Tim Walz ATTACKS Free Speech, Says Misinfo Is Illegal: Robby Soave

[@arielsanchez465]

Jessica's intellectual dishonesty is amazing.

[@maribk1966]

She has an intellect??

[@stevensugars3957]

Breathtaking, really.

[@343Films]

Second only to Brie

[@bitburg40]

Just say dishonesty. There’s nothing intellectual about her.😂

[@TheRiderInBlack85]

@@343Films at least Brie didn’t give everyone a headache when she pushed back against Robbie. She was just annoying. Jessica is a total shell for the DNC.

[@stephanieh6306]

Who else remembers Maxine Waters telling people to attack trump supporters when they are out to eat? Heres your example Jes. What is she even arguing?

[@babyqueenxo]

Oh, thanks for sharing it. I wish Robby would bring such examples and go on the offense rather than just play defense and weasel out of accusations.

[@babyqueenxo]

Don't you feel we self-censor ourselves, even as libertarians, whenever race (esp. B/W) is brought up? For example, when Robby and Amber covered allegations against JD Vance that “he wanted more white babies,” they didn't have to beg that his children are biracial. It's nice that we celebrate their mixed heritage, but we should just ask what's wrong even if he wanted more white children? I think we need to reclaim being comfortable in our skin from the far-right in a way that isn't anti-minority, and push back at the left for gaslighting about it at the same time. The notion of colorblindness should be, *“judge me not by the color of my skin, but judge me by the content of my character.”* But it's like we've been pressured and traumatized so much that we avoid the conservation and act like we “don't see color,” even when we ourselves are targeted for it.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

People need to keep bringing that up.

[@jackspring7709]

I remember that.

[@williamsgang4437]

And Pelosi encouraging the deadly riots in 2020.

[@kevincase9251]

I imagine Jessica arguing with someone for telling her they would arrive around 8 but they arrive at 8 and not "around" 8.

[@khatdubell]

🤣

[@jerseydebil]

🤣

[@sumerianastrology]

100%😂

[@flch95]

lol perfect!

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Lol

[@Bradley-i4t]

Robby deserves a co-host who isn't an idiot.

[@Ciriousglitch]

They need to Stop giving him a female co-host then. 😂

[@KevinSmith-qi5yn]

Maybe this is the best they could do when sourcing a progressive viewpoint.

[@sheex410]

They cancelled Kim Iverson, so it's their own fault... I unsubscribed when they did so.

[@jimluebke3869]

Just turn the sound off when Jessica is talking.

[@jimluebke3869]

@@Ciriousglitch I dunno, that Duke girl has a good head on her shoulders.

[@davidhandson2429]

Free speech means free speech, and the government has no right to regulate it. In fact, it would be illegal and unconstitutional. Someone needs to explain what democracy is to the democracts because clearly, they have no idea. They seem to think democracy means dictatorship.

[@RadiantSkin]

Wrong. US law has always had limits on free speech and likely always will. You do not have a right to say anything that is guaranteed to cause harm to others. You can't even say seven swear words on widely availavle broadcast media.

[@BR0STRADAMUS]

"You're reading a lot into what he said" says the person literally adding words to what he said

[@propertake]

💯👏👏👏

[@TheChase008]

Jessica is NOT adding words to what he said ....... she is just demonstrating how the left woke mind works and hears things.

[@hanzo2001]

"but reading into someone is not the same as adding more for someone" - probably Jessica again

[@albaniaball897]

"I know he said one thing but he probably meant this other thing. Now stop reading into what he said." Embarrassing. When people tell you who they are, believe them.

[@TheChase008]

@@albaniaball897 Once you say " probably" you are leaving lots of room for skepticism. People need to stop being naive. That is what is embarrassing.

[@Foxandbearwoodcraft]

This is like watching a teenager arguing with an adult. Both are educated, only one has wisdom.

[@joiedevie3901]

The only wisdom Robby brings is how to please Tucker Carlson.

[@domone1201]

Educated doesn’t mean much nowadays. You have people with masters degrees in Gen theory, and they couldn’t find the US on a map. Just watch the Prager U interviews of college students.

[@waynew7805]

Ohhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!😂😂😂😂

[@GeeTrieste]

This one is so true!

[@johnconnors6412]

She accused robbie of splitting hairs. He quoted him directly while she tried to qualify it with things he didnt say. Shes gaslighting

[@Treblaine]

splitting hairs = objections about matters that are minor, unimportant, or irrelevant while being defiance of reason. Her smear against him only exposes herself that she thinks the rights and freedoms of Americans are minor, unimportant or irrelevant and with no evidentiary basis.

