid problem-finders who work so hard at being offended by something someone may have said a decade ago as a teenager, progressives found a reason to be offended, unsafe and disrespected, and they are having a full-blown hissy fit over it.

The "it" being referred to is that some members of the Tampa Bay Rays major league baseball team have decided not to celebrate Pride Month. Perhaps they are religious and see pride as a sin. Perhaps they simply want nothing to do with the event for personal reasons that is none of our business. Perhaps they see it a gay and want no part of it, so they decided not to wear rainbow-colored logos on their uniforms as part of the team's yearly "Pride Night" on Saturday. 

The event is designed to legitimize the struggles lesbians, bisexual people, gay men, transgender [aka gender dysphoric] men and women and people of all sorts of letters of the alphabet, numbers, tilde and plus signs face every day by imaginary Trump supporters who come out on the streets in the early morning hours in sub-zero weather in MAGA hats, carrying nooses, and bleach . . . in Chicago, New York or LA shouting, "This is MAGA country!" while the poor victims just want to eat their sandwiches.

Tampa Bay Rays manager Kevin Cash [no relation to Johnny] addressed the refusal of some team members refusing to bend over backwards to accommodate the LGBTQMNOP+1~ after Sunday’s game. He doesn’t think it’ll negatively impact the clubhouse because discussions among the players over past few weeks were constructive and emphasized the value of differing perspectives no matter how bizarre the sexual appetites are.

"If people identify as fire hydrants, they're fire hydrants, as far as I see it," he said. "I just worry about his friend who identifies as a beagle."

Reliever Jason Adam, one of the players who chose not to wear the logo, explained that for him, it was a “faith-based decision.” During an interview with the Tampa Bay Times, he said, “It’s just what we believe the lifestyle [Jesus] encouraged us to live for our good, not to withhold.”

He added: “But we love these men and women, we care about them and we want them to feel safe and welcome here.”

Thus far, nobody has threatened the life of Jason Adam as they did with Matt Walsh of The Daily Wire who made a documentary "What is a Woman," that has caused him numerous death threats because progressives are a passionate group of folks.

During the event, groomers of the LGBTQ community participated in pregame activities and handed out miniature LGBTQ flags to fans both old and very young.

Some sports writers, who clearly don't believe in the First Amendment, attacked the team for not falling in lockstep with the demands made upon them. These cretins claim, using the straw man fallacy, that if you don't want to be a purveyor of Pride Month that means you hate the LGBTQMNOP+1~  community.

Except for the minor Biblical fact that Jesus never said a f**king thing against lgbt people. @RaysBaseball https://t.co/SJoGLbdQe2

— John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) June 6, 2022

Except He did, at least the Bible says the following [to mention just a few of the verses]:

Romans 1:27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Timothy 1:8-11 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

Romans 1:26-28 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.

So spare us your vulgar take on theology and Jesus.

* * *

 Consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and please check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against Communism, ignorance, The New York Times, and the heebie-jeebies.

* * *

It seems many people on the left make claims that they know little to nothing about because they don't read about it; they feeeeel about it. 

I hear that next year major league baseball is going to honor former President Donald J. Trump and is having all players wear red MAGA hats as a sign of respect.

Tweet

DOJ, FBI investigating "disturbing spike' in freedom of speech targeting school administrators

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday has ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate a recent spike in people's First Amendment rights, aka, freedom of speech. He labels this freedom as "harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence" against Marxist-inspired school administrators who call for revolution, harassment and threats of violence as also witnessed by leftist. 

When Trump won the presidential election, leftists rampaged through the streets, randomly destroying property and screaming at the sky. The latter was their constitutional right, but not the former whereby innocent people were victimized. Maxine Waters (D-CA) told people to harass Trump supporters from public places and gas stations, and nobody on the Left batted an eye. 

Hillary Clinton divisively called Trump voters "deplorables," and Democrats across the country cheered her on. Some Trump voters were intimidated at their workplace and even terminated before the election. 

