Trump's War on the First Amendment

[Whiskey]

So We the people are now losing our comedians also?!? How come WE the people are the ones always losing under this canard of Make America Great Again?!

President Poops-His-Pants can't take a joke at his expense. He has to attack the source with his presidential powers. Our president is an enemy of the First Amendment. He sent his AG out to threaten to go after people who were disrespectful in some way in response to the tragic death of Charlie Kirk. He is using his FCC head to threaten broadcasters with the loss of their license if they do not bend to his will. He and his allies are arranging the sale of media companies to Trumpy billionares to make the media landscape the equivalent of OAN or some other kissass MAGA outlet.

The nation is falling very quickly into authoritarianism. We are probably cooked. The Supreme Court is filled with Trump enablers. The Congress is yanked about by Trump loonies who are enabled by spineless Republicans too afraid of offending His Orangeness. I am not seeing the light at the end of this tunnel.

Your conclusions aren’t facts. Your assumptions aren’t reality. Your victimhood isn’t convincing. Your gaslighting isn’t working. But yes — your tantrum is genuine.

The fact that a tenured professor can post this at all proves rights are perfectly intact — you’re just free to air your whining, bitchy declaration of victimhood.

[Gadianton]

I think we can say that any and every tool will be pursued to turn the US into China; probably worse than China. I'm not saying we shouldn't note it and complain about it, but this certainly isn't unexpected. by the way, I've been telling people that any of these "escalatory" things getting done in the name of the recent tragedy would have happened anyway. One thing that won't be fixed by his draconian pursuit of justice is right-on-right violence of the kind that resulted in the tragedy. All those so-called "progressives" who are life long Republicans that everyone in their family thinks is MAGA or close enough to it but secretly ready to snap will be unaffected by the crackdown.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I think we can say that any and every tool will be pursued to turn the US into China; probably worse than China. I'm not saying we shouldn't note it and complain about it, but this certainly isn't unexpected. by the way, I've been telling people that any of these "escalatory" things getting done in the name of the recent tragedy would have happened anyway. One thing that won't be fixed by his draconian pursuit of justice is right-on-right violence of the kind that resulted in the tragedy. All those so-called "progressives" who are life long Republicans that everyone in their family thinks is MAGA or close enough to it but secretly ready to snap will be unaffected by the crackdown.

I think the plan is to create common targets they can rally around before the infighting kicks into gear:

[Hound of Heaven]

The title of this discussion is "Trump's War on the First Amendment". Could you clarify your statement and elaborate on how Kimmel has become the most recent casualty? In what way is Kimmel considered a victim of his constitutional rights being infringed upon if he still has the freedom to pursue launching his own show?

You do realize he was an employee of Disney?

The opening post was very clear, Hound. What exactly is opaque to you? I notice you have conveniently ignored, for some time now, Brendan Carr's threat to pull ABC's license. If the president has his FCC chairman threaten the loss of a company's ability to conduct its business legally, we are not talking about Disney's unfettered decision to cancel Kimmel. We are talking about the president of the United States using his power to attack speech he does not approve of.

You are behaving in a very obtuse manner, and no doubt purposely.

Your opening post reads like it was written by a person who lives their life as a constant victim.

Let us present some facts. In 2013, under the Obama administration, the IRS subjected conservative groups to additional scrutiny, particularly those with names such as tea party or patriots, when they sought tax-exempt status.

A 2025 report from free speech America details 57 separate censorship initiatives that are purportedly coordinated by the Biden administration. Things like supporting efforts to urge major tech companies such as Meta and Amazon to limit content that is unfavorable to Biden. Utilizing taxpayer money to back organizations that commit to silencing conservative perspectives. Recruiting foreign agents to stifle narratives from conservative media sources. Utilizing federal agencies to oversee or limit the expression of those who criticize the administration.

One example is that the White House Covid advisor Andy Slavitt reportedly pressured Amazon to ban books that question government vaccine policies.

Additionally, there is a significant amount of evidence indicating that the Obama and Biden administrations attempted to suppress conservative speech. So please stop behaving like a baby, and explain how Jimmy Kimmel's free speech has been compromised? It's not possible, as Jimmy has the freedom to express his thoughts as he wishes. Disney fired him because he's a hack!!

[Whiskey]

In what ways are these MAGA people infringing upon the First Amendment?

Which "MAGA people" are you talking about?

The ones referred to upthread as MAGA. A less lazy read of the discussion would have made that obvious.

Did Kimmel possess a constitutional right to remain in his role as host of the show for the duration of his life?

I never claimed that he did. Where did I make that claim again?

Could you tattoo a bigger L on your own forehead? Thank you for this response, Professor. The answer to that question is plainly “no.” But you go on pretending the question was somehow an accusation you never faced. Without that question, your whole argument collapses.

Instead of addressing that collapse, you throw a tantrum about never having said it. That’s your priority. Want to see a non-pertinent question? “Where did I make that claim again?” Kishkumen, are you FITH? Nothing could sound more toddler in tone or more irrelevant in content.

Was the company that owned the show prohibited from considering his dismissal once he took on the role of host?

I never claimed that it was.