[@DennisBLee]

she's literally just splitting hairs the whole time

[@babyqueenxo]

Okay, I'm a bit lost with the blind spot of these arguments. As someone who grew up progressive but independent now, Jess cares about social justice, she cares about minorities, especially black and Palestinians like most of on the left. To the libertarian and center-right, *free speech is the end goal.* But to the liberal and progressive, *free-speech is the means to an end* like diversity or equity. So it's more like “free speech for me, none for thee.” Why is it so complicated for the right to call out the double standard and not stop filibustering your already known position? 🤦🏼‍♀

[@odiedodieuk]

She’s splitting hairs lol

[@anonygrazer3234]

She's a communist, whaddya expect?

[@qbitz08]

A politician saying misinfo is illegal -- that's rich.

[@lokitus]

Robbie has the patience of a saint.

[@weverleywagstaffe8490]

this woman is INSUFFERABLE

[@milestackettmusic]

Incredibly!

[@martinbrenner6664]

I said these exact words a week ago. She isn’t getting better.

[@Alsayid]

Her arguments are horrible, but she is not insufferable to look at, lol

[@GameDevChad]

It's unbelievable, this is why I don't watch "The Hill", what a ridiculous program and channel.

[@jonschlottig9584]

That's her calling card. L

[@ArizonaGrows]

Man, I really thought Jessica would be good, but she gets worse each week.

[@sprgeorge333]

I used to watch this program daily till she got on. Now i basically just watch till she comes on.

[@Roxwins]

People need to stop watching. They are engagement farming with all the comments about how terrible she is. Stop watching and stop commenting.

[@carlrav5660]

hot and dumb...but not dumb in a fun way, more just dumb and annoying way

[@putinwork3498]

@@ArizonaGrows WOKE epidemic 😅

[@VTAcraft]

I can't believe they did it but the Hill actually managed to find a more insufferable debater than Briahna. Amazing.

[@bperez8656]

Brihana is WAY smarter than this lady

[@TheRiderInBlack85]

When Jessica took over for Bree, I changed my notifications for being subscribed to the hill. I like Robbie, he’s annoying at times, but he’s good. In my opinion Jessica, is insufferable!

[@mikeottersole]

Benihana and Jessica are both insufferable. Robbie is honest and logical and puts up with sooo much nonsense from his fellow anchors.

[@wellokthenben3611]

Seeing a pattern here. Robby makes a decent point...his co-host gets emotional (because robby doesn't) and desperately tries to play devil's advocate. Then they end up defending a ridiculous take. Glad Robby remains.

[@a00019217b]

Robbie, please go on your own. People will follow you

[@deathmetaldouglas69]

I agree. He's paid his dues at this point.

[@roboparks]

Says Misinfo Is Illegal . Then he would be in Jail for misinformation on his Military Service.

[@tophercabba]

yup cant "misspeak" that many times for it to be misspeak,biden should be in jail just for that alone 30 years worth of tape

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

True.

[@audijo6562]

No no no! What the coach said wasn't misinformation. It was an oopsie, and oopsies don't count. 😅

[@putinwork3498]

@@roboparks yooo! 😭😅

[@MusicLover-dt7ic]

Mis info...who determines it to be false or misinformation. its only supposedly misinformation when they dont like it or agree with it...all bs word salad.

[@sideshowamit]

Jessica is such an embarrassing addition to Rising. She is not a serious person at all

[@domone1201]

They needed someone to match Brianna’s level of intelligence.

[@wren7195]

Oh she's TREMENDOUSLY serious about the things she says, the "qualifying" she does to justify her beliefs. That is what disturbs me. But you're right, she's embarrassing.

[@anonygrazer3234]

She also never smiles....the Left has no sense of humor, harmony or happiness.

[@DetVen]

Honestly, I don't think she actually holds those views. I think she's playing a role here. Her character is the insufferable progressive and she's playing the role wonderfully.

[@RGRCD]

@@DetVen Unfortunately I think she does believe those views.

[@gs8136]

Jessica is either doing a bad job at purposeful manipulation, or she doesn’t understand the basic tenet that all ducks are birds but not all birds are ducks, that just because sometimes hateful speech incites violence, not all hateful speech incites violence. In fact, the majority of hateful speech incites no violence whatsoever.

[@deadgolfer6345]

It's a bad job at manipulation.

[@JP-kq4jr]

It really is like the simplest concept ever. My 6-year-old would understand this no problem.

[@pokegogeezer7676]

It's cliche but bears repeating. The first amendment is not there to defend speech that we like. It's there to defend distasteful and unpopular speech.

[@khatdubell]

@@pokegogeezer7676 I don't think its cliche at all. If anything this needs to be said MORE.

