Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Here is Attorney General Pamela Bondi’s “hate speech” statement in full context. The broader context does not attenuate what is fundamentally wrong about what she is proposing. She confounds university *policy* with criminal prosecution of “hate speech”. She confounds “hate” *crime* with “hate *speech*”. And she actually contradicts herself...

thevivafrei's profile picture

Viva Frei

758,883 subscribers

62,181 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikBildungComedy
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

US Attorney General Pam Bondi: "There is free speech, and then there is hate speech" This is how Bondi justifies the prosecution of those Americans who publicly mocked the death of Republican Charlie Kirk. Do you agree that regulating hate speech destroys freedom of speech? Or should hate speech be banned?
0:27

US Attorney General Pam Bondi: "There is free speech, and then there is hate speech" This is how Bondi justifies the prosecution of those Americans who publicly mocked the death of Republican Charlie Kirk. Do you agree that regulating hate speech destroys freedom of speech? Or should hate speech be banned?

NEXTA

49,949 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Pam Bondi is now using Charlie Kirk's death to oppress free speech under the guise of hate speech, but is this what Charlie would have wanted? Breanna Morello breaks it all down:
2:22

Pam Bondi is now using Charlie Kirk's death to oppress free speech under the guise of hate speech, but is this what Charlie would have wanted? Breanna Morello breaks it all down:

INFOWARS

17,265 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Attorney General Pam Bondi is now claiming that “hate speech” won’t be prosecuted after Charlie Kirk’s murder—but the damage is done. Another word for so-called hate speech is free speech, and it's protected by the First Amendment. 🎥: Aaron Terr
1:48

Attorney General Pam Bondi is now claiming that “hate speech” won’t be prosecuted after Charlie Kirk’s murder—but the damage is done. Another word for so-called hate speech is free speech, and it's protected by the First Amendment. 🎥: Aaron Terr

FIRE

24,231 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

The full context of Pam Bondi's "hate speech" comments yesterday is insane. Katie Miller says hatred of conservatives on college campuses led to Charlie Kirk's death. Bondi responds by saying antisemitism on college campuses is the real issue at hand, and what the government needs to be focused on, "especially after what happened to Charlie." She then uses Charlie's death to justify unconstitutional prosecution of "hate speech," and spends the next 40 seconds talking about prosecuting antisemitism. I take back what I said yesterday. I don't think Pam Bondi is an idiot, I think she's working on behalf of foreign interests to clamp down on free speech in America –– and I know for a fact Charlie would've spoken out against it.
1:38

The full context of Pam Bondi's "hate speech" comments yesterday is insane. Katie Miller says hatred of conservatives on college campuses led to Charlie Kirk's death. Bondi responds by saying antisemitism on college campuses is the real issue at hand, and what the government needs to be focused on, "especially after what happened to Charlie." She then uses Charlie's death to justify unconstitutional prosecution of "hate speech," and spends the next 40 seconds talking about prosecuting antisemitism. I take back what I said yesterday. I don't think Pam Bondi is an idiot, I think she's working on behalf of foreign interests to clamp down on free speech in America –– and I know for a fact Charlie would've spoken out against it.

SOVEREIGN BRAH 🇺🇸🏛️⚡️

347,497 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

"The solution to hate speech is more free speech" - Charlie Kirk
0:46

"The solution to hate speech is more free speech" - Charlie Kirk

Kim Iversen 🇺🇸

29,573 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

This entire hate speech debate in the Supreme Court is puerile and reeks of hypocrisy and cowardice. Who decides what is hate speech? Here, I dare milords to have the guts to call the public recitation of the verse claiming ‘Hindus are the worst of creatures’ as hate speech:
0:56

This entire hate speech debate in the Supreme Court is puerile and reeks of hypocrisy and cowardice. Who decides what is hate speech? Here, I dare milords to have the guts to call the public recitation of the verse claiming ‘Hindus are the worst of creatures’ as hate speech:

Anand Ranganathan

117,909 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Attorney General Pam Bondi: "There's free speech and then there's hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society...We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."
0:30

Attorney General Pam Bondi: "There's free speech and then there's hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society...We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."

The Bulwark

29,721,712 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Reporter: What do you make of Bondi saying she is going after hate speech, a lot of allies say hate speech is free speech. Trump: Probably go after people like you, you treat me unfairly, you have hate in your heart. ABC paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech, your company paid me 16 million for a form of hate speech, maybe they'll go after you.
0:31

Reporter: What do you make of Bondi saying she is going after hate speech, a lot of allies say hate speech is free speech. Trump: Probably go after people like you, you treat me unfairly, you have hate in your heart. ABC paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech, your company paid me 16 million for a form of hate speech, maybe they'll go after you.

