October 13, 2025 • 24 mins
Trump Manages to Make Free Speech Illegal -Hear more on about this story on today's podcast.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Broadcasting from the Civic Cipher Studios. Welcome to the QR Code,
where we share perspective, seek understanding, and shape outcomes. The
man you are about to hear from is a man
who always asks for gummy bears instead of donuts, but
he never gets mad at me when I show up
with donuts. Anyway. He is the que in the QR code.
He goes by the name of Qboard, the voice that
(00:23):
you just heard.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's pretty infuriating because you could just not ask if
I want anything and bring what you want. To ask
what I want, I tell you and then you bring donuts. Anyway.
It's like son like just donut run and come back
with donuts and said you like you want something. I'm like, yeah,
some gummies and you like yeah, so I got you
a donut. But he's the art that you are code.
(00:48):
His name is Ramsa's Jaw, and.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
We need you to stick around a little. Later on
the show, we're going to be talking about something that
that we like, seeing something that we like. We like
watching the culture of all. We like the positive direction
that it's going in our culture, you know, hip hop culture.
Kendrick Lamar, He's on an extended Victory Lap and we
just well, I just got some new information and I'm
(01:11):
so proud of him and so excited at what's to come.
So that's a little later on the show, prod to that,
we're going to hear from q Ward his clap back
discussing how the president rewards loyalty over merit the real DEI,
right or the real what is it? The didn't earn
it DEI? Okay, before we break, we're going to be
(01:31):
talking about a story where a Charlie Kirk supporter ended
up killing two teenage girls for mocking his death. It's
a very sad story that unfortunately shows sort of where
we are as a country and how divided we are
and where the violence is coming from. And we're going
to start off talking about what's going on in the culture.
(01:52):
President Donald Trump has managed to make free speech illegal
scary times, but as always on the show, like to
start off with a field good feature. In today's feel
good feature comes from The Oregonian. You can check this
out at Oregonlive dot com. Oregon's top military leader offered
some reassuring or infuriating, depending on one's political perspective, comments
(02:13):
about the role of National Guard soldiers during a proposed
federal troop deployment to Portland. Speaking before a state Senate subcommittee,
Brigadier General Alan R. Groenwald told legislators that before deployment,
the two companies of soldiers would be trained in protective
crowd control. That training is now up in the air,
as Governor Tina Kotek on Tuesday ordered troops to go
(02:36):
home after a federal judge ruled over the weekend that
Trump had no authority to call them up. Groenwald said
Guard soldiers serve two purposes quote, one to defend America
and two to protect Oregonians, and so by serving in
this mission, they will be protecting any protesters at the
Ice facility unquote. A federal judge paused President Donald Trump's
(02:59):
mobilization on Saturday and expanded her order Sunday to block
units of the Guard from any state after Trump said
he would muster troops from California and Texas. The administration
has now appealed the ruling to the ninth US Circuit
Court of Appeals, which has set a hearing on the
matter for a Thursday. There is no definitive, no definite
timeline for the appellate court to issue or ruling. Groenwald
(03:20):
for his noted sorry that the president's federalization meant the
soldiers would be taken out of his chain of command
and placed under the control of the US Northern Command.
He said Trump's social media post authorizing full force by
the soldiers was unclear, as the term is not a
doctrinal term that the army uses. Groenwald closed out its
(03:40):
remarks by asking lawmakers to spread a message about the
difference between local troops and federal law enforcement agencies. So
somebody standing up for Oregonians and their right to protest,
and somebody doing the job that they swore to do,
which is all pold the constitution, not follow lock and
step with whatever the president wants and obeying his whims. So, yeah,
(04:06):
we like what's going on in Oregon right now and Chicago.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
So y'all keep going praying that that's a trend and
not an outlier.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
Absolutely, Okay. So that might have sounded a bit alarming
in the tea's talking about how Donald Trump has managed
to make free speech illegal. Things aren't as straightforward as all, right,
(04:36):
free speech is illegal, the laws are change. We're doing
it this way, and I think that a lot of
people are expecting it to be like that, or else
they will say that we're exaggerating. But as unsophisticated as
this administration is, legally, Donald Trump's personal legal sophistication is astounding.