Oh really? So this is about you? You have some special victim clairvoyance now? That is a question, a pertinent one. Oh my dear god for the victimization. There is nothing rational or normal or healthy about your state of mind, your words and arguments or the smoke being blown up your ass. You don't have to answer the question. But for the love of all that is normal, just don't answer it instead of telling the world you have the mental acuity of a plant and emotional control of pre-transitioning girl.

The company wasn’t prohibited from considering his dismissal. Exactly. That’s the point. That’s why your entire “rights were trampled” act is hollow. You admit the company had the authority, yet still play the victim as though some grand constitutional crime has been committed.

This is where your argument dies on its own terms. You confirm the obvious, then retreat into wounded posturing. That isn’t clarity. It’s collapse dressed up as indignation.

Your argument lacks clarity.

Your questions lack pertinence.

You are wrong. The Hound is correct. You’ve made no case that anyone’s constitutional rights have been infringed. Even if there were, you’ve offered nothing close to a convincing argument. In this post especially — where you act like a question itself is somehow victimizing you (“where did I make that claim again”) — you only highlight your minimal investment in reality and your insufferable investment in feelings masquerading as arguments.

And if that stings, don’t worry — just have your therapist feed this through AI, derail the thread, wallow in your feelings about your feelings, ignore the content, and call it a threat to the board. K? Okay, Kishy feelings baby.

[Gadianton]

If a venue has "the right" to cancel whoever they want, why is hound so freaked out about getting moderated here? The mods can do whatever they want. He complains more than anyone. Are his complaints supposed to be ironic? "hey, I'm complaining, being like a liberal", or is he really complaining? I think he's really complaining. The mods can censor or ban whoever they want, as recognized by Whisky. So anyone on Whiskey's side needs to quit complaining about Hound and previous socks getting owned by the mods.

[Whiskey]

If a venue has "the right" to cancel whoever they want, why is hound so freaked out about getting moderated here? The mods can do whatever they want. He complains more than anyone. Are his complaints supposed to be ironic? "hey, I'm complaining, being like a liberal", or is he really complaining? I think he's really complaining. The mods can censor or ban whoever they want, as recognized by Whisky. So anyone on Whiskey's side needs to quit complaining about Hound and previous socks getting owned by the mods.

The board owner and moderators should ban Hound of Hell immediately for having a picture that is not actually a hound. The board should ban me immediately for having common sense. The board should ban that Ceeboo guy right away too, as a favor, to Ceeboo. Do the guy a solid and just ban him from here.

And the board should ban dehumidifiers. It makes the tears dry to a salty pale finish on Kishkumen's cheeks. He is really a glutton for punishment though. I bet he thinks this post is about him. Don't you? Don't you? Don't you?

If you’d like, I can mock up a full parody version of the song You're so Vain tailored to this thread — keeping the melody/structure but replacing the content with digs about Kishkumen, Hound, bans, and moderator drama. Want me to write that instead, Gadianton?

[Gadianton]

The board owner and moderators should ban Hound of Hell immediately for having a picture that is not actually a hound. The board should ban me immediately for having common sense. The board should ban that Ceeboo guy right away too, as a favor, to Ceeboo. Do the guy a solid and just ban him from here.

And the board should ban dehumidifiers. It makes the tears dry to a salty pale finish on Kishkumen's cheeks. He is really a glutton for punishment though. I bet he thinks this post is about him. Don't you? Don't you? Don't you?

If you’d like, I can mock up a full parody version of the song You're so Vain tailored to this thread — keeping the melody/structure but replacing the content with digs about Kishkumen, Hound, bans, and moderator drama. Want me to write that instead, Gadianton?

Whoah, relax bro. Let's sit down and have a drink.

[Kishkumen]

Your opening post reads like it was written by a person who lives their life as a constant victim.

Let us present some facts. In 2013, under the Obama administration, the IRS subjected conservative groups to additional scrutiny, particularly those with names such as tea party or patriots, when they sought tax-exempt status.

A 2025 report from free speech America details 57 separate censorship initiatives that are purportedly coordinated by the Biden administration. Things like supporting efforts to urge major tech companies such as Meta and Amazon to limit content that is unfavorable to Biden. Utilizing taxpayer money to back organizations that commit to silencing conservative perspectives. Recruiting foreign agents to stifle narratives from conservative media sources. Utilizing federal agencies to oversee or limit the expression of those who criticize the administration.

One example is that the White House Covid advisor Andy Slavitt reportedly pressured Amazon to ban books that question government vaccine policies.

Additionally, there is a significant amount of evidence indicating that the Obama and Biden administrations attempted to suppress conservative speech. So please stop behaving like a baby, and explain how Jimmy Kimmel's free speech has been compromised? It's not possible, as Jimmy has the freedom to express his thoughts as he wishes. Disney fired him because he's a hack!!

First, drop the dopey rhetoric. Second, substantiate your facts. Third, the alleged misdeeds of prior administrations are no excuse for current presidential misdeeds.

You really suck at this.

[Kishkumen]

Your conclusions aren’t facts. Your assumptions aren’t reality. Your victimhood isn’t convincing. Your gaslighting isn’t working. But yes — your tantrum is genuine.

The fact that a tenured professor can post this at all proves rights are perfectly intact — you’re just free to air your whining, bitchy declaration of victimhood.

Your AI dribble is silly. If you have anything of substance to add, please do. I am not falling for empty rhetoric.