[@MikeM-uy6qp]

@@pokegogeezer7676 how about we say it's there to defend all speech, rather than suggesting there's a consensus on what's distasteful, or that an authoritarian state wouldn't also prohibit popular views under certain conditions.

[@Pohonesty]

Please get rid of Jessica. Its clear the DEI intent is not working. Hire a cohost based on their talent.

[@bperez8656]

100%!

[@doubleohhhhseven]

I agree completely. She reduced this episode into a junior-high-level debate, which, sadly, is what I've come to expect from her. I never thought I'd miss Bri... Okay, I don't miss Bri. But please jettison Jessica from the team and find someone we can take more seriously.

[@alikhat1647]

Saying “misinformation” can present a “clear and present danger” is like saying “we have to protect you from yourself”. If information is clearly wrong, then it is on the individual to figure out why it’s wrong.

[@MoonDoggie-hs2se]

That's the most inane, and obtuse take on free speech that one could possibly argue. If I'm a firefighter, and I ask a witnesses to a house fire, and the witness intentionally lies, no matter the reason they lie, and tells me three children are trapped in the home, and I enter the home, get cutoff from a safe exit, because I'm looking for three nonexistent children, is it my fault that I entered a burning structure with the knowledge that I could get cut from a safe exit while I'm looking for these imaginary children? Or is it the fault of the witness who intentionally mislead me with misinformation? Nobody has the God given right to say anything they want , anytime they want. If I say I'm going to unlive the president of the U.S. of A. I think you are such simple minded partisan hack, that you would agree that as long as it's Sleepy Joe, it's not illegal, and I should be able to carry on, but if it was Diaper Donnie, it's illegal to make those threats, and I should be arrested. You can't intentionally mislead people in instances where safety or other critical factors can be compromised by their premeditated duplicity, and expect it to fall on the person who was injured, or harmed because they should have had the forewarning, or knowledge that the other party was lieing. That's not only absurd, that's just weird.

[@breelee4362]

And up to the source providing the information to make a case for why it's credible and true and why anyone should trust in it.

[@alikhat1647]

@breelee, I find that to be mostly accurate, but the people who most often give information without any credible reason for why it’s true beyond, “trust us”, is the media and the government. Those are the people who can say whatever and people will believe what they say. “50 former intelligence officials” (this is the first thing that came to mind, I’m not trying to post a defense of Trump), in regards to Hunter Biden’s laptop, but it turned out to be true, because they are all just one group with an agreed upon narrative using each other as sources. If it’s just one wackadoo on the internet claiming something, then of course it’s on said wackadoo to prove what is being said has any basis in reality. If it’s against the established narrative though, any evidence along with the entire claim will be dismissed as misinformation, and the source given for dismissal will be “trust us”.

[@chrismiller5198]

I think the words "clear and present danger" are vague and open to interpretation. It would be better to say there must be no immediate incitement to violence or panic.

[@mikeottersole]

Hard to believe 2000 plus years after Socrates we have "leaders" who want to control speech. Freedom of speech is the foundation of all other freedoms. But the "progressives" are telling us what speech is "acceptable". Should we get our chalice ready?

[@Kenyanon]

Why does The Hill insist on hiring women who belong on The View

[@spurzo-thespiralspacewolf8916]

Exactly! LOL

[@alexanderchenf1]

For the views

[@elizarhad1]

🤣

[@ControversialTopics]

UNSUBSCRIBED

[@craigclermond8001]

Jessica is happy to say hate speech is not protected because then they can lock up conservatives for anything. Don't want an open border, hate speech, criticize the current democrat nominee,hate speech. It pretty much would be a police state

[@meme-qk7jq]

"We have to learn from Europe" Hello!!! We did learn from Europe. This is why the 1st ammendment exists.

[@TexasGreed]

Thank you! I was so confused by that lol.

[@paulsnow]

"We need to learn from Europe" They are the counter examples to what we need to do. Exactly.

[@Dan-dz1ws]

And the second amendment is thair to protect the first

[@losthighway5967]

Europe is crazy anti free speech.

[@AstrobotJones]

And how's Europe doing right now?

[@paulweeldreyer7457]

Jessica's silly arguments are getting really cringe. Jessica, when the speech is illegal, it is not because it's "hateful," it's illegal because it's incitement to violence. One need not be "hateful" (whatever that means) to incite violence.

[@rebekahwest8957]

Yep!

[@dorianissock732]

No one is saying that the only way to incite violence is through the speech. They're saying SOMETIMES speech and hate speech and sometimes speech is libel, obscene, fraud etc.