(05:00):
It's not based in intentionality. It's based in loopholes, and
it's based in exaggerations, and it's based in you know, cronyism,
and it's based in all that sort of stuff. But
he finds a way for these things to be legal,
and so legally he has managed to make a free
speech illegal. I'll explain. So just listen for it, because
(05:23):
you know these people end up talking out of both
sides of their mouth. They'll tell you on the one hand,
free speech is absolutely legal, while making it illegal. So
follow me here. This from USA Today. President Donald Trump
on October eighth said his administration quote took the freedom
of speech away quote as it relates to flag burnings,
(05:43):
an activity that the Supreme Court has ruled is protected
under the First Amendment. Quote, we took the freedom of
speech away because that's been through the courts, and the
courts said, you have freedom of speech. But what has
happened is when they burn the flag, it agitates and
irritates crowds, unquote, Trump said during a roundtable discussion on Antifa,
(06:03):
and goes on to say, I've never seen anything like
it on both sides, and you end up with riots.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Vote.
Speaker 1 (06:10):
Trump made the comment after referencing conservative influencer Nick Sorder,
who reported being attacked after attempting to stop a flag
burning at a protest. According to Oregon Live, Trump also
referenced an August twenty fifth executive order that directed his
administration to prosecute people who burn American flags. The order
describes the flag as the country's most sacred and cherished
(06:31):
symbol and said its desecration is uniquely offensive and provocative.
The US Supreme Court established that flagburning is protected speech
in a nineteen eighty nine case involving Gregory Lee Johnson,
who burned the flag while protesting then President Ronald Reagan's administration.
The court found that First Amendment rights are not limited
(06:52):
to verbal or written speech. While the ruling said states
may seek to prevent imminent lawless action, it added that
actions such as Johnson's are and should be a protected
rit Sorry I can't read today. Trump reiterated his position
that flag burning isn't protected speech during groundtables, saying quote,
when you burn an American flag, you incite tremendous violence. Unquote.
(07:16):
White House spokesperson Abigail Johnson told USA Today Trump quote
will always protect the First Amendment while simultaneously implementing common sense,
tough on crime policies to prevent violence and chaos. Unquote. Okay,
so real quick, before we go any further. So, what
they're doing is criminalizing flag burning because of an executive order, okay,
(07:39):
that was already protected by the Supreme Court as free speech.
Then redefining the clap, the burning of the flag from
an expression of free speech to inciting of a riot.
Now whether or not that's true, if he changes the
(08:01):
narrative around that action to where you are attempting to
inside a riot rather than expressing your Supreme Court given
rights to free speech, now they can come after you.
In other words, your free speech has been your free
(08:22):
speech is what is the word I'm looking for? De facto?
It's like a de facto illegal form of expression now
because of Donald Trump kind of reframing this, and then
of course they want to say that they're protecting free speech,
and what they end up doing is speaking out of
both sides of their mouth. As I mentioned. Now, I
want to share one more thing and then, Q, I
(08:42):
want to let you weigh in. Here. I'm going to
share the entirety of the Flag Code in terms of
the respect for the flag section Section eight for the
American Flag Code. You can check this out in an
American Legion dot org. And what they say is that
this is about protecting the flag and protecting our sacred
(09:04):
what is it? What do you call it? Sacred symbol
of America or something like that. So I want you
to count how many ways Donald Trump and his cronies
disrespect the flag? All right? First off, this again respect
for the Flag from the American Legion dot org. If
you want to check it out. No disrespect should be
shown to the flag of the United States of America.
The flag should not be dipped to any person or thing.
Regimental colors, state flags and organizations, or institutional flags are
(09:27):
to be dipped as a mark of honor. A. The
flag should never be displayed with the Union down, except
as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme
danger to life or property. B. The flag should never
touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water,
or merchandise. See. The flag should never be carried flat
or horizontally, but always aloft and free. So whenever you
(09:50):
watch the Super Bowl, watch them carry the flag out flat.
That is disrespecting the flag per the flag Code. Okay,
let's go on. D The flag should never be used
as wearing apparel, bedding, or draper. It should never be festooned,
drawn back, nor up in folds, but always allowed to
fall free. Okay, how many of those folks you see
wearing the flag? All right, let's move on. Bunting of blue, white,
(10:12):
and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white
in the middle, and the red below, should be used
for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front of the platform,
and for decoration in general. E. The flag should never
be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner
as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or
damaged in any way. This means adding a flag to
(10:36):
your car unless it's unless the ends are embroidered, because
it will get frayed. So that's disrespect in the flag.
All you people that are ride around with the flag
on your car, it's per the flag Code, all right. F.
