Tucker Carlson posted a video to Twitter on Tuesday in which he announced plans to launch a “new version” of his show on the social media platform — the video, which amassed 22.9 million views within 24 hours, marked Carlson’s second recent video to blow up on the social media platform.
Last month after his show was nixed from the Fox News Channel lineup, Carlson posted a brief video on Twitter that has since earned more than 24 million views.
Fascist tendencies were quick to surface. “NBC News NOW” guest host Tom Costello brought in former CNN host Brian Stelter to help him complain, “Will anybody be able to police what Carlson says? Or is this the point? It’s just a free-for-all?” Costello suggested to Stelter, who himself was repeatedly blasted with accusations of peddling misinformation prior to his ouster from CNN last year.
Why is free speech and the 1st Amendment so scary for Liberals?
CCM: Why is free speech and the 1st Amendment so scary for Liberals?
I think it is more a case of free speech and the 1st Amendment being anathema to them because they are control freaks!
There is only ONE WAY, and that ONE WAY is what they dictate to the rest of us it is going to be.
So it is really freedom of thought and freedom of expression they are against and are the enemies of, as is the case in totalitarian countries like North Korea.
And this suppression of views is nothing new in this country as is made crystal clear in the Centinel XII political essay by Centinel & Samuel Bryan on January 23, 1788, to wit:
If the foregoing circumstances did not prove a conspiracy, there are others that must strike conviction in the most unsuspicious.
Attempts to prevent discussion by shackling the press ought ever to be a signal of alarm to freemen, and considered as an annunciation of meditated tyranny; this is a truth that the uniform experience of mankind has established beyond the possibility of doubt.
Bring the conduct of the authors and abettors of the new constitution to this test, let this be the criterion of their criminality, and every patriotic mind must unite in branding them with the stigma of conspirators against the public liberties.
No stage of this business but what has been marked with every exertion of influence and device of ambition to suppress information and intimidate public discussion; the virtue and firmness of some of the printers, rose superior to the menaces of violence, and the lucre of private interest; when every means failed to shackle the press, the free and independent papers were attempted to be demolished by withdrawing all the subscriptions to them within the sphere of the influence of the conspirators; fortunately for the cause of liberty and truth, these daring high handed attempts have failed except in one instance, where from a peculiarity of circumstances, ambition has triumphed.
Under the flimsey pretence of vindicating the character of a contemptible drudge of party rendered ridiculous by his superlative folly in the late convention, of which the statement given in the Pennsylvania Herald, was confessedly a faithful representation, this newspaper has been silenced by some hundreds of its subscribers (who it seems are generally among the devoted tools of party, or those who are obliged from their thraldom to yield implicit assent to the mandates of the junto) withdrawing their support from it; by this stroke the conspirators have suppressed the publication of the most valuable debates of the late convention, which would have been given in course by the Editor of that paper, whose stipend now ceasing, he cannot afford without compensation the time and attention necessary to this business.