[@OllieCat7]

I don't care for the addition of this Jessica.

[@amandaspear6148]

Hear here

[@MikeM-uy6qp]

Yes. By her silly argument, there's no guarantee of any speech, because incitement can happen in any context. Technically it's true, but it's also a really dumb rejoinder to Robbie's point. As ever, he did a terrible job of defending himself.

[@asusandroid7811]

Jessica is in line with the communist ideology's emphasis on collective interests over individual rights. As is the VP candidate Tim Walz.

[@bluebird6300]

Incredibly well articulated ❤ Bravo

[@willman9567]

Harris and Tim will do us the way the UK is doing their people.

[@Sneaky-Sneaky]

Jessica’s spin is so childish …. It’s beyond me why she is even on this show!

[@Roxwins]

People need to stop watching. They are engagement farming with all the comments about how terrible she is. Stop watching and stop commenting.

[@raymondmeyers8983]

Jessica is desperately contorting herself trying to defend Walz's comments.

[@sharpturns5558]

She's insufferable. So condescending the way she's talking to Robby.

[@donleyp]

The dumbest people often put on the air of superiority to mask their deep insecurity.

[@douglascounts4634]

She is a leftist elitist, they are pretty much all this way. They know what is right and no one should be able to say otherwise without facing severe consequences. They should be worshipped as our benevolent dictators.

[@n2the1]

When you realize how much better it was with Brihanna.....

[@spookrockcity]

@@cassiescornerreviews6884 Bri couldn't wipe the floor with anyone. She just had emotional breakdowns and made funny faces. That's partly why she got fired.

[@DennisBLee]

Maximum Dunning-Kruger effect lol

[@patcline6972]

Sounds like Germany in the 30s all over thank a democrat

[@LG-tw5vm]

The Nazis used the term "misinformation."

[@Americanbadashh]

The Nazis also spread tons of misinformation! The Nazi's also ate sugar, are you against sugar now too!

[@thefuturist8864]

They also believed the world was round. What’s your point?

[@deyoloco3110]

Tyrants will always use terms like "misinformation" and "hate speech" to classify anything that goes against the status quo. That is why the US is a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy like this brain dead politician wants. The republic defends individual rights, democracy tramples that through mob rule and it perfectly allows tyrants to stay in power by controlling the information and the meaning of words. Aristotle knew this well 2300 years ago.

[@junkjunk81]

Jessica is becoming insufferable. She might as well be a Harris campaign spin doctor at this point.

[@junkjunk81]

@@cassiescornerreviews6884 No, adding implied clarifications in order to defend an indefensible position is insufferable. Walz was clearly stating that, in his view, speech being "misinformation" or "hate speech" means the speaker may forefit first amendment rights. Jessica, in an clear attempt to defend Walz no matter what, decides to add a caveat that Walz didn't--that the statement only applies to speech that is violent. If that is what Walz meant, then why didn't he say that? Jessica is playing spin doctor by adding arguments that Walz didn't say himself. And Robbie's counter argument is on the nose here. If Walz's statement is acceptable because of some unspoken addendum, then you should be willing to apply the same logic elsewhere. Here is a simple thought experiment. Imagine Trump made any of the following statements: -Campus protests are not guaranteed protection under the first amendment. -Social media posts are not guaranteed protection under the first amendment. -Newspaper op-eds are not guaranteed protection under the first amendment. -Religious speech is not guaranteed protection under the first amendment. If Trump said any of that, would you think "those statements are true because if the described speech advocates specific violent acts, then they are not protected"?

[@beltsandedman]

Becoming?

[@Roxwins]

People need to stop watching. They are engagement farming with all the comments about how terrible she is. Stop watching and stop commenting.

[@Darcsied27]

-Is freedom of speech legal in America? Jessica: No because if that speech is violent then that speech isn’t legal. So you’re wrong 🤪

[@dougyoung4790]

Her vocal fry should be illegal

[@hanzo2001]

Agreed

[@chadfredrick1519]

That haughty timbre should not be protected by free speech.

[@kayjay407]

The drawn-out arrogance...🙄🤢 It's like nails on a chalkboard.🤦‍♀️

[@dans1985]

Walz is terrible, take it from a Minnesotan.

[@TheChase008]

They have women like Jessica on here so we can hear their bad ideas and form our opinions and vote accordingly. As annoying as Jessica is , she is unfortunately a necessary evil.

[@bperez8656]

Why is she a necessary evil? Why must we suffer through such ignorance!???

[@TheChase008]

@@bperez8656 To remind us of her and the left's ignorance. Also , so that those who are undecided can watch and learn for themselves.

