Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

WHY DOES THE DOJ GIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT TO ANTISEMITISM? During her time as Attorney General, Pam Bondi made prosecuting antisemitism on college campuses and elsewhere a major priority. Why was the Department of Justice and federal law enforcement dedicating special attention to one category of speech? What does the...

RedactedNews's profile picture

Redacted

301,559 subscribers

17,154 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Attorney General Pam Bondi openly admits at the American Israeli Council that antisemitism is her top priority at the Department of Justice, with zero mention of the Epstein files. Bondi makes it stone cold clear her priorities lie with the State of Israel and the Jewish people. She was introduced by Miriam Adelson.
2:37

Attorney General Pam Bondi openly admits at the American Israeli Council that antisemitism is her top priority at the Department of Justice, with zero mention of the Epstein files. Bondi makes it stone cold clear her priorities lie with the State of Israel and the Jewish people. She was introduced by Miriam Adelson.

Shadow of Ezra

228,407 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇮🇱 A Rubio clip is back in circulation, and people are asking a fair question: why does criticism of one foreign government (Israel) get special visa treatment? He talked about a new policy to keep out foreigners who “foment hatred against our Jewish community” and to hold people accountable for certain rhetoric against Israel. The admin says it’s about antisemitism and security, but critics hear a double standard, no equivalent rule for bashing France, Germany, or even the U.S. itself. The line between protected political speech and actionable hate is being drawn in real time, and a lot of Americans don’t like where the pencil is going. Writer: Lucas
11:08

🇺🇸🇮🇱 A Rubio clip is back in circulation, and people are asking a fair question: why does criticism of one foreign government (Israel) get special visa treatment? He talked about a new policy to keep out foreigners who “foment hatred against our Jewish community” and to hold people accountable for certain rhetoric against Israel. The admin says it’s about antisemitism and security, but critics hear a double standard, no equivalent rule for bashing France, Germany, or even the U.S. itself. The line between protected political speech and actionable hate is being drawn in real time, and a lot of Americans don’t like where the pencil is going. Writer: Lucas

Mario Nawfal

34,117 просмотров • 16 дней назад

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 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

We interviewed the CEO of the ADL, Jonathan Greenblatt We Discuss: - Elon Musk & X - Antisemitism on College campuses - X's Ad Boycott - Free Speech - Zionism V. Antisemitism Timestamps: 1:33 - Is Elon Musk antisemitic? 4:25 - Is the ADL advertising on X Currently? 7:35 - What's the Line Between Free speech and Hate Speech 10:30 - Is X Improving? 12:53 - Is Musk Trying to stop Antisemitism? 14:06 - Has Musk taken the appropriate action after his recent Tweet Replies? 15:20: Is there a difference between antizionism and antisemitism? 19:58 - What More can be done about antisemitism on College Campuses. 24:08 - TikTok or X? 25:00 - Dinner with Elon, Trump or Biden? 25:21 - Is Antisemitism a bigger problem on the Right or the Left?
26:55

We interviewed the CEO of the ADL, Jonathan Greenblatt We Discuss: - Elon Musk & X - Antisemitism on College campuses - X's Ad Boycott - Free Speech - Zionism V. Antisemitism Timestamps: 1:33 - Is Elon Musk antisemitic? 4:25 - Is the ADL advertising on X Currently? 7:35 - What's the Line Between Free speech and Hate Speech 10:30 - Is X Improving? 12:53 - Is Musk Trying to stop Antisemitism? 14:06 - Has Musk taken the appropriate action after his recent Tweet Replies? 15:20: Is there a difference between antizionism and antisemitism? 19:58 - What More can be done about antisemitism on College Campuses. 24:08 - TikTok or X? 25:00 - Dinner with Elon, Trump or Biden? 25:21 - Is Antisemitism a bigger problem on the Right or the Left?

KrassenCast

488,571 просмотров • 2 лет назад

There is a touch of irony in the fact that Pam Bondi was fired as Attorney General just over 86 years to the day that AG Robert Jackson gave perhaps the most famous speech ever given by an AG. Titled “The Federal Prosecutor” the speech set forth the guiding principles and high standards for DOJ lawyers that have been followed for decades. Pam Bondi literally did every possible thing she could to destroy those principles and standards. But that speech endures and provides hope and even a roadmap for rebuilding the trust and faith of the American people. Lawyers of DOJ represent “The United States of America” not the individual who happens to temporarily occupy the White House.
2:09

There is a touch of irony in the fact that Pam Bondi was fired as Attorney General just over 86 years to the day that AG Robert Jackson gave perhaps the most famous speech ever given by an AG. Titled “The Federal Prosecutor” the speech set forth the guiding principles and high standards for DOJ lawyers that have been followed for decades. Pam Bondi literally did every possible thing she could to destroy those principles and standards. But that speech endures and provides hope and even a roadmap for rebuilding the trust and faith of the American people. Lawyers of DOJ represent “The United States of America” not the individual who happens to temporarily occupy the White House.

