Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Opinion

Trump’s right on ‘disinfo’ censorship, RFK’s dangerous mouth and other commentary

Libertarian: Trump’s Right on ‘Disinfo’ Censorship

Disinformation experts may hate President Donald Trump’s executive order ending “the federal government’s pressure campaign on social media companies,” but Reason’s Robby Soave deems it entirely “right and proper”: It reaffirms the “free speech rights of social media users and prohibits government agents from engaging in unconstitutional censorship.”

While “legitimate reasons for law enforcement to interact with social media companies” include “flagging, investigating, and removing child sexual abuse material, threats of violence, and terrorism,” any “efforts to police them are not imperiled by the executive order.”

The government “can work with social media companies to identify crime” but the feds shouldn’t weaponize “vague ‘national security’ objections and pressure private companies to comply with unconstitutional dictates.”

Conservative: RFK’s Dangerous Mouth

With a hearing on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination for Health and Human Services secretary set for this week, it’s critical to “understand the motivating impulse” behind his “outlier” positions, warns The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley A. Strassel: “He’s a trial lawyer” who worked for “plaintiffs firms that squeeze companies for settlements,” with lawyers “getting huge contingency fees.”

This “matters deeply” because it’s how he’d run HHS: Once, say, government experts rule on what products “cause” disease, attorneys can bring lawsuits.

Indeed, “every time an HHS Secretary Kennedy opens his mouth,” he’d potentially be helping trial lawyers “who’ll use his words as evidence in court.”

Senators must “justify placing an unrepentant advocate of that industry” in a position “to facilitate further abuse.”

Eye on the Dems: Still in Disarray

“After a rudderless post-election run, Democrats are suddenly showing some fight against President Donald Trump,” reports Semafor’s Burgess Everett, but “it’s not clear who is leading the charge.”

Dems admit to being “in a bit of disarray” when it comes to responding to Trump, and the “split between antagonism and accommodation is playing out in full view among the party’s most prominent members.”

While Sen. Chris Murphy “is embracing aggressive opposition, others are trying to do both.”

Outside DC, “governors like Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania will undoubtedly help steer their party’s direction.”

In short, “it’s a wide-open playing field for Democrats to redefine their party.”

From the right: Putin’s Weak Bargaining Position

Russia’s Vladimir Putin claims he’s willing to negotiate with Washington to end the Ukraine war,  but still insists on “Ukraine’s full capitulation,” including territorial concessions, fume Jonathan Sweet & Mark Toth at The Hill.

“Other non-negotiable demands include Ukraine officially ‘giving up its pursuit of NATO membership’ and accepting ‘extensive limitations on the size of its armed forces and on the kinds of weapons systems it is allowed to possess.’”

President Trump shouldn’t be fazed: Russia’s “military has been decimated,” and its “economy is on the brink of collapse.”

Putin “has no winning hand and should not be extended a lifeline or any face-saving measures. Trump’s message to Putin should be to leave Ukraine or risk losing your army and your country.”

From the left: Send John Brennan to Mars

“John Brennan couldn’t help himself,” smirks Racket News’ Matt Taibbi: “Publicly taken down a notch” by the Trump order “stripping security clearances of 51 officials who signed” the “Russian information operation” letter on Hunter Biden’s laptop, “the former CIA chief needed to show everyone how smart he still is,” and so showed why he and his ilk “need resettling on a new planet.”

Brennan protests that the letter never charged “disinformation,” but if he was upset “over someone ‘misrepresenting’ his words, he would have done it” immediately when Politico reported, “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

He could have screamed “minutes after publication and gotten the headline changed. It’s still up.”

Nor did he correct Joe Biden days later for citing the letter as proof the laptop news was “garbage.”

Worse, notes Taibbi, Brennan’s silent on the damning fact that the 51 “coordinated with the Biden campaign” on the letter. 

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button