I oppose Musk's decision to suspend journalists, even if they were "doxxing" him, largely because I don't believe that any speech should be suspended unless it's actually illegal. But the social media sites have long said "abusive" speech can be banned, which has always been a fuzzy standard. So this is nothing new.
What's new is that the bans are hitting a group that previously thought they were immune -- because they work for the institutional media; because they are on the left; because they knew whom to call at Twitter to protect themselves, or to have other people banned. Now they are throwing tantrums.
I dropped in on a Twitter "space" last night where some of these banned (really, suspended) journalists were gathering to gripe about the situation. They, like, sound like college students, you know, and, yeah, like, they aren't happy about being punished. They didn't lift a finger during bans under previous ownership.
So while I think Twitter is a better place without such suspensions, and that Musk is taking a commercial risk that the company could become another small conservative platform if enough people leave, I have zero sympathy for the people who encouraged censorship just so their "side" could win an election.
If we're playing by their rules, what we should do is call their advertisers and ask whether they have stopped buying ads on publications that saw journalists suspended. That's how the NYT and CNN sought to destroy competitors under the old regime. It won't happen. But now they know a little about how it feels.
This is my first broadcast from the new office and studio in Washington, DC, where I'll be for a couple of years my neighborhood back in L.A. cleans up -- and as we follow the Trump administration from a little closer up than usual.
Topics:
- The anniversary of the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump
- The escalating tariff battle with various different trading partners
- The future of the Middle East peace talks, and ongoing antisemitism
- The Jeffrey Epstein files and whether they mean anything at all
- The continued crisis of the Texas floods, and stories of heroism and survival
And more!
Special guests:
- James Rosen - Newsmax chief Washington correspondent
- Bob Price - Breitbart News Texas reporter, on the ongoing floods
- Robert Cahill - Trafalgar Polling, on a new alliance of reliable pollsters
- Rabbi Yaakov Menken - Coalition for Jewish Values - on Israel & antisemitism
Tune in: 7-10 p.m. ET, 4-7 p.m. PT
Call: 866-957-2874
This week’s portion tells the grand story of the prophet who tried to curse people of Israel and instead ended up blessing them.
I am reminded that these portions continue to be relevant anew, as this particular reading lent the title for Israel’s recent 12 Day War against Iran, “Operation Rising Lion.”
This week's portion includes the commandment of the red heifer -- one of the classic "irrational" commandments whose fulfillment is an expression of faith. It also includes the regrettable episode in which Moses strikes the rock.
I referred to this story in a wedding speech last night. Why was Moses punished for striking the rock in Numbers, when he struck the rock without incident in Exodus -- both for the purpose of providing water to the people?
The answer is that in the interim, the Jewish people had received the Torah, which is like the marriage contract between the people of Israel and God. In a marriage, you do not resolve things by breaking boundaries, but through love.
The additional reading, from Judges Chapter 11, is the story of Jephthah (Yiftach), a man whom the leaders spurn, but to whom they must turn to save the nation. The parallels to our present political circumstances are striking.
Shabbat Shalom and Happy Fourth of July!
...