The flag should never be used as a covering for
a ceiling ge. The flag should never have placed upon it,
nor any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia,
(10:57):
a letter, word, figure, designed, picture, or drawn of any
nature that means do not alter the flag. The flag
should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, caring,
or delivering anything the flag or this is I. The
flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any
manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles
(11:17):
as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise
impressed on paper, napkin or boxes, or anything that is
designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not
be fastened to a staff or howard from which the
flag is flown jay. No part of the flag should
ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However,
a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of
(11:39):
military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The
flag represents a living country and is itself considered a
living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica
should be worn on the left lapel near the heart
k the flag. When it is in such condition that
it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should
(12:00):
be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning. All right, Q,
the rest of the times yours.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
There's an interesting thing here, one thing I want to
call out. You said that freedom of speech was a
Supreme Court given and that's not true. Give us anything
the Constitution did.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Yeah, that's fair.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
The Supreme Court rule to protect this right that was
supposed to be inalienable. But here we are. The interesting
thing about you saying they talk out of both sides
of their mouth is that they're saying. We're not implying.
They're saying, we took freedom of speech away. That's their intention.
(12:50):
That's what they're bragging about. That's what they're claiming. That's
what they are stating, that they took away free speech.
So I don't want people to think that this is
something that we implied or mis understood, or it was
taken out a condence. Give it all the context you want.
Taking away free speech was the whole thing, and finding
a way to justify it is how they do with
(13:13):
everything they count on their base to be blindly loyal
and under educated. They plan their faces in a way
that should be insulting, but they're so loyal to the
guy they don't even recognize when they're being insulted, nor
do they care. There's not a lot more to say,
(13:34):
like the American Legion breaking it down that way, and
you hearing like there wasn't enough time for you to
after each thing say this is what they do to
disrescoviolate it or to violate it. But anyone listening could
hear and see in their head all the ways that
they defy the flag code. We will always protect the
(13:55):
First Amendment while starting with saying, you know, we're taking
it away. It's a very very interesting thing that they.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
Do, now, you know. All right, Moving on opinions, Charlie
Kirk supporter kills two teens for mocking his death. This
one is kind of sad, so buckle up, all right.
This is a well covered story. But we source this
from a radio station in New Jersey that would be
one on one point five. If you can check this
(14:28):
out at NJ one o one five dot com if
you like, just like how it was written here, because
I think it tells the story briefly and fully so.
On September twenty ninth, Cranford High School juniors Maria Neotis
and Isabella Salas were struck and killed by a jeep
traveling seventy miles per hour and a twenty five mile
per hour residential street. Prosecutors say the driver, a seventeen
(14:49):
year old Garwood boy, deliberately targeted the girls as they
rode their e bike. What first appeared to be another
e bike tragedy has since revealed chilling allegations of stalking
and harassment. The suspect, whose name is being withheld because
he is a juvenile, faces two counts of first degree murder.
According to Union County Prosecutor William Daniel, He was initially detained, questioned,
and released penning an investigation, then arrested October first. Officials
(15:13):
have not said whether he is currently being held or
released to juvenile custody. At first, the case appeared to
be another in a series of recent deaths involving teens
on e bikes, but friends and neighbors told a different
story to the media. Neighbors told ABC seven Eyewitness News
that one of the girls had a restraining order against
(15:34):
the driver after he harassed her at school and that
he often set in his vehicle outside her home. Maria
noticed his uncle was blunt about it on his Facebook page,
stating that the driver followed her home from school every day.
He said the police did nothing about it despite being
told many times this same site, I want to give
(15:54):
him credit New Jersey one to one point five or
NJ one to one five dot com. They have a
follow up article talking about the funeral. It says days
before mowing down to seventeen year olds on the street,
the accused teen killer revealed on a YouTube live stream
that he had been tormenting one of his teen victims,
in part, he says, because she laughed at the death
(16:14):
of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The seventeen year old suspect
from Garwood, a son of a retired police officer and
the nephew of the Westfield police chief, was charged Wednesday
with the first degree murders of Maria Neiotis and Isabella Salas.
Relatives of Neotis said the teen had been stalking her
for months, something the teen suspect acknowledged on live streams
(16:36):
of his MLB co op games, which attracted thousands of
followers on TikTok. The teen suspect ram the girl's e
bike with his jeep, which police believed was traveling seventy
miles per hour on a twenty five mile per hour
residential street on Monday. So the first thing that jumps
out to me here is when Charlie Kirk was first assassinated,
(17:05):
a lot of the Trumper's Trump's inner circle they went
on and they tried to paint the radical left as
the source for the source of, you know, Charlie Kirk's death.