Acyn

2,715,443 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

New episode: Pam Bondi says hate speech is not free speech — is she right? FIRE staff (Nico Perrino, Sarah McLaughlin, & Aaron Terr) also take your questions on Charlie Kirk's assassination, President Trump's lawsuit against The New York Times, cancel culture, and more. 00:00 Intro 01:42 Attorney General Pam Bondi's comments that "hate speech" is distinct from "free speech" 02:23 Is it OK for the Department of Justice to target people for "hate speech"? 05:42 How have “hate speech” laws played out overseas? 07:19 President Trump's response to Pam Bondi's “hate speech” remarks 08:50 Are “fighting words,” “incitement,” and “true threats” free speech? 11:22 What about doxxing? 15:15 Is it free speech to celebrate or condone the assassination of Charlie Kirk? 21:52 The termination of k-12 and university faculty in response to their commentary on Kirk's assassination 28:40 Is there a law that might implicate the Discord users who had reason to be aware of malicious intentions the shooter had towards Kirk ahead of the assassination? 30:05 The agency of speakers and those hearing their speech under the incitement standard 31:14 What are the differences between the free speech rights of citizens and non-citizens? 36:20 Does a court filing by President Trump as an individual in the New York Times lawsuit open him up to being deposed about a wide range of behaviors and actions? 37:40 What is the Trump's administration's legal strategy with the New York Times lawsuit? 39:24 What is FIRE doing about private employees being fired for their political commentary? 46:50 What is Charlie Kirk's legacy on free speech? 50:04 What is the difference between the academic protections enjoyed by tenured and non-tenured faculty members? 52:05 Does FIRE trust the Supreme Court to protect free speech? 56:12 How can we prevent capitulation from The New York Times? 59:20 How can ordinary people safely express their opinions on social media and promote civil discourse?
1:05:15

New episode: Pam Bondi says hate speech is not free speech — is she right? FIRE staff (Nico Perrino, Sarah McLaughlin, & Aaron Terr) also take your questions on Charlie Kirk's assassination, President Trump's lawsuit against The New York Times, cancel culture, and more. 00:00 Intro 01:42 Attorney General Pam Bondi's comments that "hate speech" is distinct from "free speech" 02:23 Is it OK for the Department of Justice to target people for "hate speech"? 05:42 How have “hate speech” laws played out overseas? 07:19 President Trump's response to Pam Bondi's “hate speech” remarks 08:50 Are “fighting words,” “incitement,” and “true threats” free speech? 11:22 What about doxxing? 15:15 Is it free speech to celebrate or condone the assassination of Charlie Kirk? 21:52 The termination of k-12 and university faculty in response to their commentary on Kirk's assassination 28:40 Is there a law that might implicate the Discord users who had reason to be aware of malicious intentions the shooter had towards Kirk ahead of the assassination? 30:05 The agency of speakers and those hearing their speech under the incitement standard 31:14 What are the differences between the free speech rights of citizens and non-citizens? 36:20 Does a court filing by President Trump as an individual in the New York Times lawsuit open him up to being deposed about a wide range of behaviors and actions? 37:40 What is the Trump's administration's legal strategy with the New York Times lawsuit? 39:24 What is FIRE doing about private employees being fired for their political commentary? 46:50 What is Charlie Kirk's legacy on free speech? 50:04 What is the difference between the academic protections enjoyed by tenured and non-tenured faculty members? 52:05 Does FIRE trust the Supreme Court to protect free speech? 56:12 How can we prevent capitulation from The New York Times? 59:20 How can ordinary people safely express their opinions on social media and promote civil discourse?

So to Speak: The Free Speech Podcast

31,314 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

🚨 PROTEST AGAINST CHARLIE KIRK “HATE SPEECH”⁉️ Look at this pathetic tiny protest I caught at the Heritage Foundation in front of his BEAUTIFUL banner: Get married. Have children. Build a legacy. THIS is what they call “HATE SPEECH” and “RAClSM”? Free promo for Charlie! 🤣✊🏻
0:26

🚨 PROTEST AGAINST CHARLIE KIRK “HATE SPEECH”⁉️ Look at this pathetic tiny protest I caught at the Heritage Foundation in front of his BEAUTIFUL banner: Get married. Have children. Build a legacy. THIS is what they call “HATE SPEECH” and “RAClSM”? Free promo for Charlie! 🤣✊🏻

Naomi Seibt

11,619 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Is this hate speech? Or is it speech that is the truth, that they now want to create a law that defines it as hate speech? Thoughts?
0:44

Is this hate speech? Or is it speech that is the truth, that they now want to create a law that defines it as hate speech? Thoughts?

