9-22-25 - 7am - Criminals In The Education System and First Amendment & Broadcasting

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, fellas, I was off in the undisclosed location for
me last week and I didn't hear any of you.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
You guys are still on the air, right, you didn't
get kimmeled.

Speaker 1 (00:13):
Dam it must be now here. That's a new program.
We get kimmeled every day, every day. We every day
at ten o'clock. Every day at ten o'clock, we get
kim We both just we well, Dragon has to stick
around for a little bit longer, but we both get
out of out of here as quickly as we can
so we don't get the opportunity because they never listen

(00:34):
to us. They don't care about us, they don't give
a rats ask what we're doing. Just you know, don't
cause them any problems. And so we just sneak out
of here as foky as we can so that they
don't they don't even know we're on there.

Speaker 2 (00:48):
I haven't been told to see me in my office
for years.

Speaker 1 (00:52):
Yes, right, come see me in my office. Remember when
they get at the school, somebody come in, you know. No,
they need to see Michael in the principal's office. Oh brother,
I always wonder on the way to the principal's office.
I always thought to myself I wonder what thin get is?

Speaker 2 (01:15):
Wonder, No, I wonder what they know?

Speaker 1 (01:18):
Oh I well, Min's kind of along the same thing
mine was. I wonder which then it is a thing
that I did that they're that I'm getting called in for,
because there's always every day there was a list of
four or five things.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
Right, but it's I wonder what they know. I'm not
going in saying anything.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
Oh no, no, no. That's why I went to law
school because I already I already knew the whole point
about you know, you have the right to remain silent.

Speaker 2 (01:43):
So Girner was always fun with that kind of stuff.
Is Hey, I need you to see me in my
office after you get done. No, no, no, nothing bad,
nothing bad, just just that I need you to come
see me in my house. So serious, all the time,
all the time. That's great.

Speaker 1 (01:58):
So it's been almost two weeks since since we had
a speaker assassinated on a college quad. Think about all
the times that we've talked about the Heckler's veto, where
conservative speakers who are scheduled to speak on a college

(02:19):
quad or a college on a college campus somewhere end
up being canceled because the administration would be fearful they
couldn't provide for their safety. So Kurt gets shot during
an outdoor event Utah Valley University in Utah on September tenth,

(02:41):
almost two weeks ago. Since that time, prosecutors have charged
a twenty two year old dirt back. Can I say
that Erica with aggravated murder and they say they're going
to seek the death penalty. The charging documents themselves, Miss Kimmel,
describe political motivation. They've already resumed classes. Everything I read

(03:08):
indicates that the mood on the campus is pretty heavy.
And that's where we are now. A couple of weeks later.
The news last night was talking about the Evergreen High
School and their plan for returning to school. And that's
been almost two weeks ago since that dirt bag open fire.

(03:35):
Now in the day since then, I think another layer
of rot surfaced. Students, faculty, other public school employees we
witnessed celebrating a political assassination. Texas State University expelled a

(03:56):
student they found a video that showed him re enacting
the shooting at a campus memorial. A similar expulsion followed
at Texas Tech. There are many numerous other examples professors
faced swift back lession. Arkansas law professor and Arkansas law
professor was suspended for social media posts celebrating the killing. Clemson.

(04:23):
Clemson suspended two professors, fired an employee for mocking Kirk's
death online. Out in California, several teachers got placed to
leave because they were literally cheering the assassination. All across
the country, educators from K twelve teachers to university faculty

(04:46):
have been fired. They've been disciplined almost always for online
posts glorifying the violence. If you draw a public paycheck,
you are accountable to the public. Cheering an assassination disqualifies
you from positions of civic trust. Words are not violence.

(05:09):
We know that it's kind of a trite phrase, but
we I think we have to repeat it. Words are
not violence for those who think they are and want
to engage in violence. No, words are not violence, But
celebrating violence is a direct endorsement of violence. We've talked,

(05:32):
you know, I. You know there's no way to do it,
but I'd love to see a a chronology or a
bibliography or a index or something of topics that I've
covered by topic and then chronologically because I've talked about

(05:59):
this monoculture that exists on college campuses and their tendency
to label speech that it dislikes as, oh, my gosh,
it's harmful. Yet if somebody's out there executing, maybe that's
not the right word, I shouldn't I collect it? While

(06:21):
someone is out there engaging in hard edged activism to
the point of maybe vandalism, trespassing, but you know, some
even though it might be technically minor, but nonetheless some
criminal activity. So they're labeling speech as harmful because they

(06:45):
dislike it, and yet they're engaging in criminal activity in
many cases. And if it's not criminalists at least as
I describe it, as I said, hard edged activism, How
did we get to this place? How do we get
in this long, glacial timeline where speech is treated like

(07:05):
violence while actual violence gets rationalized by the very institutions
secondary and higher that claim to steward our civic life.
If a university can be considered as some sort of
culture factory, then the faculty hiring is the assembly line.