[@grocerybaggy]

Jessica doesn't care about the terms of her own freedoms. Hate speech and Violent speech are two different things... If hate speech turns to violent speech, then it is violent speech. Sure Jessica, limit speech because it upsets you. Maybe your generation should be more accepting of other rights... It's also sickening she thinks misinformation is dangerous.

[@JustinFREAKIN]

Misinformation is dangerous. And yelling fire in a crowded theater is not protected speech. Take a civics class.

[@andrewpinson1268]

@@JustinFREAKIN The problem is who grades it as misinformation. The mainstream media will grade EVERYTHING that the GOP or Trump says as misinformation or lies period. So let the misinformation fly on both sides and then create a real debate with the media as to what is right - not propaganda from the media.

[@user-nu4py2mu6o]

@@JustinFREAKIN- You are really caught up on that Strawman argument, huh? Did you know that no one ever yelled “fire!” in a crowded theater? Did you know that the “Fire in a crowded theater” remark was coined by the government attorneys who were attempting to censor political speech of anti-war protesters during WWI? How deliciously ironic that you are employing this Strawman in an attempt to legitimize political censorship. 😂

[@es83stevenson88]

​@@JustinFREAKIN and who is in charge of what is misinformation? You? How do you tell the difference between misinformation and a mistake or a joke?

[@JustinFREAKIN]

@@andrewpinson1268 courts. That's literally what the legal system is for.

[@freedmanschannel4409]

I hate when you read word for word what someone says and then they think you’re “reading too much into it”

[@creativemaplewoodworks4640]

Wow, Jessica is not good at this. - was that violent?

[@januarysson5633]

Jessica: “I think you’re reading a lot into what he said Robbie.” Meanwhile, it’s Jessica who’s trying to convince Robbie that all “hate” speech creates a clear and present danger which is what Walz is implying. 🤦‍♂️

[@nomad_333_]

Good argument but Robby got this one.

[@ronaldjeffrey8712]

Patrick Henry summed it up perfectly. "I disaprove of what you say, but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it"!

[@academyofchampions1]

Bravo Robbie for withstanding the barrage of stupidity from Jessica

[@reneechavez9866]

Jessica knows that what Walz said is wrong and complete BS, but she continues to try to stretch things to cover for him which is just shameful!

[@ShamefulDispleey]

How is it shameful?! She has right to say whatever she think is right.

[@reneechavez9866]

@@ShamefulDispleey covering for someone whose lying and you know is wrong is never right.

[@phloog]

I’m not sure. She’s seems almost dim most of the time.

[@justinpowell7171]

Jessica purposely gaslighting robbie

[@squatch545]

You mean purposefully destroying Robbie with facts and logic.

[@nefigaha]

@@squatch545 Jessica's mother has entered the chat

[@markdavis7853]

​@@squatch545you are trolling right?

[@kevingreer9686]

I think she's accidently being unintelligent. 😂

[@justinpowell7171]

@@squatch545 Jessica Burbank, Facts and Logic should never be combined in a sentence.

[@steveg18556]

Burbank twists herself in knots to defend Walz. When she talks, she’s just a haircut with an agenda, so cringe.

[@johnconnors6412]

She is also a very patronising voice

[@daisydaisy...4562]

I'm voting for the guy who believes hate speech is a bad thing ....works well with my own belief system....

[@JW30000]

@@daisydaisy...4562 ok there Vader, if you say the wrong thing to someone perhaps that would get you the Vader death claw and that would be ok to punish you for thinking you had free speech. More rising after this.

[@jeffreymontoya9933]

It's really hilarious that you can't see how it's Robbie trying to twist what he said by his own misunderstanding of the words " no guarantee"

[@veritasinvicta8128]

I find it hilarous and appalling that people styling themselves as "progressive" are literally defending censorship.

[@aliensallaroundus1126]

SHES GRABBING FOR STRAWS AND THERE ARE NONE LEFT R9BBIE IS RIGHT

[@raizen21ss56]

Walz basically said that if you disagree with him or people that share his idealogy, you should go to jail.

[@Det_Fan]

She’s got an agenda and he’s not letting her get away with it.

[@dblackesquire]

Robbie is correct. The first amendment amendment provides a guarantee for protected speech. Hate speech is protected. When speech isn't protected it isn't because of it being hateful. The government is required to be blind with regard to the content of expression and only restrict those expressions which are necessary to protect. Fighting words and threats are not protected and can be restricted. Walz was irresponsible when he said hate speech isn't guaranteed. He should have been clear that fighting words and threats aren't protected. The way he presented his point was meant to chill some kinds of expression he doesn't like. As a governor, he shouldn't be flippant about the constitutional protections.