Leftists got in the face of GOP members while they sat with their families in restaurants but Garland fails to talk about this kind of intimidation because it comes from the Left.

The Left only likes the U.S. Constitution when it serves their purposes and they undermine it when it protects their political opponents, especially when it comes to the First Amendment.

The Department of Justice [a department whose title has become an oxymoron] published a memo by Garland directing U.S. attorneys and the FBI to work with local officials to identify and curb threats to school administrators. What he defines as "threats" is the anger parents are voicing about schools teaching Marxism and anti-American sentiment in the classrooms. Anger is not the same thing as calls for violence.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools,” the memo said, without citing specific examples. “While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, the protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views."

Spirited debate in Loudon County, Virginia is what sparked Garland's intervention. The school board is being challenged by parents who object to their children being taught Marxist critical race theory. But as far as spirited debate is concerned, they are only allowed to speak for 60 seconds to voice their objections. Tell me, how can the average person get their points across in such a limited period of time? 

* * *

Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.

* * *

A host of The Daily Wire, Matt Walsh, spoke at one of the school board meetings and was able to quickly and succinctly present his case against the current curriculum. Since Walsh did not live in the school district when he first presented, the school board changed its rules stating that one must live within the district in order to be at the meetings--a ploy designed to get rid of his input. 

So Walsh rented an apartment in the district and his landlady charged him one dollar a month rent just so he can have a voice.

In his initial presentation, Walsh called on school board members to present evidence to back up their universal mask mandate for all students at school. He went on to cite official data on total number of cases for children since the beginning of the pandemic, around 4.2 million, and the extremely low death rate among children, which Walsh compared to the common flu. Forcing students to be masked, he argued, is “cruel” and a form of “child abuse.”

These idiots are running scared because parents don't want their kids being taught how terrible America is, and how they are bad because of their skin color.

Just imagine if Merrick Garland had gotten onto the Supreme Court at the end of the Obama administration when he was nominated but blocked by Mitch McConnell. 

Tweet

Comedy News Network's Lemon disses his own network

Strong advocate of the First Amendment only when it is used by people he agrees with, CNN's Lemon named Don says that the network lowered itself by allowing free speech of someone with a different political view than his.

On Thursday, as blockhead Chris Cuomo passed the baton over to vacuous Don Lemon for the next show, the two CNN dullards got into a bizarre exchange about the merits of having Kellyanne Conway appear on the network.

"She never answers a question. She berates you. She’s condescending," Lemon told Cuomo, who appeared to be thinking about whether or not someone saw him litter on his way into the studio. "For me, it feels beneath the dignity of this network to have someone one who constantly lies and misconstrues things."

The dignity of CNN? Really?

According to the digital canary cage liner, HuffPost, Conway appeared on Cuomo's show earlier to discuss comments President Trump made in an interview with Breitbart, in which he said his supporters were "tough people" that would make things "very, very bad" if pushed to a certain point. Cuomo accused the president of dog-whistling violence; Conway said he was misinterpreting, but Cuomo can actually hear a dog whistle as he identifies as a pit bull.

"You’re just reading into it like you usually do. He was talking about how peaceful and gentle many people are who are otherwise tough," Conway told Cuomo before going on to interrupt him. "Christopher, he didn’t threaten and he’s not threatening violence."

Cuomo replied, "I made a mistake, so I surrender. You will never ― you will never call him out for whatever he says or whatever he does. You are choosing pragmatism over principle, and I should know this."

At least Kellyanne didn't call Cuomo a "cockroach" like CNN's Paul Begala did to Jared Kushner and Ivanka.

Don Lemon later told Chris Cuomo that Kellyanne Conway should not have been permitted to speak on the show because she was being dishonest to the American people, because he doesn't agree with her.

