Should Fake News be Censored?

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Boston's Bulldozer never sleeps. The Kuner Report weekend edition on
the Voice of Boston w RKO.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
Censorship, Is it ever acceptable? Should fake news be censored?
And what about actions as opposed to speech. We've talked
about flag burning. You know, some feel very strongly that
that should be censored. Like President Trump, he's signed a
law to that effect or an executive order to make
it ajailable offense. But what about actions not involving the flag.

(00:32):
I want you to look at the case of Elizabeth Baxter.
She's a paralegal at the Department of Justice. She was
just fired by Attorney General Pam Bondi after multiple incidents
of inappropriate conduct toward National Guard service members that have
been stationed in d C during President Trump's crime crackdown,

(00:55):
and Pam Bondi has said that she's removed Elizabeth with Baxter,
the paralegal. She's a paralegal specialist in the DOJ's Environment
and Natural Resources Division, But Bondie said she removed Elizabeth
Baxter after an internal investigation into repeated actions directed at

(01:16):
National Guard personnel. According to the AG, Baxter first admitted
in the middle of August to a DOJ security guard
that she had made an obscene gesture toward a National
Guard member at the Metro Center station and verbally insulted him.
That same day, surveillance footage showed Baxter making the gesture

(01:41):
again you can imagine what gesture it is outside the
DOJ's Forecon building and shouting profanities at a guardsman. A
week later, she did the same thing, made the same
remarks to a DOJ security guard while entering the building,
and witness statements and security video were looked at in

(02:01):
regard to the investigation, and after the investigation, Bondi filed
a report saying that Baxter was removed from the position
of Paralegal Specialists, et cetera, et cetera, and from the
Federal Service effective immediately, citing inappropriate conduct towards National Guard
service members and she's got a right of appeal that

(02:23):
you know, lasts for thirty days. Bondi confirmed that firing
in a social media post and she said today I
took action to terminate a DOJ employee for inappropriate conduct
towards National Guard Service members in DC at the Justice
Department and remains committed to defending President Trump's agenda and

(02:44):
fighting to make America safe again. If you oppose our
mission and disrespect law enforcement, you will no longer work
at the DOJ. So that's that's Did Bondie do the
right thing? Or was Elizabeth Baxter just exercising free speech?

(03:05):
Was what she did and say protected by the First Amendment?
Is she being censored in firing her? You know, there
was another case just a few weeks ago at the DOJ.
It's a little bit different. You had another dog employee,
Sean Charles Dunn. He was accused of throwing a sandwich
at a national guard, a federal officer, and shouting insults

(03:27):
at law enforcement at the same time. And he also
was a paralegal. He was in the DOJ's criminal division,
and he has been charged with misdemeanor assault after a
grand jury declined to indict him on felony counts. But
was what he did free speech? I think his case

(03:49):
is different. It's assault and battery when you throw something
at somebody, even if it's just a sandwich, and assault
is not a constitutional freedom. But you know, flipping some
of the bird is not a form of speech. It's offensive.
But does that mean that it should be censored? And

(04:11):
you're paying a price there, you're losing your job or
does the job change your rights? The fact that she
works for the DOJ, does that she held to a
higher standard. Do you lose some of your free speech
rights if you are if you work for the DOJ
or the White House or or someplace else that's that's
on the public payroll and in high visibility. It's an

(04:35):
interesting question because I think that the guy who threw
the sandwich at the National Guard, that's a salt battery
that's not protected under any stretch of the imagination. I
don't think. But I'm thinking what Baxter did well, I
find it distasteful and I find and I think she's

(04:55):
a little unhinged there by running around flipping the bird
to National guardsmen and insulting them when they're just doing
their duty. I think that's different. I think there is
an issue there in regard to free speech. I'm not sure.
And I think maybe you holler in and you say
you don't don't do that. It's a bad look for

(05:17):
the d o J. But you don't necessarily fire her
out of the box, do you. I mean she has
a right to do that. She does not have. I
will make it clear she does not have a right
to work for the d o J. But I think
she has the right to say what she what she did,
and she also has a right to some corn of appeal,
which she does for thirty days. But I think they

(05:38):
needed to suspend her or tell her if you do
this again, we're telling you now, it's a bad look
for us. We don't want it. We're going to fire you.
I think they were a little quick to pull the
trigger there. Do you think I'm wrong? Do you think
that she that she that Pam BONDI was within her
rights to fire Ms Baxter. Let's go to Anne in
Cambridge and welcome to w r KO. How are you I.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
I'm good, thank you very much as my first time calling.
Oh well, welcome. Oh you've done a great job this week.

Speaker 2 (06:06):
Thank you.

Speaker 3 (06:08):
I just wanted to say I think she was Pam
was well within her rights. Okay, because this woman, she's
her boss, and you have to act like your job description.
She didn't throw her in jail, so she didn't take
away her First Amendment rights. She has the right to
do it, but she doesn't have the right to work
for her and get away with what she wants.

Speaker 2 (06:28):
To don't you think that maybe saying don't do this
again might have been a little less a draconian or
was Pam BONDI trying to prove a point that has
nothing really to do with miss Baxter.

Speaker 3 (06:41):
From what you said, and I didn't. I wasn't aware
of this. She did it three different times. Yeah, so
how many times? You're a grown up? You know that
you're so she's unhead.

Speaker 2 (06:50):
Yeah, she's a nut, without a doubt, she's a nut.
And you know, I don't think taxpayer dollars should go
to be paying in that salary. But I agree that
she's a nut. But if they spoke to her after
each time, I think, yeah, she's out of here. But
if they didn't know she was doing it till a
third time and then told her don't do it, would
that have been a better response?

Speaker 3 (07:12):
Subatable?

Speaker 2 (07:13):
Yeah, it's it's it's a fine line, isn't it. Censorship
is not an easy question. It's it can be a
very difficult question. Thank you for the call in. I
appreciate it and welcome and I'm so happy that you
joined us for the first time. This is Sandy shack
In for Jeff Cooner. We'll be right back six one, seven, two,
sixty six, sixty eight, sixty eight.

Speaker 1 (07:34):
Jeff doesn't get a day off. This request came from
his wife. The Kooner Report weekend edition on the Boys
for Boston w RKO