[@crhu319]

Terms like "hate speech" refer in law to non imminent / immediate threats. US law is uniquely over tolerant of those to the detriment of the targets. Threat is far too narrowly defined. Trying to invent "violent speech" or "fighting words" as arbitrary thresholds never works. Ultimately the test is the same as in self defense pleas: reasonable apprehension of harm, and reason to fear fleeing or responding will lead to more harm. The exact basis of "stand your ground" doctrine, so the US right should not be confused by it. All the Canadian or Australian or French or Europe-wide laws say is that if you could trigger self defense or stand your ground laws in the US, the state can act to break things up. It's not hard to understand. They don't want armed gangs of vigilantes escalating threat to the limits of immediacy, credibility, specificity & intent, the four loopholes by which almost anything gets through the 1A. Even all of Hitler's speeches.

[@giovannacolone]

Very well said. Thanks

[@tyraonortham6545]

So very well stated!

[@RuebenY]

This woman is insane.

[@jairkerker2821]

I stand for Jessica's freedom to talk herself out of a job.

[@stevestevens8749]

How did this lady get this job? This is a ridiculous, elementary school, "got'cha" argument.

[@luckygluxx]

I work for the postal service. They found ballots months after the election. They need to stop mail in ballots and go back to one day in person voting

[@davidtimmerman3121]

with an ID.

[@luckygluxx]

@@davidtimmerman3121 right. With a proper government issued ID

[@lynnmarie2962]

​@@davidtimmerman3121with an ID that shows citizenship status.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

​@@luckygluxxyes.

[@fehlrock]

And nobody will listen to you...

[@Bookworm214-y3d]

Who gets to decide what is hate speech? Hate speech can literally be anything that a certain party disagrees with

[@SavageAltruist]

I feel bad for Robby. Her lack of intellect and morals is insufferable

[@dreadcthulhu1439]

Also, Bri and now Jessica will argue with him over view that are not even his

[@WhatAboutsAndWhatifs]

Robby is the real MVP having to carry a news station with a bunch of hacks

[@eQuariuz]

lol omg

[@enochgoodfellow8972]

This woman is an embarrassment. Twisting herself into knots to justify that which is clearly wrong.

[@fehlrock]

We have the right to "Hate" it is not illegal.... Yet !

[@k.s.nichols4060]

Omg. Jessica is so inept when she tries to lay a rhetorical trap for Robby. "So Robby... you'll agree that...". So cringe.

[@xephael3485]

She needs to dye her hair blonde... If she's doing that intentionally she should just be kicked off the show.

[@smooth_pursuit]

So smarmy

[@OldWanderingMillennial]

Lol😂... But you didn't say she was wrong. She politely crushed Robbie's argument... Lol❤

[@davidedwards2323]

Agreed and she's outclassed every time cause she just isn't that bright

[@Lynn.Panadero4242]

Robby set up his own trap. Jessica just clarified what was said in the quote and question what Bobby asserted that wasn’t there.

[@meme-qk7jq]

The gurl is off the wall as usual

[@augustuswayne9676]

Anything can be called hate speech . ALL speech is protected under the first amendment . Just because you don't like it doesn't make it hate speech .

[@charliewaters5289]

She is deliberately trying to conflate hateful speech, with incitement. Totally different things.

[@scottwork47]

Fire her!

[@allanholster5717]

Watching her squirm was PAINFUL. To pretend there is no guarantee to hate speech because sometimes it can fall under a call to violence or lawlessness is maximum levels of double think. There is no free speech by that logic because all speech has the potential to be a call to violence or lawlessness

[@oooolah]

Exactly! And how she try's to twist words just to seem right was so hard to watch. I know how Robbie feels trying to argue with someone who can't even understand their own argument.

[@scott_nutt]

Exactly. That was the point Robbie tried to make numerous times during the segment but she just wasn't able to process the information (or refused to).

[@VTAcraft]

I can't believe I'm saying this but she's actually worse than Briahna. Briahna still would've engaged in the deflections and whataboutisms, but she would've at least conceded that Walz' statement here was clearly incompatible with the 1A.

[@randazzlin]

It's all mental gymnastics now with Jessica. Same with Bri.

[@chriswood5012]

Jessica, like her fellow leftie female Briahna, repeatedly says "Robbie" in that lecturing tone. If he talked to her like that he'd be called a sexist.

[@sergiomedina7960]

She gets worse every day

[@ih8u696]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[@frankstipes4114]

Its not an ERROR ITS WHO HE IS...A DANGEROUS IGNORAMOUS

[@PDXFilmmongers]

No politiician should be the one to determine what is misinformation and what is not. Their truths are often lies.