They were saying, hey, you can't call people Nazis and
(17:28):
so forth using these big platforms and not expect it
to agitate your base to take action to you know,
commit these sorts of acts, right, And they were quick
to try to say that it was because of the
incendiary nature of speech coming from the left that Charlie
(17:52):
Kirk's assassination took place. That take and position is entirely
devoid of responsibility from them, and it lacks responsibility for
you know, Charlie Kirk's own actions. Charlie Kirk did what
(18:15):
he did, said what he said, and people that said, hey,
he did this and said this, and this is reminiscent
of issues from yesteryear that we as a species have
dealt with. To suggest that the people calling that out
are problematic instead of what Charlie Kirk was saying and
(18:37):
doing was problematic, again is tone deaf, But I think
that this story shows exactly what the truth of the
matter is, is that the violence comes from that side.
It just does. Now, we've done a number of shows
(18:58):
in recent weeks, certainly since his assassination, where we've actually
tried to get into the weeds to figure out if
what these people on the right were saying had any
basis in truth whatsoever. And the data just does not
suggest that, and the facts do not suggest that this
is overwhelmingly a problem with the right. The right has
(19:20):
all the guns, the right has all the weird chat
rooms on the internet. The right has all the well
not all of it, but a huge amount of the radicalization.
We did an episode yesterday talking about how there's a
lot of sexual deviancy. I don't want to talk about
it anymore because it was really gross, But there's a
(19:42):
lot of problems over there, and there's just this intentional
blindness to it, and they try to paint people with
a more progressive philosophy and more inclusive ideas about what
this country should be as somehow poisonous to this country,
ignoring their own responsibility, ignoring what their ideas tend to
(20:06):
breed in these circles. And here we have two girls
who are dead. They don't even get to tell their
side of the story. That they don't even get to
say whether or not they even laughed at Charlie Kirk,
because we don't know that. We're just taking this from
the article. We don't get to talk to these little
girls because they didn't get to grow up. They buried him.
(20:29):
And this is a Charlie Kirk supporter who is the
son of a what a police officer and related to
the police chief. This article says, And this is the
sort of people that get to commit this type of violence,
and they have the shielding and the narrative of the
right insulating them from a modicum of responsibility. And this
(20:55):
is a sad state of affairs. And I think that
this lays bare exactly where we are and the fact
that they're not willing to take responsibility of it. I
think the death of these two little girls is on
the hands of those people on the right who are
insulating these people committing these acts of verbal violence and
(21:15):
now real world violence. Anything to add here to you.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
You know, there's an interesting thing that happens with these stories.
Two innocent young women were killed, and we're going to
read opeds and you know, published stories and think pieces
about all the things that were stacked against this young man,
all the reasons we should feel sorry for him, how
(21:43):
rough of a time he was having at it, even
though he stalked, harassed, and tormented these young women, even
though it was documented, reports were made he did this
on live essentially to you know, followers or fans of
his played video games, bragged about how he tormented this
(22:03):
one of these young ladies, even if they laughed. Sure,
we don't get to hear it from them or proof
whether or not they did it, but even if they did,
If you don't think that Charlie Kirk deserves to have
his life taken for the actual hateful, divisive rhetoric that
he spewed, then how do you then justify taking the
(22:25):
life of these young ladies because they disagreed with you
or because they laughed. The hypocrisy, the continuous blatant, perpetual hypocrisy,
the lack of accountability, the turning a blind eye to
all of these things that we see happening over and
(22:48):
over again. They will explain to us why we should
feel sorry for this young man. And if he's the
nephew of a police chief and the son of a
police officer, you better believe that they're going to be
as lean is possible with this young man, even though
he's being accused of taking elives of two people. The
same people that told us that teenagers in DC should
start being tried as adults, as teenagers I think as
(23:11):
young as fourteen, will tell us how this young man
isn't old enough to understand the gravity of his decision,
and tell us all the reasons why he should have
mercy and benefit of the doubt provided for him the
same way really every teenager should. But every accusation is
a confession, and everything is for me, not for thee.
(23:34):
So we're going to hear about all the things stacked
against this young man, and the pressures and the mental
instability and everything that he was going through, and we're
going to take away the humanity and the deserved life
of these two young ladies who are gone and what
their families have to deal with in the wake of
their death from this troubled young man with clear right
(23:56):
wing influence. It's pretty gross.