"When you come on CNN, [aka the Communist Nebbish Network] you have an obligation to be honest to the American people," Lemon claimed, forgetting about the exceptions they make, like the Covington High School lies they spouted and are getting their asses sued over.

"You can give your opinion, you can give your take, but it is a privilege to come on this network and speak to the American people ― and if you’re going to do it, do it directly and honestly."

Honestly like their reporting on Jussie Smollett.

Just like it's a privilege to have Jim "Am I Handsome or What" Acosta be obnoxious to Sarah Sanders and the President just to make a show of himself.

Again, Lemon said this on the very same week the network was slapped with a $275 million defamation lawsuit for their role in perpetuating the slander against the Covington Catholic High School students, during which CNN contributor Reza Aslan said that Nicholas Sandmann (a 16-year-old) had a "punchable" face, and he's brave enough to punch Sandmann because he's smaller than him.

Cuomo, staring off into what can only be described as the jasmine of his mind, ultimately felt that Kellyanne Conway should be allowed to speak on his show. He argued that the American people deserve to see what the president considers his "best defense."

And there's this thing called the First Amendment. Duh!

"I just believe that if this is who the president wants out there, I want people to see what he considers his best defense," Cuomo said. "I want them to see what he thinks is appropriate for his main counselor to do on television. That’s the saving grace."

And on the plus side, only 135 people ever watch CNN at the same time, unless they're catching a plane, so they're not going to hear Trump's best defense.

Both Cuomo and Lemon were not commenting because they forgot the question.

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.





Tweet

High School girl who refused to stand for the pledge of allegiance, settles out of court

Texas -- Between the 2016 and 2017 school year, Windfern High School student India Landry refused to stand for the pledge of allegiance. But Texas law requires that if a minor is going to exhibit such resistance, they must have permission from the parent. If not, they must stand for the pledge.

Landry continued to refuse standing for the pledge and as a result, she was expelled from the school. Principal Martha Strother ordered India to leave the school or else the law would be involved.

“I don’t think that the flag is what it says it’s for, for liberty and justice and all that. It’s not obviously what’s going on in America today,” Landry said.

She filed a lawsuit against the school district.

State Attorney General Ken Paxton intervened thusly:

“Schoolchildren cannot unilaterally refuse to participate in the pledge. Requiring the pledge to be recited at the start of every school day has the laudable result of fostering respect for our flag and a patriotic love of our country. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that parents have a fundamental interest in guiding the education and upbringing of their children, which is a critical aspect of liberty guaranteed by the Constitution.”

Paxton’s court filing read as follows:

“The United States flag represents the values of liberty and justice that form the foundation of this country and are defended by our armed forces. It is thus deserving of the highest levels of reverence and respect, which is expressed through every recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.”

The school district made a failed attempt to have the case dismissed. India’s attorney wanted to go. all. the. way.

“If Cy-Fair wants to bury its head in the sand and say we will violate these people’s rights, then we will go to the court and we will go all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to.”

So why did she think the country was so crappy? She was awakened to the nation's crappiness by the NFL. As per the Houston Chronicle:

Landry told reporters in July that her opposition to the pledge was political, inspired by NFL players kneeling during the National Anthem to draw attention to a surge of police violence against African-Americans. [The fact is, there hasn't been a surge in police violence against blacks or any one group. Blacks, it turns out, are less likely to be victims of police shootings than whites.]

The lawsuit accuses the principal, vice principal, secretary and two teachers of violating Landry’s rights to free speech, equal protection and due process and of singling her out because she was black.

The first step, upon hearing something, should be to first find out if it’s true. Look at the evidence and facts. India didn’t do that and neither did the NFL players.

Fact: statistics don’t bear out Colin Kaepernick’s police violence position, and that's what makes him a crappy role model to young people He proceeded with ignorance, going on something he’d heard from his girlfriend perhaps, but did not verify it. The result is a chain of stupidity.

As it turned out for India, she and the Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District have settled out of court. But her mother too should have known better and she along with India, should have done a little fact checking.


Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do.



Tweet

Trump wins, Stormy loses

Los Angeles -- A federal judge on Monday threw out the case of porn-film performer Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford against President Trump on free-speech grounds [aka: the First Amendment].

"The court agrees with Mr. Trump's argument because the tweet in question constitutes 'rhetorical hyperbole' normally associated with politics and public discourse in the U.S.," U.S. District Judge S. James Otero said in a ruling Monday, according to Bloomberg News. "The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement."

The "Stormster" [as people who "know" her say] sued the president in April over a tweet in which he denied her claims of being threatened by a man [who looks exactly like her ex-husband, by the way] in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011.

She said the man was threatening her for going public about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. The president denied the affair took place and cast doubt on her story of being threatened [by an alleged guy who looks exactly like her ex-husband, by the way].

Not known for being Twitter-shy, President Trump tweeted: "A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!" He also tweeted a side-by-side image of the sketch with a photo of her ex-husband.

"The ruling also states that the President is entitled to an award of his attorneys' fees against Stormy Daniels," Trump's attorney Charles Harder said in a statement to Fox News. "No amount of spin or commentary by Stormy Daniels or her lawyer, Mr. [Michael] Avenatti, can truthfully characterize today's ruling in any way other than total victory for President Trump and total defeat for Stormy Daniels. [You know Trump told Harder to put that part in the statement.]  The amount of the award for President Trump's attorneys' fees will be determined at a later date."

Avenatti, a rather horrible lawyer, previously said the president's tweet damaged Daniels' credibility by portraying her as a liar. He responded to the ruling via Twitter: "Judge's limited ruling: Daniels' other claims against Trump and Cohen proceed unaffected. Trump's contrary claims are as deceptive as his claims about the inauguration attendance. We will appeal the dismissal of the defamation cause of action and are confident in a reversal."

Avenatti is a publicity whore who is using this case to remain relevant as he plans to throw his hat in the ring for the 2020 presidential race. Imagine the fun it would be in debating Trump--but it'll never happen.

Daniels' lawsuit over a hush-money deal is pending and Avenatti said he wants and needs to keep the case alive, so that his presidential ambitions remain alive as well.

Just like she is used as a sex object in her films, Daniels is  Avenatti's is using her to further his ambitions for the coming presidential election.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.




Tweet

Hypocrisy Alert: 43% of GOP say Trump should be allowed to shut down media

POTUS continues to call news organizations that report false, disagreeable or negative things about him as "fake news." He's right in many instances--the left hates him and most mainstream news outlets are left-leaning and no longer report the news but provide consumers of news with opinions. That isn't fake, it's slanted.

But Trump has gone so far as to call journalists the "enemies of the American people." That, folks, is fake news.

The press often lies by omission and slants their take in accordance with their political views, but that's actually their right, whether it's right or wrong to do so. A flat out lie is not what I'm talking about--omitting something is unethical, but it isn't the same thing as a lie.

Sadly, in an Ipsos survey reported on by the Daily Beast, 43 percent of Republicans now say he "should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior."

Bad behavior? Isn't that kind of the same idea as hate speech? Aren't conservatives and other staunch constitutionalists upset over social media giants banning conspiracy theorist Alex Jones? As much as he sucks as a human being, he has the right to say whatever he wants as long as he doesn't call for violence or do anything vile regarding children.

The Ipsos survey resulted in only 36 percent of GOP voters disagreeing with the notion that Trump should have the authority to close news outlets he believes engage in "bad behavior."

When asked whether Trump should close down specific organizations such as CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, 23 percent said he should and 49 percent did not.

The survey also showed that overall, Republicans were likely to dislike the media more than Democrats.

Gee, I wonder why when they ask hard-hitting questions like: "What's your favorite color, Mr. Obama?" or "Does your awesomeness ever get in the way of your boyish good looks, Mr. Obama?"