(07:27):
For decades, administrators have signaled that violent left wing radicalism
is not disqualifying for classroom authority. Think about that, you're
interviewing people, you're asking about your teaching philosophy. You're looking
at their past record, doing their academic record. You're looking

(07:47):
at everything, and you see that they are engaged, or
they have engaged in violent left wing radicalism, or they
believe in violent left wing radicalism, or they are just
left wing radicalists themselves. That's not qualifying for them putting
them into a position of authority in a classroom. Well,
that message, over decades has now been heard by students, scholars,

(08:12):
in fact, the broader culture. You and I hear it.
I was general, I said, I haven't spoken on a
college campus in years. But I take that back, I forgot.
I just spoke to the University of Chicago. Just what
a four or five months ago. Bernardine Dorn. Let's do

(08:32):
a little inventory. Bernardine Dorn. Northwestern Law School a very
good law school. She's a former Weather Underground leader. She
pleaded guilty to misdemeanor aggravated battery bail jumping. She served
seven months for civil contempt because she refused a grand
jury request. She then gets welcomed as a clinical associate

(08:56):
professor and becomes the founding director of Northwestern Children and
Family Justice Center from the early nineties through twenty thirteen.
That is, that is Northwestern legitimizing her political viewpoint. It's

(09:20):
not a guest lecturer, it's not a speaker, it's an
institutional legitimacy of radical left wing politics. Bill Airs, University
of Illinois, Chicago. He founded here, I should say technically
he co founded the Weather Underground. Charges tied to bombings

(09:41):
were dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct, not because the bombing
has never happened, but the prosecutor overreached. He rose through
the ranks to become distinguished Professor of Education at the
University of Illinois, Chicago and became a major figure schools
of education. They've institutionalized the radicalism. Kathy Baudine, Columbia. She

(10:09):
took part in a brinx robbery in nineteen eighty one
that left three people dead. She served more than two
decades in prison, So of course, what do we do.
Columbia hires her to join the School of Social Work,
and she co founded that Center for Justice. Now, the
institution frames itself as one being that advocates for rehabilitation.

(10:34):
But I would imagine that the victims' families of the
three people that she murdered when she engaged in the
Brinx robbery. Probably heard something other than rehabilitation. Prestige becomes absolution.
Susan Rosenberg, John Jay College, Hamilton College. She's this, well,

(10:59):
they're all amazing to me. She was convicted on weapons
charges and explosive charges, was later commuted. Rosenberg taught as
an adjunct professor at sun He's John Jay College of
Criminal Justice. Wow, I guess teaching criminal justice you must

(11:20):
be a criminal in order to treat or to teach
criminal justice. Hamilton College invited her to teach for a
credit seminar, but there there was enough backlash that she withdrew.
But the invitation should tell you what the gatekeepers were
ready to normalize. Eldreach Cleaver. I remember that name so well.

(11:46):
Eldridge Cleaver, Berkeley, University of California at Berkeley, a black
panther leader with felony convictions gets approved lecture in social analysis,
whatever the crap that means social analysis back in nineteen
sixty eight. That was probably the match that started to

(12:09):
fight over academic freedom. The template of provocation as pedagogy
has been part of campus identity ever since. Eldridge Cleaver
provocation is pedagogy. It's amazing to me if you leaning

(12:30):
on Ottomia University, College Cork. This guy, convicted in nineteen
ninety four conspiring to cause explosions in the United Kingdom,
later released under a Good Friday agreement, went on to
lecture in social policy at University of College Cork a

(12:53):
radical biography. Oh that's now a credential. Oh that's let
me see your resume. You've been convicted of conspiracy to
cause explosions. Wow, you're more than qualified. That's just the
list I came up with, very very briefly. Now, think
about that list. Bernadine Dorn aggravated battery, bail jumping, refuses

(13:21):
our contempt of court for refusing a grand jury requests.
Bill Ayre's Weather Underground, by the way, Bernadine dorm Weather
Underground too. Kathy Boudine Brinks robbery, murdered three people, Susan
Rosenberg weapons explosive charges. Eldrich Kleaver, Black Panther founder Adamo
conspiracy to cause explosions? What's missing from that list? What's