Broadcasting from the Civic Cipher Studios. Welcome to the QR Code,
where we share perspective, seek understanding, and shape outcomes. The
man you are about to hear from is a man
who always asks for gummy bears instead of donuts, but
he never gets mad at me when I show up
with donuts. Anyway. He is the que in the QR code.
He goes by the name of Qboard, the voice that
(00:23):
you just heard.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's pretty infuriating because you could just not ask if
I want anything and bring what you want. To ask
what I want, I tell you and then you bring donuts. Anyway.
It's like son like just donut run and come back
with donuts and said you like you want something. I'm like, yeah,
some gummies and you like yeah, so I got you
a donut. But he's the art that you are code.
(00:48):
His name is Ramsa's Jaw, and.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
We need you to stick around a little. Later on
the show, we're going to be talking about something that
that we like, seeing something that we like. We like
watching the culture of all. We like the positive direction
that it's going in our culture, you know, hip hop culture.
Kendrick Lamar, He's on an extended Victory Lap and we
just well, I just got some new information and I'm
(01:11):
so proud of him and so excited at what's to come.
So that's a little later on the show, prod to that,
we're going to hear from q Ward his clap back
discussing how the president rewards loyalty over merit the real DEI,
right or the real what is it? The didn't earn
it DEI? Okay, before we break, we're going to be
(01:31):
talking about a story where a Charlie Kirk supporter ended
up killing two teenage girls for mocking his death. It's
a very sad story that unfortunately shows sort of where
we are as a country and how divided we are
and where the violence is coming from. And we're going
to start off talking about what's going on in the culture.
(01:52):
President Donald Trump has managed to make free speech illegal
scary times, but as always on the show, like to
start off with a field good feature. In today's feel
good feature comes from The Oregonian. You can check this
out at Oregonlive dot com. Oregon's top military leader offered
some reassuring or infuriating, depending on one's political perspective, comments
(02:13):
about the role of National Guard soldiers during a proposed
federal troop deployment to Portland. Speaking before a state Senate subcommittee,
Brigadier General Alan R. Groenwald told legislators that before deployment,
the two companies of soldiers would be trained in protective
crowd control. That training is now up in the air,
as Governor Tina Kotek on Tuesday ordered troops to go
(02:36):
home after a federal judge ruled over the weekend that
Trump had no authority to call them up. Groenwald said
Guard soldiers serve two purposes quote, one to defend America
and two to protect Oregonians, and so by serving in
this mission, they will be protecting any protesters at the
Ice facility unquote. A federal judge paused President Donald Trump's
(02:59):
mobilization on Saturday and expanded her order Sunday to block
units of the Guard from any state after Trump said
he would muster troops from California and Texas. The administration
has now appealed the ruling to the ninth US Circuit
Court of Appeals, which has set a hearing on the
matter for a Thursday. There is no definitive, no definite
timeline for the appellate court to issue or ruling. Groenwald
(03:20):
for his noted sorry that the president's federalization meant the
soldiers would be taken out of his chain of command
and placed under the control of the US Northern Command.
He said Trump's social media post authorizing full force by
the soldiers was unclear, as the term is not a
doctrinal term that the army uses. Groenwald closed out its
(03:40):
remarks by asking lawmakers to spread a message about the
difference between local troops and federal law enforcement agencies. So
somebody standing up for Oregonians and their right to protest,
and somebody doing the job that they swore to do,
which is all pold the constitution, not follow lock and
step with whatever the president wants and obeying his whims. So, yeah,
(04:06):
we like what's going on in Oregon right now and Chicago.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
So y'all keep going praying that that's a trend and
not an outlier.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
Absolutely, Okay. So that might have sounded a bit alarming
in the tea's talking about how Donald Trump has managed
to make free speech illegal. Things aren't as straightforward as all, right,
(04:36):
free speech is illegal, the laws are change. We're doing
it this way, and I think that a lot of
people are expecting it to be like that, or else
they will say that we're exaggerating. But as unsophisticated as
this administration is, legally, Donald Trump's personal legal sophistication is astounding.