Forty-eight percent in the survey said they believe the "news media is the enemy of the American people." Only 28 percent disagreed.

One statistic that's hard to dispute is the one whereby nearly four out of five (79 percent) believe "the mainstream media treats President Trump unfairly."

Show me one instance where they erred on the side of Trump rather than against him.

Trump has referred to US libel laws "a sham and a disgrace," and often says that journalists lie and make up sources, and they knowingly report false information to make him look bad.

The danger to these claims is to a free press, and that becomes a danger to freedom.

Speaking of free, it's the free market that can put so-called fake news in check. If you don't believe a source of news, don't support it. If it can be proven they are intentionally lying, that's when libel laws should kick in.

"The Fake News hates me saying that they are the Enemy of the People only because they know it's TRUE. I am providing a great service by explaining this to the American People. They purposely cause great division & distrust. They can also cause War! They are very dangerous & sick!" he tweeted on Sunday.

If you believe all of those claims, then you're simply believing in the other fake news, and that's just as dangerous as the claims Trump is making.

Dictatorships usually censor the media and have it support their own agenda.

I may hate MSNBC and despise CNN, but I don't want them muzzled any more than I want the idiot Alex Jones muzzled.

There is a saying that liberals hates it when conservatives talk. And conservatives want liberals to keep talking.

According to the survey, it isn't only the GOP who think POTUS should have the power to shut up the media. Twelve percent of Democrats and 21 percent of Independents agree that "the president should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior."

Proof that the average IQ is around 100, and our schools are teaching to the low end.

On a positive note, 74 percent of Democrats and 55 percent of Independents disagreed with the statement. However, 12 percent of Democrats and 26 percent Independents agree "the news media is the enemy of the American people," and 74 percent Dems and 50 percent Independents disagreed.

Overall, 57 percent of all surveyed believe the news media and reporters are "necessary to keep the Trump administration honest," including 39 percent plurality of Republicans.

It's just too bad the media didn't do that with the Obama administration nor would they have been likely to have kept the Hillary Clinton administration honest had she won. [God forbid.]

A large majority, 85 percent, rightfully believe that "freedom of the press is essential for American democracy" compared to 4 percent who stupidly oppose that statement.

A recent Gallup poll showed that 41 percent of voters approve of the job Trump is doing while 54 percent wouldn't approve of him if he cured cancer and brought us world peace. They'd say he put a lot of doctors out of work and he only created world peace because he's a racist and to stroke his ego.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.


Tweet

Dems got it backwards on democracy

The survival of our democracy depends on the adherence to the Bill of Rights. Democracy never depends on banning any right guaranteed by the finest document ever put to paper.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) is calling for more tech companies to ban more sites that he and his party disagrees with, like Facebook, YouTube, Apple, Pinterest, and Spotify have done to Infowars. Murphy says the survival of American democracy depends on it.

Murphy has it a** backwards: the survival of our democracy depends on our ability to express ourselves and defend ourselves against the tyranny of government, just like the tyranny of censoring free speech erodes democracy.

If it's Alex Jones today, who will it be tomorrow? Ben Shapiro?Sean Hannity? Robert Spencer? Pamela Geller?

Even the speech of Milo Yiannopoulos, which is as detestable as Alex Jones', should not be banned because the more these idiots talk, the more normal people can see their lies.

But Chris Murphy and his ilk are more dangerous than both Jones and Yiannopoulos.

"Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart," Murphy said. "These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it," he tweeted Monday.

Murphy never explains just who determines what are the lies. He also doesn't understand that free speech is not the speech we want to hear, but the speech we don't want to hear. It's a person's right to say whatever he wants to say and our right to not listen, to walk away, to disagree and use more speech to debate.

Speech that calls for violence or puts lives at risk is already illegal.

