Today in the principled conservative commitment to free speech, Trump has gotten a movie he (apparently erroneously) perceived as anti-gun pulled from release:
If the reverse had occured there would not be enough pixels or ink on planet earth to finish producing all the warnings of imminent totalitarianism from aging newspaper columnists and cable news hosts— Adam Serwer🍝 (@AdamSerwer) August 10, 2019
Projection is a hell of a etc.
Meanwhile, the Sarah Palin First Amendment reaction to Joaquin Castro observing that maxed-out Trump donors were maxed-out Trump donors based on publicly available data continues to get more ridiculous:
Seven Republican members of the House Freedom Caucus are calling on the House Ethics Committee to investigate Texas Democrat Joaquin Castro for publicly posting on Twitter the names and workplaces of constituents who donated to President Donald Trump.
“Posting a target list of private citizens simply for supporting his political opponent is antithetical to our principles and serves to suppress the free speech and free association rights of Americans,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter sent to the Ethics panel Friday.
This idea that rich people should not only have the unfettered right to influence political outcomes but should be able to do so in serene anonymity is deeply stupid, and the fact that it’s getting a respectful hearing from some prominent journalists is even more so.
“Free speech requires giving rich people massive, obviously corrupting influence over the political system” has always been a wild take but enhancing it with “and nobody should name or criticize them over it” has truly blown my mind.— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) August 10, 2019