(05:00):
It's not based in intentionality. It's based in loopholes, and
it's based in exaggerations, and it's based in you know, cronyism,
and it's based in all that sort of stuff. But
he finds a way for these things to be legal,
and so legally he has managed to make a free
speech illegal. I'll explain. So just listen for it, because
(05:23):
you know these people end up talking out of both
sides of their mouth. They'll tell you on the one hand,
free speech is absolutely legal, while making it illegal. So
follow me here. This from USA Today. President Donald Trump
on October eighth said his administration quote took the freedom
of speech away quote as it relates to flag burnings,
(05:43):
an activity that the Supreme Court has ruled is protected
under the First Amendment. Quote, we took the freedom of
speech away because that's been through the courts, and the
courts said, you have freedom of speech. But what has
happened is when they burn the flag, it agitates and
irritates crowds, unquote, Trump said during a roundtable discussion on Antifa,
(06:03):
and goes on to say, I've never seen anything like
it on both sides, and you end up with riots.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Vote.
Speaker 1 (06:10):
Trump made the comment after referencing conservative influencer Nick Sorder,
who reported being attacked after attempting to stop a flag
burning at a protest. According to Oregon Live, Trump also
referenced an August twenty fifth executive order that directed his
administration to prosecute people who burn American flags. The order
describes the flag as the country's most sacred and cherished
(06:31):
symbol and said its desecration is uniquely offensive and provocative.
The US Supreme Court established that flagburning is protected speech
in a nineteen eighty nine case involving Gregory Lee Johnson,
who burned the flag while protesting then President Ronald Reagan's administration.
The court found that First Amendment rights are not limited
(06:52):
to verbal or written speech. While the ruling said states
may seek to prevent imminent lawless action, it added that
actions such as Johnson's are and should be a protected
rit Sorry I can't read today. Trump reiterated his position
that flag burning isn't protected speech during groundtables, saying quote,
when you burn an American flag, you incite tremendous violence. Unquote.
(07:16):
White House spokesperson Abigail Johnson told USA Today Trump quote
will always protect the First Amendment while simultaneously implementing common sense,
tough on crime policies to prevent violence and chaos. Unquote. Okay,
so real quick, before we go any further. So, what
they're doing is criminalizing flag burning because of an executive order, okay,
(07:39):
that was already protected by the Supreme Court as free speech.
Then redefining the clap, the burning of the flag from
an expression of free speech to inciting of a riot.
Now whether or not that's true, if he changes the
(08:01):
narrative around that action to where you are attempting to
inside a riot rather than expressing your Supreme Court given
rights to free speech, now they can come after you.
In other words, your free speech has been your free
(08:22):
speech is what is the word I'm looking for? De facto?
It's like a de facto illegal form of expression now
because of Donald Trump kind of reframing this, and then
of course they want to say that they're protecting free speech,
and what they end up doing is speaking out of
both sides of their mouth. As I mentioned. Now, I
want to share one more thing and then, Q, I
(08:42):
want to let you weigh in. Here. I'm going to
share the entirety of the Flag Code in terms of
the respect for the flag section Section eight for the
American Flag Code. You can check this out in an
American Legion dot org. And what they say is that
this is about protecting the flag and protecting our sacred
(09:04):
what is it? What do you call it? Sacred symbol
of America or something like that. So I want you
to count how many ways Donald Trump and his cronies
disrespect the flag? All right? First off, this again respect
for the Flag from the American Legion dot org. If
you want to check it out. No disrespect should be
shown to the flag of the United States of America.
The flag should not be dipped to any person or thing.
Regimental colors, state flags and organizations, or institutional flags are
(09:27):
to be dipped as a mark of honor. A. The
flag should never be displayed with the Union down, except
as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme
danger to life or property. B. The flag should never
touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water,
or merchandise. See. The flag should never be carried flat
or horizontally, but always aloft and free. So whenever you
(09:50):
watch the Super Bowl, watch them carry the flag out flat.
That is disrespecting the flag per the flag Code. Okay,
let's go on. D The flag should never be used
as wearing apparel, bedding, or draper. It should never be festooned,
drawn back, nor up in folds, but always allowed to
fall free. Okay, how many of those folks you see
wearing the flag? All right, let's move on. Bunting of blue, white,
(10:12):
and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white
in the middle, and the red below, should be used
for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front of the platform,
and for decoration in general. E. The flag should never
be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner
as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or
damaged in any way. This means adding a flag to
(10:36):
your car unless it's unless the ends are embroidered, because
it will get frayed. So that's disrespect in the flag.
All you people that are ride around with the flag
on your car, it's per the flag Code, all right. F.