BroBro🇦🇺🏇🏻

14,629 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Tucker UNLEASHES on AG Pam Bondi with a blistering 3-minute rebuttal to her remarks on “hate speech.” The monologue version of Tucker is back. This is EXACTLY what we need from him right now. “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech. This is the Attorney General of the United States, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, telling you that there is this other category called hate speech. And of course, the implication is that’s a crime. There’s almost no sentence that Charlie Kirk. “And I, I’m not running the risk of appropriating his memory for my own ends by saying this. It’s provable. There’s no sentence that Charlie Kirk would have objected to more than that. And you’ve got to think the Attorney General didn’t think it through and was not attempting to desecrate the memory of the person she was purporting to celebrate that she just threw that out there, that she hadn’t thought about it. “You hope that. You hope that Charlie Kirk’s death won’t be used by a group we now call bad actors to create a society that was the opposite of the one he worked to build. You hope that. “You hope that a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country. And trust me, if it is, if that does happen. There is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that, ever. “And there never will be. Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think. There is nothing they can’t do to you because they don’t consider you human. They don’t believe you have a soul. A human being with a soul. A free man has a right to say what he believes, not to hurt other people, but to express human his views. “And by the way, that thinking, and not to pile on the Attorney General, who’s a very nice person, but that thinking that she just articulated on camera there is exactly what got us to a place where some huge and horrifying percentage of young people think it’s okay to shoot people you disagree with to kill Nazis for saying things they don’t like. “Why do they believe that? How did we get here? Is it the video games? Is it the SSRIs? Yeah, probably. But what it really is is 12 and then 16 years of indoctrination in our schools at the hands of people who tell them that, who say exactly what the Attorney General just said. “Well, there’s free speech, which of course, we all acknowledge is important, so, so important. But then there’s this thing called hate speech. Hate speech, of course, is any speech that the people in power hate. But they don’t define it that way. They define it as speech that hurts people, speech that is tantamount to violence. And we punish violence, don’t we? “Of course we do. They’ve been taught that every year of their lives. And so naturally, most of them believe it. When Charlie Kirk is shot in the throat with a .36 on camera. I doubt very many young Americans want to see something like that or actually applaud the death of a man, a father, a husband. “But they’ve been told for their entire lives in schools exactly what Pam Bondi just told them. Well, there’s free speech, but then there’s also hate speech. And woe to those who engage in it because it’s a crime.”
2:56

Tucker UNLEASHES on AG Pam Bondi with a blistering 3-minute rebuttal to her remarks on “hate speech.” The monologue version of Tucker is back. This is EXACTLY what we need from him right now. “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech. This is the Attorney General of the United States, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, telling you that there is this other category called hate speech. And of course, the implication is that’s a crime. There’s almost no sentence that Charlie Kirk. “And I, I’m not running the risk of appropriating his memory for my own ends by saying this. It’s provable. There’s no sentence that Charlie Kirk would have objected to more than that. And you’ve got to think the Attorney General didn’t think it through and was not attempting to desecrate the memory of the person she was purporting to celebrate that she just threw that out there, that she hadn’t thought about it. “You hope that. You hope that Charlie Kirk’s death won’t be used by a group we now call bad actors to create a society that was the opposite of the one he worked to build. You hope that. “You hope that a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country. And trust me, if it is, if that does happen. There is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that, ever. “And there never will be. Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think. There is nothing they can’t do to you because they don’t consider you human. They don’t believe you have a soul. A human being with a soul. A free man has a right to say what he believes, not to hurt other people, but to express human his views. “And by the way, that thinking, and not to pile on the Attorney General, who’s a very nice person, but that thinking that she just articulated on camera there is exactly what got us to a place where some huge and horrifying percentage of young people think it’s okay to shoot people you disagree with to kill Nazis for saying things they don’t like. “Why do they believe that? How did we get here? Is it the video games? Is it the SSRIs? Yeah, probably. But what it really is is 12 and then 16 years of indoctrination in our schools at the hands of people who tell them that, who say exactly what the Attorney General just said. “Well, there’s free speech, which of course, we all acknowledge is important, so, so important. But then there’s this thing called hate speech. Hate speech, of course, is any speech that the people in power hate. But they don’t define it that way. They define it as speech that hurts people, speech that is tantamount to violence. And we punish violence, don’t we? “Of course we do. They’ve been taught that every year of their lives. And so naturally, most of them believe it. When Charlie Kirk is shot in the throat with a .36 on camera. I doubt very many young Americans want to see something like that or actually applaud the death of a man, a father, a husband. “But they’ve been told for their entire lives in schools exactly what Pam Bondi just told them. Well, there’s free speech, but then there’s also hate speech. And woe to those who engage in it because it’s a crime.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