Doug Jones

10,934 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The antisemitism we’re seeing on college campuses is not from a grassroots movement. There is a sophisticated campaign by people who are connected to and sympathizer of Hamas, orchestrating all of this. I call on the Department of Education to investigate why these hate groups are allowed on campus.
1:26

The antisemitism we’re seeing on college campuses is not from a grassroots movement. There is a sophisticated campaign by people who are connected to and sympathizer of Hamas, orchestrating all of this. I call on the Department of Education to investigate why these hate groups are allowed on campus.

Noa Tishby

490,674 просмотров • 2 лет назад

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 by specifically acknowledging how Charlie Kirk’s political messaging was seen as “obscene” to others. Nobody wants the government prosecution of “hate speech”. If you want to know where that road goes, look at the United Kingdom or Canada. People want the application of *existing law*. More law = less justice. I cannot purport to claim what Charlie would have wanted. But for Pam to suggest Charlie would have wanted government criminalization of so-called “hate speech” is fundamentally antithetical to everything Charlie did in his life. Bondi has screwed up at every step of her stewardship of the DOJ. She is unfit for the position.
2:35

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 by specifically acknowledging how Charlie Kirk’s political messaging was seen as “obscene” to others. Nobody wants the government prosecution of “hate speech”. If you want to know where that road goes, look at the United Kingdom or Canada. People want the application of *existing law*. More law = less justice. I cannot purport to claim what Charlie would have wanted. But for Pam to suggest Charlie would have wanted government criminalization of so-called “hate speech” is fundamentally antithetical to everything Charlie did in his life. Bondi has screwed up at every step of her stewardship of the DOJ. She is unfit for the position.

Viva Frei

62,181 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

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

11,269 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Camilla Tominey Camilla Tominey, veteran journalist and commentator, delivered a powerful and moving speech yesterday, warning of the normalisation of antisemitism in Britain and the urgent need to confront it. Drawing on her own family history as the stepdaughter of an Auschwitz survivor, she reminded us: “The Holocaust did not begin with the concentration camps. It began with words, with stereotypes, with lies, with the quiet acceptance of hatred. When people stayed silent, hate was allowed to grow. That silence cost six million lives.” Her words are a clear call to action: the fight against antisemitism is not just a Jewish concern, it is a British one. The time to act is now.
9:52

Camilla Tominey Camilla Tominey, veteran journalist and commentator, delivered a powerful and moving speech yesterday, warning of the normalisation of antisemitism in Britain and the urgent need to confront it. Drawing on her own family history as the stepdaughter of an Auschwitz survivor, she reminded us: “The Holocaust did not begin with the concentration camps. It began with words, with stereotypes, with lies, with the quiet acceptance of hatred. When people stayed silent, hate was allowed to grow. That silence cost six million lives.” Her words are a clear call to action: the fight against antisemitism is not just a Jewish concern, it is a British one. The time to act is now.

Campaign Against Antisemitism

24,049 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

When I am Premier, I will: 1. Bring a vote on the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism to the floor of the Legislative Assembly within the first 2 weeks of the next Legislative session – Either as the government or the Official Opposition. 2. Link Funding for BC Universities to Upholding the rights of their Jewish student body and all other religious groups acting peacefully. Require universities to enforce their code of conduct to protect students from bigotry and physical threats. 3. Immediately approve charges against Charlotte Kates and Samidoun as recommended by the Vancouver Police Department. Additionally, instruct the Attorney General to investigate other groups who have been actively partnering with Samidoun. 4. Adjust the mandatory Holocaust Education to be delivered in grade 8 and include an additional mandatory module about the evolution of antisemitism: From medieval to modern. 5. Provide additional funding to Jewish schools, places of worship and institutions to improve security, until the threat level comes down. 6. The creation of a Special Advisor on Jewish Community & Antisemitism. 7. Antisemitism training for law enforcement, politicians and public service employees. 8. Work with the Provincial Firearms Officer to ensure that licensed armed security can be employed to protect Jewish institutions. Together, we will get BC back on track -
1:35