The flag should never be used as a covering for
a ceiling ge. The flag should never have placed upon it,
nor any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia,
(10:57):
a letter, word, figure, designed, picture, or drawn of any
nature that means do not alter the flag. The flag
should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, caring,
or delivering anything the flag or this is I. The
flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any
manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles
(11:17):
as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise
impressed on paper, napkin or boxes, or anything that is
designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not
be fastened to a staff or howard from which the
flag is flown jay. No part of the flag should
ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However,
a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of
(11:39):
military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The
flag represents a living country and is itself considered a
living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica
should be worn on the left lapel near the heart
k the flag. When it is in such condition that
it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should
(12:00):
be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning. All right, Q,
the rest of the times yours.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
There's an interesting thing here, one thing I want to
call out. You said that freedom of speech was a
Supreme Court given and that's not true. Give us anything
the Constitution did.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Yeah, that's fair.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
The Supreme Court rule to protect this right that was
supposed to be inalienable. But here we are. The interesting
thing about you saying they talk out of both sides
of their mouth is that they're saying. We're not implying.
They're saying, we took freedom of speech away. That's their intention.
(12:50):
That's what they're bragging about. That's what they're claiming. That's
what they are stating, that they took away free speech.
So I don't want people to think that this is
something that we implied or mis understood, or it was
taken out a condence. Give it all the context you want.
Taking away free speech was the whole thing, and finding
a way to justify it is how they do with
(13:13):
everything they count on their base to be blindly loyal
and under educated. They plan their faces in a way
that should be insulting, but they're so loyal to the
guy they don't even recognize when they're being insulted, nor
do they care. There's not a lot more to say,
(13:34):
like the American Legion breaking it down that way, and
you hearing like there wasn't enough time for you to
after each thing say this is what they do to
disrescoviolate it or to violate it. But anyone listening could
hear and see in their head all the ways that
they defy the flag code. We will always protect the
(13:55):
First Amendment while starting with saying, you know, we're taking
it away. It's a very very interesting thing that they.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
Do, now, you know. All right, Moving on opinions, Charlie
Kirk supporter kills two teens for mocking his death. This
one is kind of sad, so buckle up, all right.
This is a well covered story. But we source this
from a radio station in New Jersey that would be
one on one point five. If you can check this
(14:28):
out at NJ one o one five dot com if
you like, just like how it was written here, because
I think it tells the story briefly and fully so.
On September twenty ninth, Cranford High School juniors Maria Neotis
and Isabella Salas were struck and killed by a jeep
traveling seventy miles per hour and a twenty five mile
per hour residential street. Prosecutors say the driver, a seventeen
(14:49):
year old Garwood boy, deliberately targeted the girls as they
rode their e bike. What first appeared to be another
e bike tragedy has since revealed chilling allegations of stalking
and harassment. The suspect, whose name is being withheld because
he is a juvenile, faces two counts of first degree murder.
According to Union County Prosecutor William Daniel, He was initially detained, questioned,
and released penning an investigation, then arrested October first. Officials
(15:13):
have not said whether he is currently being held or
released to juvenile custody. At first, the case appeared to
be another in a series of recent deaths involving teens
on e bikes, but friends and neighbors told a different
story to the media. Neighbors told ABC seven Eyewitness News
that one of the girls had a restraining order against
(15:34):
the driver after he harassed her at school and that
he often set in his vehicle outside her home. Maria
noticed his uncle was blunt about it on his Facebook page,
stating that the driver followed her home from school every day.
He said the police did nothing about it despite being
told many times this same site, I want to give
(15:54):
him credit New Jersey one to one point five or
NJ one to one five dot com. They have a
follow up article talking about the funeral. It says days
before mowing down to seventeen year olds on the street,
the accused teen killer revealed on a YouTube live stream
that he had been tormenting one of his teen victims,
in part, he says, because she laughed at the death
(16:14):
of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The seventeen year old suspect
from Garwood, a son of a retired police officer and
the nephew of the Westfield police chief, was charged Wednesday
with the first degree murders of Maria Neiotis and Isabella Salas.
Relatives of Neotis said the teen had been stalking her
for months, something the teen suspect acknowledged on live streams
(16:36):
of his MLB co op games, which attracted thousands of
followers on TikTok. The teen suspect ram the girl's e
bike with his jeep, which police believed was traveling seventy
miles per hour on a twenty five mile per hour
residential street on Monday. So the first thing that jumps
out to me here is when Charlie Kirk was first assassinated,
(17:05):
a lot of the Trumper's Trump's inner circle they went
on and they tried to paint the radical left as
the source for the source of, you know, Charlie Kirk's death.