(13:45):
missing from that list? And there's probably others. That's just
something I came up with. Right wing equivalents who committed
comparable political violence and then are welcomed into core teaching roles.
If you're looking for a symmetry, yeah, yeah, well, good luck. Yeah,

(14:07):
there's there's a there's a graph over here, there's a
list over here, there's an empty list over here. When
administrators redefined, redefine words that they don't like as being harmful,
what they do is they didn't create this loophole for violence.
It becomes a narratively negotiable. It becomes the lived experience

(14:32):
of liberation. That hiring record that I just listed for
you did not cause a gunman to pull that trigger,
but it has taught generations of students and faculty which
kinds of law breaking are glorious, which kinds of law
breaking or tolerating, which viewpoints are treated as existential threats.

(14:57):
That culture matters on campus, and it behavehavior that we
saw did not appear out from anywhere. It was learned.
It was a learned behavior. It was a taut behavior.

(15:17):
Just as a footnote, you could probably draw a parallel
to some degree around the constant rhetoric that we hear
about climate changed, because climate change is always described as
an existential threat. Well, conservatism must be an existential threat.
And what happens with some of the radicals in climate change?

(15:40):
You know, sabotage pipelines, energy infrastructure, burned down resorts appear
in the Colorado Mountains. We've seen it in the murder
of the United Healthcare CEO. When are we going to

(16:01):
see the murder of fossil fuel CEOs or critics that
you know talking about climate change? And the way that
I talked about climate change, maybe it's time to draw
a bright line for violent political crimes. Public universities ought
to categorically bar hiring anybody into the classroom who is

(16:22):
convicted of violent political crimes like bombings, armed robberies, terrorist conspiracies,
advisory talks at arm's length. You can debate that, you know,
a speaking engagement, you can debate that, But classroom authority
is what I'm talking about. That should be precluded because

(16:43):
that professor sitting up in front of you in that
mush brain kid that you sent off to college is
a radical, violent leftist. Why do we accept that? Because
people have been afraid to speak up, because parents have
just written a check for the tuition. Your kids are

(17:07):
getting brainwashed, absolutely brainway indoctrinated. They mus as well be
at some re education camp in communist China or Cuba.
Public employees, you're in a position of trust too, so

(17:30):
you can't celebrate violence. No celebrating violence for public employees.
If you're a taxpayer funded educator and then you cheer
a political assassination, boom, you're gone. Do I have to
explain that that is not criminalizing speech. It is enforcing
fitness for a duty in a civic role, which as

(17:53):
a university you're entitled to do, because you're putting that
person in a bozisition of authorities. Do you really want
to allow that to keep going on?

Speaker 3 (18:16):
Hey, Michael, I went to school in the late seventies
through the eighties, and no one ever showed up with
a note to go to the principal's office. They just
came on over the PA direct to your classroom.

Speaker 2 (18:31):
Are you that much older than me? They were using
smoke signals for Michael.

Speaker 1 (18:36):
You gotta remember I went to a one room school.
I honestly don't think that we had We must have
had a PA system, but it was never used that
way because I remember in the hallways there were announcements made.

(19:00):
Remember announcement being made in the classroom, or an announcement like,
you know, missus Boston, send Michael Brown down to the office. Now,
I know, but we're talking rural Oklahoma too, So back
off a little bit. Let's most people don't understand what's

(19:29):
actually going on with this Jimmy Kimmel suspension, and I
think part of it's driven by ignorance, part of it's
driven by just obfuscation, and partially by the fact that
so few of the free speech free speech contrarians are
really conservatives in any typical sense, and they don't have
any They actually lack an awareness of how things have

(19:51):
changed for conservatives over the past decade. I'm a I'm
a subscribe subscriber to the Free p else and I
like the Free Press, and I like Barry Weiss, but
I include her in that list non conservative people who

(20:13):
always seem to forget is not a conserv She's not
a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. And Barry
Weiss is certainly not considered by actual conservatives to be
a conservative. I've never thought of Barry Wiss as a conservative.
I just like the way she's put the paper together
and that I can get different points of view, and

(20:33):
I know when I'm reading something that's a conservative point
of view versus a liberal point of view. But she
is a liberal, and I don't mean that in a
majority sense. It's just a fact. She's just culturally a
liberal contrarian. Like sometimes I might be a conservative contrarian,

(20:53):
basically conservative libertarian, but occasionally I drift off a little
bit because I get I live in the real world,
and why may still maintain my conservative principles. I still
think in the real world of politics, you're gonna have
to give sometimes. Now I think we've given too much,
and we need to be very very precisive when we

(21:14):
do give up or negotiate or some mediate compromise. But
I think Barry Weiss is too often called a conservative
by people who don't like the prospects of her taking
her role at this new conglomerate being put together by
Larry Ellison's son, David Ellis over at CBS puck News

(21:41):
has labeled her a reactionary, so of course it's consistent
for her response in an editorial that she published in
The Free Speech to take the liberal contrarian view. While
Barry Weiss sees Kimmel's suspension as a bridge too far conservative.
See it does a good start. There are three elements.