[@KentoLeoDragon]

Good lord no, we do not need to learn anything from Europe.

[@lisacole690]

😂😂😂

[@BruceNewhouse]

We need to learn from Europe what not to do.

[@Gunners_Mate_Guns]

@@BruceNewhouse Yep, the perfect reverse barometer.

[@DB57RB]

This strong push to categorize speech you disagree with as "hate speech" is disturbing. It's nothing but trying to eliminate the right to free speech.

[@TheVeritas2100]

***This strong push to categorize speech*** as ILLEGAL ( essentially to eliminate 1A ) - and is the 100% desire by the Lefty America DimokRats ( lik eWaltz ) ... to destroy the FREEDOMS in U.S.

[@stitch438]

It's the only way a certain side can push their stances; if you can't ask questions because they're labeled "hate speech"; you can't question the madness.

[@ryancappo]

Well, organizing mobs of people on corporate owned communication channels to hate the groups of people with different skin color or ethnic background is a big problem and isn’t protected speech by the 1st amendment.

[@mr.saturn7833]

Spot on!👏🇺🇸

[@ryancappo]

@@DB57RB What speech are you worried about getting labeled as hate speech?

[@user-mj4zk3bo8v]

Voter I'D should be mandatory in every state

[@ayabokti161]

Hate speech is free speech. Period.

[@ChrisSmith-qk9rk]

We did learn from Europe. This is why the 1st ammendment exists.

[@yehoshuabenavraham9706]

Witness the tragedy of government censorship destroying the formerly free society that was the United Kingdom.

[@yehoshuabenavraham9706]

This is happening as we speak.

[@DAMgmt]

Jessica is trying to have a gotcha moment. She is looking foolish.

[@AFSco1521]

She is insufferable.

[@SJBetkoski]

That voice!

[@ShadowMan66]

@@SJBetkoski Only good for one thing and that would last one night!

[@DukeRhodes]

Proof the 19th amendment was a big mistake.

[@user-wr9ws8sp5j]

Robbie is right, this is not complicated

[@JohnTightlips]

Jessica doesn’t understand 1st amendment at all

[@lamp-stand7]

Jessica: Because some grass is not green does not mean that grass is not green.

[@scottm2553]

That's not what she said. Because there is grass doesn't guarantee that it's green. How is everyone in the comments so clueless?

[@lamp-stand7]

@@scottm2553 Hateful Speech is Protected. That is TRUE. Grass is Green. That is TRUE. Are there rare exceptions to both? Yes. But, she is arguing that because there are exceptions, there can be no RULE. That would be flawed reasoning.

[@TheChase008]

@@scottm2553 Robby took Watlz literally. She tried to read Watlz's mind and offer her interpretation. That is a naive tactic. I think you are the one who is clueless.

[@electrolytics]

There is no "Hate Speech". There is ONLY speech. We wouldn't need a 1st Amendment if it was to protect our right to talk about the weather or baseball.

[@vinyllpreviews9462]

Only baseball teams I like, talking about Yankees I consider hate speech.

[@crhu319]

Where it's defined in law, it sure doesn't mean "words that upset others".

[@bperez8656]

Thank you: Can we become best friends

[@lockhartia]

Bless Robbie for putting up with this woman.

[@JohnSmith-pb4ri]

Hate speech is protected speech. Misinformation is also protected speech. It's actually a very simple concept and I'm not sure why this lady is confused about it.

[@thedailyhawker8726]

She really is Harry Sisson in a dress. She can’t even say that maybe he misspoke, she has to defend whatever the democrats do no matter what. Bri had so much more credibility.

[@propertake]

I was just thinking about Bri and how she would have agreed somewhat with Robby, but also pointed out that "if it turns to voilent speech, thats different". Cause she used her critical thinking skills, not just always defending the party

[@utah_koidragon7117]

On the contrary, she seems to be following in Bri's footsteps these past couple of weeks. Equivocating like this is EXACTLY the kind of dishonest arguing Bri routinely engaged in. And Walz didn't misspeak on this issue- he, like so many others on the left, really just oppose freedom of speech as a principle to begin with.

[@McGurkus]

​@@propertake I agree. Briahanna had some faults, but being an expert in legal matters wasn't one of them. She would be spot-on in explaining where the line falls, and what the "spirit of the law" applied.

[@andrewzapata9420]

And what do the MAGA crowd do??

[@gypsyroze]

Missing bri

[@jeffrodrequez]

Jessica: "I think you are reading a lot into what he said, Robbie"...then proceeds read into what he said by explaining what he "really meant", meanwhile Robbie just quoted him, word for word. Good thing she isn't "splitting hairs".