When I am Premier, I will: 1. Bring a vote on the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism to the floor of the Legislative Assembly within the first 2 weeks of the next Legislative session – Either as the government or the Official Opposition. 2. Link Funding for BC Universities to Upholding the rights of their Jewish student body and all other religious groups acting peacefully. Require universities to enforce their code of conduct to protect students from bigotry and physical threats. 3. Immediately approve charges against Charlotte Kates and Samidoun as recommended by the Vancouver Police Department. Additionally, instruct the Attorney General to investigate other groups who have been actively partnering with Samidoun. 4. Adjust the mandatory Holocaust Education to be delivered in grade 8 and include an additional mandatory module about the evolution of antisemitism: From medieval to modern. 5. Provide additional funding to Jewish schools, places of worship and institutions to improve security, until the threat level comes down. 6. The creation of a Special Advisor on Jewish Community & Antisemitism. 7. Antisemitism training for law enforcement, politicians and public service employees. 8. Work with the Provincial Firearms Officer to ensure that licensed armed security can be employed to protect Jewish institutions. Together, we will get BC back on track -

Iain Black

337,245 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

No non-Jewish person my age has a longer or clearer record of support for Israel, sympathy with the Jewish people, or opposition to antisemitism than I do. I regularly refer to antisemitism as a "lie from the pit of Hell," because it is. But I have to disagree with Amb. Friedman here. The First Amendment and our strict freedom of speech is one of America's greatest rights and sets us apart from every other country in the world. One of the central promises of Trump's 2024 campaign was to restore and protect American freedom of speech. Five years ago, our elites tried to destroy free speech in America in order to stop "racism." Immediately and predictably, stopping "racism" became a justification for wrecking our cities and wrecking the lives of people who did nothing wrong. Simultaneously, in the name of stopping "transphobia," they tried to make it impossible to dissent against the mutilation of children or radical gender propaganda in schools. The criminal witch hunts against President Trump by Fanni Willis and Jack Smith both tried to criminalize President Trump's speech, indicting him for making tweets or delivering speeches. Racism and antisemitism are both evil and must be opposed. But a government organized around jailing, impoverishing, or silencing people based on "racism" is what our enemies wanted. We should not repeat their mistakes just because some keffiyeh-wearing communists are protesting on campuses. If you don't like a person's opinion that doesn't mean they are an antisemite. But once "antisemitism" becomes valid grounds to censor or even imprison somebody, there will be frantic efforts to label all kinds of speech as antisemitic — the same way the left labeled all kinds of statements as "racist" to justify silencing their opposition. Not only that, but all of this won't even work: A legal crackdown won't make antisemitism go away. In the long run, it would make it worse! America's free speech tradition is our birthright. We should never get rid of it.
2:02

No non-Jewish person my age has a longer or clearer record of support for Israel, sympathy with the Jewish people, or opposition to antisemitism than I do. I regularly refer to antisemitism as a "lie from the pit of Hell," because it is. But I have to disagree with Amb. Friedman here. The First Amendment and our strict freedom of speech is one of America's greatest rights and sets us apart from every other country in the world. One of the central promises of Trump's 2024 campaign was to restore and protect American freedom of speech. Five years ago, our elites tried to destroy free speech in America in order to stop "racism." Immediately and predictably, stopping "racism" became a justification for wrecking our cities and wrecking the lives of people who did nothing wrong. Simultaneously, in the name of stopping "transphobia," they tried to make it impossible to dissent against the mutilation of children or radical gender propaganda in schools. The criminal witch hunts against President Trump by Fanni Willis and Jack Smith both tried to criminalize President Trump's speech, indicting him for making tweets or delivering speeches. Racism and antisemitism are both evil and must be opposed. But a government organized around jailing, impoverishing, or silencing people based on "racism" is what our enemies wanted. We should not repeat their mistakes just because some keffiyeh-wearing communists are protesting on campuses. If you don't like a person's opinion that doesn't mean they are an antisemite. But once "antisemitism" becomes valid grounds to censor or even imprison somebody, there will be frantic efforts to label all kinds of speech as antisemitic — the same way the left labeled all kinds of statements as "racist" to justify silencing their opposition. Not only that, but all of this won't even work: A legal crackdown won't make antisemitism go away. In the long run, it would make it worse! America's free speech tradition is our birthright. We should never get rid of it.

Charlie Kirk

2,046,379 просмотров • 1 год назад

This man works at the US State Department, in a special office for “Combating Antisemitism in America” He says they are working on algorithms more friendly to Jewish people, and working with tech Giants, who he says are all primarily Jewish owned, to change the Internet. Matt Gaetz: The definition of Antisemitism use to mean you didn’t like Jewish people — now it means anyone who the Jewish people (Government) don’t like. Where is the office to combat White Hate?
2:39

This man works at the US State Department, in a special office for “Combating Antisemitism in America” He says they are working on algorithms more friendly to Jewish people, and working with tech Giants, who he says are all primarily Jewish owned, to change the Internet. Matt Gaetz: The definition of Antisemitism use to mean you didn’t like Jewish people — now it means anyone who the Jewish people (Government) don’t like. Where is the office to combat White Hate?