(22:05):
As much as I've talked about this, and yes, whatever
that talkback was earlier about, I tend to go into
a lot of detail and repeat and repeat and repeat.

Speaker 2 (22:13):
Do you know why I do that?

Speaker 1 (22:15):
Because every time I do, I try to take a
little slightly different angle to those who are a average listener.
Nothing wrong with that, but an average listener you don't
really detect the details. So you think he's talking about
the same thing again. He's now talking about Jimmy Kimmel,

(22:37):
and he's talking about the First Amendment again, and he
talks about the First Amendment an awful lot. But this
is going to be slightly different. See if you can
catch the difference. There are three elements that are clearly
being left out of the pro Kimmel argument. First, the

(23:04):
climate for conservatives is now one of actual fear for
your life and the lives of your sons and your
daughters on campuses across the country, or for that matter,
even in secondary education secondary schools, and conservatives understand in
their depths of their souls that fueled by ceaseless, irresponsible

(23:28):
and violence tends rhetoric from politicians, and a constant barrage
of hatred from the media. The radical left is physically
dangerously extreme. They are, then, am I somehow violating the

(23:48):
Charlie Kirk phenomenon going on by pointing out that there
are radical leftists. Go back, if you will for a
moment to that list that I get of all of
those radical professors that were engaged in violent activities who

(24:09):
went on to either become a leading part of the
Democrat Party or, in the case of Bill Airs BF
after Barack Obama. Those the actions of the radical left
have made this country more divided and less safe. They

(24:30):
contribute to a real environment where conservatives fear for themselves
and their loved ones simply for expressing mainstream conservative, Republican
and even pro Trump opinions. Why do you think they're
clamoring so much for additional security? Members of Congress clamoring
for security, maybe you want to you have an opportunity

(24:54):
to censure one of your own members for engaging in
violent rhetoric, or at least endorsing violent rhetoric. Can you
fail to do so?

Speaker 2 (25:04):
So?

Speaker 1 (25:04):
I have zero sympathy for you, and I don't want
any tax dollars spent providing you additional security, not because
I want to put your life in danger, but because
I don't think that's our responsibility. I think it's the
responsibility if your if you want to raise money from
your campaign, and if the law allows it, or if

(25:26):
you need to change the law, then go change the
law so you can use you can go raise money
from your big donors, so you can hire a security detail.
You're not a member of the executive branch where you're
not elected, but you're appointed. Where you are, you are
assigned to a position, and so you take that position.

(25:48):
I didn't seek to become the undersecretary. I literally was
not seeking it out. Did I help the Bush campaign?

Speaker 2 (25:55):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (25:56):
Did I help and have a personal relationship with the
Bush campaign campaign manager?

Speaker 2 (26:01):
Yeah? I did.

Speaker 1 (26:02):
Did did I ever call Joe and say hey, I
want to serve in you? I never did that. Never
did it, and quite frankly, wasn't expecting to do it.
But when called to serve, you go do it. And
when you get called to serve in a position like that,
it comes with a detail because you were drafted, so

(26:26):
to speak. You got drafted and you answered the draft.
You didn't burn your draft card, you said, okay, I'll go.
This isn't fear of animosity. There's real, actual violence, and
it's based on the reality of what they have seen
in the past month, what we've seen in the past years.

(26:47):
It's not lost on any conservative that the reaction to
Charlie Kirk's assassination wasn't just hailing it and celebrating it.
It was actually in some quarters calling for more baying
for blood representing his death is a good start. Within
hours of her speech, Erica's speech that she gave at

(27:09):
the headquarters of Turning Point USA, Radical Left US, we're
calling for Erica Kirk to be gun down next. If
those quote, if those are your views, I'm totally okay
with you being murdered, because the world is a better
place without you at that point. Close quote quote one

(27:33):
Nazi down, a million more to come close quote I hear,
I hear what the radical Left to say, and I
believe it, and I have not heard anything. And you
can't say I've been patient, but I haven't heard anything

(27:58):
since September ten from that side other than oh, you know,
we shouldn't celebrate violence, but we can't do xyz butt.
It was always that butt that was included. So, yeah,
I hear what you're saying. And just as I've lectured
you to pay attention to real closely what comes after

(28:20):
the butt, I've been paying attention to what comes after
the butt. So this point number one, this is real
and that's the world that I live in, a real
world where violence is real. Second, Jimmy Kimmel is part
of an industry, just like I am, that has rules.