[@billy-black-socks]

Seriously

[@SeiyaSoiya-un4jj]

Attacking free speech is just weird.

[@davidedwards2323]

😂😂😂 yes!

[@JustinFREAKIN]

Things like yelling fire in a crowded theater is not covered under "free speech".

[@deadgolfer6345]

Well played. Far from the weirdest thing about this guy though.

[@user-nu4py2mu6o]

@@JustinFREAKIN- You should ask your philosophy professor to walk you through the pitfalls of logical fallacies - specifically the Strawman.

[@user-hk6tk4ge5t]

@@JustinFREAKIN Free speech does not cover anything. The first amendment covers lawful speech.

[@hcard1971]

He is absolutely correct.

[@tcorourke2007]

The "clear and present danger" doctrine espoused by Holmes was relinquished over 50 years ago. I was wondering how Burbank was going to publicly embarrass herself, and she didn't disappoint.

[@geertvlaenckx9942]

So if I tweet that I hate coffee, I can be jailed. Got it

[@matthew7458]

No-one, literally no-one, said that. She is NOT saying all hate speech is illegal; she is saying some hate speech is illegal. I disagree, but she is only saying that there is no GUARANTEE to legal hate speech -- an absurd position, but a far FAR FARRRR cry from "all hate speech is illegal."

[@88wildcat]

@@matthew7458 She may not say it that way but, whether she knows it or not, that is the road her position would eventually lead to. It is the mirror image of how anti-semiticism used to be considered anything critical of the religion of Judasism and has now morphed into anything critical of the Israeli government or their policies.

[@matthew7458]

@@nateman10 You all need to read my comment again. None of you are replying to my point.

[@vickiv5984]

Free speech is very important in United States and a human right..

[@TheVeritas2100]

THE FREE SPEECH IS THE ONLY THING WHICH SEPARATES US FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD ! ( including the Socialistic EUrope ... and even Canada ! )

[@losthighway5967]

Burbank is totally wrong as usual. It’s crazy how totalitarian she sounds. Why do they keep this woman. Bre at least was more liberal than she is.

[@douglascounts4634]

" It’s crazy how totalitarian she sounds"

[@YankeeSkeptic]

Time to draw one of those Venn diagrams which Harris loves. Burbank is trying to defend the Walz' statement by adding words that he did not say. Soave (Greenwald) are concerned about the exact words that Walz said. Best to get a clarification from Walz directly in a press conference (if ever) There has been censorship and suppression of free speech and political speech, based loosely on misinformation and hateful speech criteria when neither has any violent intent. or clear and present danger. So libertarians who advocate absolute free speech are rightfully concerned with Walz' statement and perspective on the 1st amendment.

[@Sammy-lv5gw]

Walz is a cross between a shack-bully, and a bullfrog with a croak shut up in its mouth, after he tongued a bug out the air!

[@janicedobis6490]

Did Jessica realize there was no real, logical opposing argument for Robbie’s radar and tried to invent one? This was like listening to a 9 year old argue against her parents for why she should have ice cream for breakfast.

[@teetrevor]

She’s not too bright

[@charlesiragui2473]

Jessica needs to take classes in law and logic.

[@molon_labe_arizona]

Jess just proved Glen's point

[@VTAcraft]

lol exactly Amazing she accused Robbie of trying to split hairs when she was contorting herself into pretzels the entire segment to justify a blatantly anti-1A statement.

[@jds1275]

She keeps linking hateful and violent. It isn't the hate part that makes those tiny exceptions a problem, it is the violent. She is spreading misinformation.

[@NotaFEDjed]

I live in Minnesota and can say Walz is the worst governor ever. He’s everything wrong with humans and politicians wrapped up nicely into one individual.

[@paulwary]

"i eat chicken, except when the chicken is rotten" Jessica : "Therefore, you cannot say that you eat chicken"

[@kingluithe1st]

The host is the type of chick to tell herself that she didn’t cheat because her and her fiancé were on a “break” because they got into an argument.

[@JADPhipps-b9b]

Kingluithe1st she is not a chick🐤

[@WhatAboutsAndWhatifs]

Bingo

[@WhatAboutsAndWhatifs]

Body autonomy

[@bethhale6733]

She's like one of those stuffed animals that when you push its stomach, it plays a recording of the same thing over and over again.

[@jcpersaud]

100% with Robby...and this woman is ridiculous.

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Walz looks like his mouth is trying to escape his face

[@anonygrazer3234]

It's actually the totalitarian within struggling to get past the "dad" face.

[@user-qh4uv5dz7i]

Smh @ Jessica. Really preposterous logic.