They were saying, hey, you can't call people Nazis and
(17:28):
so forth using these big platforms and not expect it
to agitate your base to take action to you know,
commit these sorts of acts, right, And they were quick
to try to say that it was because of the
incendiary nature of speech coming from the left that Charlie
(17:52):
Kirk's assassination took place. That take and position is entirely
devoid of responsibility from them, and it lacks responsibility for
you know, Charlie Kirk's own actions. Charlie Kirk did what
(18:15):
he did, said what he said, and people that said, hey,
he did this and said this, and this is reminiscent
of issues from yesteryear that we as a species have
dealt with. To suggest that the people calling that out
are problematic instead of what Charlie Kirk was saying and
(18:37):
doing was problematic, again is tone deaf, But I think
that this story shows exactly what the truth of the
matter is, is that the violence comes from that side.
It just does. Now, we've done a number of shows
(18:58):
in recent weeks, certainly since his assassination, where we've actually
tried to get into the weeds to figure out if
what these people on the right were saying had any
basis in truth whatsoever. And the data just does not
suggest that, and the facts do not suggest that this
is overwhelmingly a problem with the right. The right has
(19:20):
all the guns, the right has all the weird chat
rooms on the internet. The right has all the well
not all of it, but a huge amount of the radicalization.
We did an episode yesterday talking about how there's a
lot of sexual deviancy. I don't want to talk about
it anymore because it was really gross, But there's a
(19:42):
lot of problems over there, and there's just this intentional
blindness to it, and they try to paint people with
a more progressive philosophy and more inclusive ideas about what
this country should be as somehow poisonous to this country,
ignoring their own responsibility, ignoring what their ideas tend to
(20:06):
breed in these circles. And here we have two girls
who are dead. They don't even get to tell their
side of the story. That they don't even get to
say whether or not they even laughed at Charlie Kirk,
because we don't know that. We're just taking this from
the article. We don't get to talk to these little
girls because they didn't get to grow up. They buried him.
(20:29):
And this is a Charlie Kirk supporter who is the
son of a what a police officer and related to
the police chief. This article says, And this is the
sort of people that get to commit this type of violence,
and they have the shielding and the narrative of the
right insulating them from a modicum of responsibility. And this
(20:55):
is a sad state of affairs. And I think that
this lays bare exactly where we are and the fact
that they're not willing to take responsibility of it. I
think the death of these two little girls is on
the hands of those people on the right who are
insulating these people committing these acts of verbal violence and
(21:15):
now real world violence. Anything to add here to you.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
You know, there's an interesting thing that happens with these stories.
Two innocent young women were killed, and we're going to
read opeds and you know, published stories and think pieces
about all the things that were stacked against this young man,
all the reasons we should feel sorry for him, how
(21:43):
rough of a time he was having at it, even
though he stalked, harassed, and tormented these young women, even
though it was documented, reports were made he did this
on live essentially to you know, followers or fans of
his played video games, bragged about how he tormented this
(22:03):
one of these young ladies, even if they laughed. Sure,
we don't get to hear it from them or proof
whether or not they did it, but even if they did,
If you don't think that Charlie Kirk deserves to have
his life taken for the actual hateful, divisive rhetoric that
he spewed, then how do you then justify taking the
(22:25):
life of these young ladies because they disagreed with you
or because they laughed. The hypocrisy, the continuous blatant, perpetual hypocrisy,
the lack of accountability, the turning a blind eye to
all of these things that we see happening over and
(22:48):
over again. They will explain to us why we should
feel sorry for this young man. And if he's the
nephew of a police chief and the son of a
police officer, you better believe that they're going to be
as lean is possible with this young man, even though
he's being accused of taking elives of two people. The
same people that told us that teenagers in DC should
start being tried as adults, as teenagers I think as
(23:11):
young as fourteen, will tell us how this young man
isn't old enough to understand the gravity of his decision,
and tell us all the reasons why he should have
mercy and benefit of the doubt provided for him the
same way really every teenager should. But every accusation is
a confession, and everything is for me, not for thee.
(23:34):
So we're going to hear about all the things stacked
against this young man, and the pressures and the mental
instability and everything that he was going through, and we're
going to take away the humanity and the deserved life
of these two young ladies who are gone and what
their families have to deal with in the wake of
their death from this troubled young man with clear right
(23:56):
wing influence. It's pretty gross.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com