262,842 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Free speech is not for the speech you like or for the people you like. Free speech is for the speech that you hate of the people you despise. If you're for free speech, you have to be for their free speech, or else you're not for free speech. You're for the government breaking the constitution. Full Video:
1:16

Free speech is not for the speech you like or for the people you like. Free speech is for the speech that you hate of the people you despise. If you're for free speech, you have to be for their free speech, or else you're not for free speech. You're for the government breaking the constitution. Full Video:

Jimmy Dore

69,678 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

In the United States, most of what we say online – even if it’s hate-filled or toxic – is protected by the First Amendment as free speech. But in Germany, law enforcement police the internet for hate speech. 60 Minutes, Sunday.
0:29

In the United States, most of what we say online – even if it’s hate-filled or toxic – is protected by the First Amendment as free speech. But in Germany, law enforcement police the internet for hate speech. 60 Minutes, Sunday.

60 Minutes

412,894 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Karnatka's Hate Speech Bill: Congress government in Karnataka has tabled a bill that claims to curb hate speech, but it attempts to risk free speech! The wording of the bill is vague and open to interpretation, which means even ordinary statements could be judged as ill will and lead to serious criminal action. India already has laws to deal with hate speech, and even the Supreme Court has said that the real problem is weak enforcement, not the absence of law. When the line between free speech and crime becomes unclear, people begin to self censor out of fear rather than responsibility!
2:16

Karnatka's Hate Speech Bill: Congress government in Karnataka has tabled a bill that claims to curb hate speech, but it attempts to risk free speech! The wording of the bill is vague and open to interpretation, which means even ordinary statements could be judged as ill will and lead to serious criminal action. India already has laws to deal with hate speech, and even the Supreme Court has said that the real problem is weak enforcement, not the absence of law. When the line between free speech and crime becomes unclear, people begin to self censor out of fear rather than responsibility!

Praffulgarg

11,257 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

JON KARL: What do you make of Pam Bondi saying she's gonna go after hate speech? A lot of your allies say hate speech is free speech TRUMP: We'll probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly. You have a lot of hate in your hate. Maybe they'll have to go after you.
1:20

JON KARL: What do you make of Pam Bondi saying she's gonna go after hate speech? A lot of your allies say hate speech is free speech TRUMP: We'll probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly. You have a lot of hate in your hate. Maybe they'll have to go after you.

Aaron Rupar

4,196,760 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

AG Pam Bondi: "There's free speech, and then there's hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society. We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."
0:30

AG Pam Bondi: "There's free speech, and then there's hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society. We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."

TheBlaze

8,266,818 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Pam Bondi in January: "I believe in the freedom of speech...I will not target people simply because of their political affiliation." Pam Bondi now: "There's free speech, and then there's hate speech...We will absolutely target you...if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."
0:30

Pam Bondi in January: "I believe in the freedom of speech...I will not target people simply because of their political affiliation." Pam Bondi now: "There's free speech, and then there's hate speech...We will absolutely target you...if you are targeting anyone with hate speech."

Home of the Brave

361,105 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

When I was growing up, it never made sense to me that the KKK and the Nazis were allowed to have marches, spewing their hate openly despite their violent, hateful past. It was explained to me that under the 1st Amendment, their speech is protected, no matter how disagreeable or hateful it is. TODAY, Pam Bondi said that you can be targeted by the DOJ for free speech if you say mean things about Charlie Kirk or trump because that is "hate speech." Doesn’t that LITERALLY contradict the principle the right has been celebrating about Charlie Kirk? Isn’t that… unconstitutional?
0:30

When I was growing up, it never made sense to me that the KKK and the Nazis were allowed to have marches, spewing their hate openly despite their violent, hateful past. It was explained to me that under the 1st Amendment, their speech is protected, no matter how disagreeable or hateful it is. TODAY, Pam Bondi said that you can be targeted by the DOJ for free speech if you say mean things about Charlie Kirk or trump because that is "hate speech." Doesn’t that LITERALLY contradict the principle the right has been celebrating about Charlie Kirk? Isn’t that… unconstitutional?

BrooklynDad_Defiant!☮️

983,037 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Candace Owens: " Pam Bondi, who is a complete loser and a tool, is trying to use the assassination of Charlie Kirk to lay the groundwork for hate speech laws in America.. .They wanna pass speech laws which will give them the full power to go after you for wrong think."
1:26

Candace Owens: " Pam Bondi, who is a complete loser and a tool, is trying to use the assassination of Charlie Kirk to lay the groundwork for hate speech laws in America.. .They wanna pass speech laws which will give them the full power to go after you for wrong think."

Home of the Brave

1,701,688 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten