00:00Senator Durbin.
00:04Mr. Weingarten, do you think the January 6th riot at the Capitol was protected free speech?
00:13I think to the extent there was peaceful protest, that's free speech.
00:16And when it bleeds into violence to action, that's when it certainly crosses a line.
00:21So you believe that some of the individuals who received full and unconditional pardons by the President of the United States
00:27had in fact crossed the line and were guilty of criminal conduct?
00:34This is beyond the scope of what I prepared to discuss today, but in my personal opinion as a non-lawyer,
00:39yes, I believe some people committed crimes.
00:44They certainly did. 140 policemen were assaulted by these rioters.
00:48I'm on the policeman's side. I hope you are too.
00:51I am.
00:52Well, a full and unconditional pardon to some of these folks is incredible.
00:57Jake Lang, charged with assaulting police during January 6th, announced he plans to run for Senate in Florida.
01:04He's pretty emboldened by that pardon, isn't he?
01:07You don't have to answer that question.
01:09Let me ask you what the word wrong-think means. Did you make that up?
01:13If I did make it up, I'd be happy to take credit for it.
01:17My definition of it would be speech that flouts the orthodoxy of our political establishment and cultural elites.
01:27Interesting. I'll put that in my research bag to look at a little later.
01:32But you said whole of society war. I don't know what that means. Can you define that?
01:37Well, whole of society is actually a phrase that the Biden administration used in any number of documents that could be relevant to...
01:45I missed it. What does it mean?
01:47Whole of society means government working hand-in-hand with civil society to achieve some sort of outcome, as I understand it.
01:53Do you think that's inherently wrong or insidious?
01:57I think on its face it's potentially chilling when you have government and civil society working hand-in-glove
02:04because that blurring of the line between civil society and the state can cross into potentially draconian methods and outcomes.
02:13Do you think President George W. Bush was guilty of that when he mobilized America against the events of 9-11?
02:19Senator, in the context of this hearing, my view of it is that when government works hand-in-glove with civil society to purge disfavored speech,
02:30that certainly crosses a line, and it's significantly different, in my view, from mobilizing support for a war effort.
02:36Very subjective. Dr. Franks, I'm going to let you finish answering this question.
02:42I think this attack on law firms for representing unpopular clients, unpopular with this administration,
02:48is one of the most dangerous developments I've seen in the violation of basic free speech.
02:54I think I come to mind immediately John Adams.
02:58What would have happened to poor John Adams representing those British soldiers if the incumbent president decided to punish him for that?
03:06What do you think about the future of legal representation as these law firms, at least one of them,
03:12has reached an agreement and settlement with the Trump administration?
03:15I very much share your alarm about those actions because, as you mentioned, access to the courts is a very key principle of our freedoms.
03:23And to threaten law firms, to threaten law firms that are trying to do what all of us should rely on,
03:29which is to defend people's rights and courts, is extremely chilling.
03:34And it is one of those ways where we're seeing just really a comprehensive assault by this administration,
03:39not only directly to try to round up people, surveil them, deport them for their speech,
03:44but also to try to disable the levers that they can defend themselves with and to punish businesses for acting on their own principles.
03:51Mr. Rotman, not much subtlety in saying to the Associated Press, if you use the term Gulf of Mexico, you're not welcome in the White House.
03:59Yes, sir?
04:01It is explicit viewpoint discrimination that underpins retaliatory actions by the White House, and that makes it a First Amendment violation.
04:10And deportation of individuals for making statements, political statements, where would you characterize that?
04:19So the authority that's been invoked, so I come at it from the Freedom of the Press perspective,
04:26but what's notable about some of those cases is they're relying on a statute that explicitly allows immigration enforcement actions
04:35based on the speech of the person the action's being taken against, and that's of great concern for the press.
04:42Thank you very much to all of you, and I hope that you'll say thank you to the men and women in Capitol Police when you leave
04:48who are keeping you safe today as they did in my situation on January 6th with the rioters.
04:53Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
04:55Thank you, Senator.
04:56Senator Blackburn.
Comments