(28:45):
We have written and unwritten rules. Now, those rules include
a higher level of guardrails for broadcast networks, and I
include radio in that one that all the networks have
to abide by and that restricts what came and cannot
be said on the airwaves. Now, kimil pretty clearly violated
those rules with a false accusation, which was.

Speaker 2 (29:08):
Not a joke.

Speaker 1 (29:11):
Now, Brendan Carr, the chair of the Federal Community Communications Commission,
all he did, I've listened and listened and listened to him.
And again, while I wish he would have just remained silent. Nonetheless,
when I get when I set aside my personal feelings
about yeah, I wish because you're in a position of authority,

(29:32):
you should have just remained silent until something comes before you.
What was he saying. He was just threatening to enforce
the rules, in no more of a threat than any
than toward anyone else who violates them. He was just saying, look,
we're gonna start looking at these rules, and we're gonna
start enforcing them. As I spent a significant amount of

(29:55):
time on the National program on Saturday of going through
through the rules, and I know that I gay, I
know I must have given at least to one member
of that national audience a good explanation of the rules,
because I got an email, an email that well, let
me just pull it up right, and I'm not reading

(30:17):
this to my horn. I'm yeah, I'll read the email
after the break.

Speaker 2 (30:22):
Good morning from South Dakota.

Speaker 1 (30:24):
I've heard a lot of impersonations of Donald Trump, but
Donald Trump Junior nailed it yesterday.

Speaker 2 (30:29):
Yes, everyone, have a great day.

Speaker 1 (30:33):
And it was the and the timing was perfect, timing
was perfect, It fit perfectly with a very somber solemn memorial,
and it was just a right amount of humor. I
don't know whether he wrote that himself or he had
a speechwriter do it, but it was it.

Speaker 2 (30:50):
Was marvel He even had the hand gestures in there too.
Oh did you watch it?

Speaker 1 (30:54):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (30:54):
What great? Michael says, go here dot com if you
haven't seen it.

Speaker 1 (30:57):
Yeah, go watch it because it's it's absolutely wonderful. So
I get this email after Saturday's program, Brownie. I'm listening
on Saturday, September twentieth. I am a retired broadcaster from
May nineteen sixty eight to October twenty twenty four. That's
a congratulation. That's a good career. Your analysis of the
First Amendment as it applies to broadcasting was brilliant. Kudos

(31:19):
to you on the explanation. Yeah, okay, well I'll pat
myself on the back for that, but I want you
to understand it too, because they're conflating all of this
stuff and it's driving me Baddy. So Brendan Carr, while
I wish he would have remained silent because he isn't
a way Well, he's a regulator, now, I know. Look,

(31:43):
we're not accustomed to regulators coming out and saying these
kinds of things, but that's kind of what we have
come to expect with this administration. But I kind of
wish they wouldn't because they're just giving fodder to the left.
We need to first get the public educated and get
them accustomed to what the law and the rules are.

(32:04):
And then if you wanted to make comments, go make comments.
We're putting the car before the horse. In this case,
he was simply threatening to enforce the pre existing rules,
and it wasn't a threat. It was no more of
a threat than toward anyone else who violates them. Kimill

(32:28):
was the only one that at that moment had violated
the rule. But Kimill refused to apologize, or to back off,
or to come back and refute it, whatever, And the
story is that he was planning to even double down
the next day. He has since met with the ABC executives.

(32:49):
I don't know what they're going to do. Quite frankly,
I don't care, because I don't watch late night television.
Only thing I care about is the First Amendment. People
understanding that there are pre existing rules that have existed
for decades, going back to nineteen twenty seven and nineteen
thirty four about public broadcasting. And I don't mean like
public radio. I mean like using public airwaves. ABC is

(33:15):
sensitive to offending significant numbers of Americans and because unlike
other networks. The actual money for their network comes from
a mass media giant that depends on people coming to
theme parks and Marvel movies Disney, And when the affiliate
said we're going to preempt Kimel those advertising dollars, and

(33:37):
that audience was like, em, maybe we won't go to
Disney