And no, Alex, we are not 'all Alex Jones'. Just because someone defends your First Amendment right to free speech, doesn't mean they like you or believe a word you say. You are a loathsome individual who deserves not to be taken seriously, but that's the only restriction that should be placed on your words.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

Why lunatics like Alex Jones should not be banned

How is it that Apple, YouTube and Facebook banned Infowars on the same day? Is it possible the tech giants are band together to ban people they don't agree with?

Look, Alex Jones, who heads Infowars, is a conspiracy theory moron and a disgusting human being. I dislike the way he comes across; I dislike the garbage he spouts, but I like the First Amendment a lot more than I dislike Jones.

Facebook unpublished four of Jones' pages for "repeated violations of community standards," the company said Monday, without defining with clarity what the hell they were talking about.

Then YouTube terminated his account after he continued appearing in videos despite a 90-day ban from the company. Spotify also removed all of one of his podcasts for "hate content". They didn't explain what hate content is, but apparently it's anything the left disagrees with and wants banned.

Sarah Jeong is a racist just hired by the New York Times for its editorial staff. She has said horrible, anti-white, anti-cop, and anti-white woman statements on Twitter and was never banned for her hateful rhetoric.

But when Candace Owens, a conservative black woman, substituted the word 'white' with 'black' using Jeong's own tweets, Owens was banned from the website until conservatives voiced strong complaints and she was reinstated.

To rectify the situation, Twitter claimed they made a mistake by banning Owens. That was as feeble an excuse as Jeong's was when she claimed she received racist remarks on Twitter and countered those remarks with her own racist remarks.

If you believe that, you've got to be a liberal.

Have you noticed that leftist mistakes only go in one direction? Has anyone seen The New York Times or CNN make a "mistake" in favor of President Trump?

Removing speech one doesn't like or agree with is dangerous to the freedoms of this country. If you do it with Jones, you will not stop if you know you've gotten away with it. The First Amendment wasn't made to protect speech we like--it was made to protect speech we don't like. And the best way to deal with speech we don't like is with more speech, obviously.

But like a certain religion that will go unnamed, leftism cannot tolerate good debate because it's a weak ideology.

Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Spotify, Apple or any tech giant, should not be the arbiters of what is considered acceptable speech.

As mentioned, Jones is a disgusting person who has even gone so far as to claim the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School was a hoax and the children were all actors, to give merely one example of his conspiracy theory claims, but he should be viewed as the idiot he is and be allowed to show how big an idiot on Inforwars, as long as nobody is threatened with violence or that violence is called for by Jones.

The left is losing its collective mind and our rights are about to take a serious hit.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

Alex Jones of InforWars being sued by Sandy Hook parents

Many people take Alex Jones seriously. That's probably due to the notion that he says things that conspiracy theorists want to believe, so they do. Sometimes Jones makes claims that are so far out over his skis that he needs to be held accountable.

The families of two kids who were killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre filed suit against Infowars head for his claim that the Connecticut shooting never happened.

The whole thing was a hoax, he claimed.

Leonard Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa, the parents of Noah Pozner, and Neil Heslin, the father of Jesse Lewis, filed separate defamation lawsuits Monday against Jones seeking over $1 million in damages.

The suits were filed in Travis County, Texas, the home of InfoWars, Jones' media company.

Mark Bankston, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, called Jones' accusations "goulish."

Jesse Lewis

"Even after these folks had to experience this trauma, for the accusations next five years they were tormented by Alex Jones with vicious lies about them," Bankston told the Huffington Post. "And these lies were meant to convince his audience that the Sandy Hook parents are frauds and have perpetrated a sinister lie on the American people."

Six teachers and 20 first-grade students were gunned down on December 14, 2012 by the gunman, a mentally ill young man who first shot and killed his mother and took her legally-owned guns to continue the slaughter before killing himself.

Noah Pozner

The lawsuits allege that Jones insisted the shooting was staged and this resulted in the encouragement of other crazy people to make death threats against the victims' families.