MJTruthUltra

145,385 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

BREAKING: Patty Hartman, a 17-year former Justice Department official who was fired Monday by AG Pam Bondi, is warning of rising political retribution inside the DOJ: “There used to be a line, used to be a very distinct separation between the White House and the DOJ, because one should not interfere with the work of the other. That line is very definitely gone,” she told CBS News.
2:02

BREAKING: Patty Hartman, a 17-year former Justice Department official who was fired Monday by AG Pam Bondi, is warning of rising political retribution inside the DOJ: “There used to be a line, used to be a very distinct separation between the White House and the DOJ, because one should not interfere with the work of the other. That line is very definitely gone,” she told CBS News.

Republicans against Trump

1,290,357 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨 Rep. Ro Khanna Defends ArabCon, Mocks Critics of “Pro-Terror Radicals” At ArabCon, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) opened by taunting critics of the conference: “So where are the pro-terror radicals? Raise your hand if you're a pro-terror radical.” He went on to frame the backlash as an attack on free speech: “What happened to the First Amendment? You know what happened to the free speech? Free speech, if you agree with me, but not free speech, if you go speak at ArabCon. Come on, I actually believe in free speech consistently.” And he pointed to campuses: “What's going on in our university campuses with people who are criticizing foreign policy and then getting harassed, that's not standing up for free speech.”
0:30

🚨 Rep. Ro Khanna Defends ArabCon, Mocks Critics of “Pro-Terror Radicals” At ArabCon, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) opened by taunting critics of the conference: “So where are the pro-terror radicals? Raise your hand if you're a pro-terror radical.” He went on to frame the backlash as an attack on free speech: “What happened to the First Amendment? You know what happened to the free speech? Free speech, if you agree with me, but not free speech, if you go speak at ArabCon. Come on, I actually believe in free speech consistently.” And he pointed to campuses: “What's going on in our university campuses with people who are criticizing foreign policy and then getting harassed, that's not standing up for free speech.”

Stu Smith

53,646 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Mayor Mamdani on delivering for the Jewish Communities in NYC: - increased funding for hate crime prevention programs by 800% - expanding city offices to specifically combat antisemitism - developing a first in the nation municipal response to combat antisemitism 🔻 MY THOUGHTS: Interesting coming from him… but this is no different than throwing money at or creating special divisions to combat racism, or white supremacy. We don’t want it, but where is the funding to combat white hate? I am tired of the different sect’s that protect one class of people over others. There should be ZERO special divisions or funding to protect one class of people. Everyone should be equally protected.
1:10

Mayor Mamdani on delivering for the Jewish Communities in NYC: - increased funding for hate crime prevention programs by 800% - expanding city offices to specifically combat antisemitism - developing a first in the nation municipal response to combat antisemitism 🔻 MY THOUGHTS: Interesting coming from him… but this is no different than throwing money at or creating special divisions to combat racism, or white supremacy. We don’t want it, but where is the funding to combat white hate? I am tired of the different sect’s that protect one class of people over others. There should be ZERO special divisions or funding to protect one class of people. Everyone should be equally protected.

MJTruthUltra

13,957 просмотров • 8 дней назад

“We’ve got a lineage of cases going back to the 60s and 70s that have carved out a very clear definition of what protected speech is… It doesn’t matter if it's hate speech, it doesn't matter if it's vulgar, it doesn't matter if it offends you… It’s protected speech.” Shiloh Hendrix was convicted of disorderly conduct after a viral video showed her using a racial slur at a Minnesota park. Her attorney Brian Karalus argues that speech—even vulgar or offensive speech—is protected by the First Amendment. Watch The Matt Gaetz Show on OAN Live Today!
0:48

“We’ve got a lineage of cases going back to the 60s and 70s that have carved out a very clear definition of what protected speech is… It doesn’t matter if it's hate speech, it doesn't matter if it's vulgar, it doesn't matter if it offends you… It’s protected speech.” Shiloh Hendrix was convicted of disorderly conduct after a viral video showed her using a racial slur at a Minnesota park. Her attorney Brian Karalus argues that speech—even vulgar or offensive speech—is protected by the First Amendment. Watch The Matt Gaetz Show on OAN Live Today!

One America News

128,736 просмотров • 15 дней назад