"So, if children were lost at Sandy Hook, my heart goes out to each and every one of those parents. And the people who say they're parents that I see on the news. The only problem is, I've watched a lot of soap operas. And I've seen actors before [he's one of them]. And I know when I'm watching a movie and when I'm watching something real," Jones said at the time.

Jones and InfoWars did not comment on the lawsuit.

There's a difference between freedom of speech and defamation.


Tweet

Don't make America gay again the way it was gay back when

Aspen, Colorado -- Vice President Mike Pence is vacationing with his wife at his lodging in Aspen. The people next door posted a rainbow banner reading: "Make America Gay Again." Perhaps they're gay, perhaps they're simply stupid. The banner was draped on a stone pillar in front of the house Mr. Pence was staying.

In either case, whoever hung the banner evidently have a misguided sense of American history. 

America was never gay in the sense that gayness was the majority norm. Being gay back then, before our first "gay president," Barack Obama was on the scene, being gay meant "being in the closet." 

Gays today have it much better than ever before. You can't watch a Netflix Original without seeing at least one gay couple, possibly a transgender person, or lesbians kissing.

The daughters of the couple across the street and another female friend reportedly draped the banner on the pillar while a Pitkin County deputy and Secret Service members stood nearby, according to the Aspen Times.

The newspaper said the Secret Service agents were unconcerned when the women draped the banner over the pillar and said, "We're not here to control your free speech rights."

As governor of Indiana, Pence signed legislation that put him at odds with the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ community, in other words, every kind of gay and gender dysmorphic person imaginable.

Pitkin County Sheriff Joe DiSalvo said he's in favor of free speech [he probably also knows that it's the law] and that Aspen has a long history of not giving a fig when it came to people of power visiting the area.


Tweet

Pro-life student group wins settlement over 'professor'

A so-called professor in California tried to censor pro-life students drawing with sidewalk chalk and now has been ordered to undergo First Amendment training and pay $17,000 as a result of a court settlement.

It doesn't get any better than that.

Fresno State University public health professor Dr. Gregory Thatcher recruited students from his class to assist him in erasing the Fresno State Students for Life (FSSL) sidewalk chalk. (See video below.)

Professor Thatcher allegedly harassed and intimidated the group and accused them of chalking outside the free speech zone on campus--a zone that hasn't existed since 2015.

The pro-life club's president, Bernadette Tasy, told Fox News, "What the professor did was wrong, and the only permit a student needs to speak on campus is the First Amendment."

The chalk messages simply encourage students to seek pro-life health care options.

On the video, Thacher is heard saying to Tasy, Free speech is free speech in the free speech area. It's a pretty simple concept, okay? This does not constitute a free speech area. Okay?"

What an anal sphincter, okay?

Even after Tasy told the moron her group had permission from the university, Thatcher started erasing the chalk with his shoe.

"You have permission to put it down, and I have permission to get rid of it. That is our part of free speech. College campuses are not free speech areas," the commie b***ard said. "Do you understand? Obviously you don't understand."

Obviously Thatcher is a fascist.

As part of the court settlement, Thatcher will pay $1,000 to Tasy and $1,000 to another student, Jesus Herrera, and some attorney's fees. The so-called professor is also required to undergo First Amendment training to be provided by Alliance Defending Freedom, the group that represented FSSL.

Thatcher, arrogant scum crumpet that he is, told Fox News that he won't have to pay any money from his own pocket because he has a**hole insurance. "Nyah nyah."

"I did not, in any way, admit to any wrongdoing," the fascist said. "I did agree to sit through a training seminar because I love to learn others' thoughts and opinions [and he believes he has the right to eradicate those opinions that he disagrees with]."

He makes it sound like he had a choice to attend First Amendment training or not--he had no choice. He was just trying to save face because he lost and the U.S. Constitution won.

Tasy said the case wasn't about the money. "The important thing is that Dr. Thatcher won't be able to interfere with our expressive activities again."

Tasy said she was "really shocked" that a professor would act that way--especially at a public university.

Travis Barham, ADF Legal Counsel, described Thatcher as being "in a league of his own" with such a flagrant violation of the First Amendment.

"This is a particularly extreme case because you have a professor trying to wipe away the chalk himself," Barham said. "Far too often university officials try to play the role of speech police and try to restrict what can be said and where it can be said on campus."

Tweet

BREAKING: Milo Yianoppoulos UC Berkeley speech canceled due to violent protest

Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos was set to deliver a speech at UC Berkeley but at around 7 p.m. local time, but by 6 p.m. Yiannopoulos's First Amendment rights were violated by violent protesters who caused the event to be cancelled.

The school was allowing him to speak if the College Republican organization agreed to pay for extra security, which they did (on short notice by the school), but never asked the protesters, who announced that they were going to be there, to do the same.

Fires were started by masked anarchists, who wore black and had backpacks when they emerged from the crowd.

Windows were smashed, smoking things were thrown and fireworks were aimed at the building in which he was to speak. Prior to the event, metal barricades were put in place to keep protesters from rushing the building.

The anarchists wore masks and were dressed in black and had backpacks.

Yiannopoulos had to be extracted from the area for his own safety.

The protest smelled of Soros or someone paying for out-of-town people who are not part of UC Berkeley to be there to cause trouble.

"This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley," Mike Wright said, a College Republican member. As he spoke to the media, someone threw red paint on him.

Some protesters argued that hate speech isn't free speech. But hate speech is a mind crime based on how the person accusing someone of hate speech wants to define it. The First Amendment wasn't written to protect speech we all love to hear--it was written for speech we hate or don't want to hear. 

But UC Berkeley, once the bastion of free speech, is now the intolerant campus who is stifling it.

It's sad that we now live in a country where freedom of speech is fast eroding when the left doesn't want to hear the message. It reminds one of a religion that kills people whose message they too don't want to hear.


Tweet

Fakebook News

Facebook is finally getting its act together and going after "fake news." 

The giant social media's CEO and hard left liberal, Mark Zuckerberg, announced its plan to tackle what they consider fake news, especially "the garbage you see from Fox News, The Washington Times, The National Review, Breitbart, PJ Media and those damn alt right blogs, just to name a few.

The methodology the liberal media website plans to use to tackle fake news will be by harnessing fact-checking experts such as those found in PolitiFact, Salon, the Huffington Post, MSNBC and Newsweek Magazine, just to name a few.

Democrats have blamed bogus news stories from made-up media outlets for influencing the presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. Meanwhile, mainstream media outlets have been very fair to Trump while being tough on Hillary Clinton. 

"We believe in giving people a voice and that we cannot become arbiters of truth ourselves, so we're approaching this problem carefully," Facebook's VP of News Feed, Adam Mosseri said in a blog post. "We've focused our efforts on the worst of the worst, on the clear hoaxes spread by spammers for their own gain, and on engaging both our community and third party organizers."

Specifically, Mosseri was referring to hoaxes perpetrated by FBI Director James Comey who claimed that Hillary Clinton used a private email server while secretary of state. That's simply too hard to believe--nobody is that stupid.


Tweet

Pro-life group scares snowflakes

Strathclyde Life Action, a pro-life, anti-abortion group based at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, was prohibited from becoming a university society by the students' union because it would violate the university's safe space policy for students scared of opinions that differ from their own.

The Students' Ass. said they banned the group pre-emptively because they believe the group will "harass students" causing them great distress, indigestion, the willies and incontinence.

Poor little kitty cats.

A statement said that "This in turn violates their safe space."

Members of the banned group told Heat Street that proscribing them proves the university has no respect for free speech.

Well, yeah! No big surprise here.

Student officials in this so-called school weren't even able to term the abortion debate a 'women's issue' -- they called it "those with uteruses on campus".  

Seriously.

I wonder when the USA will elect a uterus for president. 

Tweet