Elon Musk recently warned that if Donald Trump doesn’t win the 2024 election, it will be the end of free speech as we know it. Is there any evidence of this? YES. Yes there is, Glenn says, and he has the receipts. Glenn rolls the tapes to prove that leftist elites in Kamala Harris’ elitist circle want to crack down on free speech: Hillary Clinton said social media could cost them “total control”; In 2022, Tim Walz said “misinformation” and “hate speech” are not protected under the First Amendment (they are); and John Kerry called the First Amendment “a major block” to combatting “misinformation.” Yet real misinformation, like Kamala’s praise of President Biden’s mental acuity even AFTER his disastrous debate, is SPREAD by the media?!
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: So, Stu, last night, you were watching the 60 Minutes interview. How was it?
STU: I did watch that. It was not good. There were a lot of different things, I much rather be watching football.
So the couple things about it. Number one was pitched as a Kamala Harris interview. And it wasn't really that. You got some Kamala Harris. A bunch of Tim Walz. And then an excruciating long piece about whether the election in Arizona was stolen in 2020.
Which I -- we've got four weeks until the election. Why?
Again, like, you could absolutely make a case, that would happen in 2020 in Arizona is important.
Nothing can be done about it, from now until the election. What's important now is 2024 election. You can get past 2024. You can start fixing problems you think exist in all these states. Once again, should have been done between 2020 and 2024.
But there's just no relevance to this whatsoever, at this point.
Whatever, they're trying to make Donald Trump look bad. A lot of it is tilted that way, including puff questions to Kamala Harris.
About, so why didn't you think Donald Trump didn't want to do this interview? Good, tough questions in 60 Minutes. Really tough question there.
GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh.
STU: There were a couple of questions that were adversarial, I guess you could say.
There was the typical, hey. You flip-flopped on 943 issues.
Let me list three of them. And let me give you a generic answer about your principles. That hasn't changed.
GLENN: So let me play one. This is cut three. This is her being pressed on her nomination. Listen to this.
VOICE: Was democracy best served by President Biden stepping down.
And basically handing you a nomination. He must have to go through a primary process. He didn't have to fight off other contenders.
That's not really the way our system was intended to work.
KAMALA: President Biden made a instigation, that I think history is going to show is rare among leaders, which was to put country before self.
STU: Stop it. He didn't want to do it.
KAMALA: And I am proud to have earned the support of the vast majority of delegates. And to have been elected the democratic nominee.
I am proud to have received the endorsement, of leaders around this country, from every background and walk of life.
STU: Nobody voted for you.
KAMALA: To fight in this election, over the next month.
GLENN: Please say there's a follow-up --
KAMALA: For our democracy.
VOICE: But I think this truncated process is why people think or say, they don't really know who you are.
KAMALA: Look, I've been in this race for 70 days.
GLENN: Right. Right. Yes. And nobody voted for you.
STU: I mean, that's a -- a fair question, that you're right. Though, the lack of follow-up is difficult.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: Right. It's tough to take. Because you know they would sit on this and press on it.
And say, wait a minute.
You're saying you won the votes.
You won the votes of the delegates. After the sitting president endorsed you and you pushed everybody else out of the race.
GLENN: And after you sat on the information, that he was almost a vegetable table.
For four years. Three and a half years.
You said, trust me. I am there with him.
He is fine.
And then, we find out, he's not. The night we find that out. You say, it was just a bad night.
He's fine.
STU: Yeah. You went on Anderson Cooper.
And said everything was fine.
You see him behind closed doors.
He's incredible. He's getting all these things done.
He's dealing with these leaders in these amazing ways.
She was lying after the debate about this.
And still, we really haven't had her pressed on what the hell happened there.
How did you -- why did you not tell people about this in advance?
Why did you continue to lie after everyone else already knew?
GLENN: So why didn't he ask that question? Cut eight, please. Here's Hillary Clinton.
HILLARY: If the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter, X, or Instagram, or TikTok, whatever they are. If they don't moderate and monitor the congratulations, we lose total control.
STU: Uh-oh.
GLENN: We lose total control.
HILLARY: And it's not just the social and psychological effects. It's real harm.
GLENN: Uh-huh. It's real harm. So why wasn't the question pressed over and over again, the way it would be done for anybody else?
Cut nine. Here's Tim Walz.
VOICE: I think we need to push back on this. There's no guarantee on free speech on misinformation. On hate speech. And especially around our democracy.
STU: That's an incredible clip, largely because he then repeated it during the actual debate.
He -- that was in 2020, that clip. He had multiple years. That clip went viral in between.
And he still thought, that -- that there's -- that the hate speech is banned by the First Amendment.
GLENN: Uh-huh.
STU: And that you can't say fire in a crowded theater.
Things that anybody who studied this issue, know immediately are wrong.
And he knows nothing about them.
GLENN: Why didn't CBS ask the tough question? Why is no one really pushing Kamala on FEMA and the response to this hurricane, which is devastating?
I don't know.
Cut ten.
VOICE: And I think the dislike of, and anguish over social media is just growing and growing and growing.
And it's part of our problem, particularly in democracies.
In terms of building consensus around any issue.
It's really hard to govern today.
You can't -- you know, there's no -- the referees we used to have to determine what's a fact and what isn't a fact.
Kind of -- you know, have been eviscerated to a certain degree.
And people go -- and people self-select. Where they go for their news or for their information.
And then you just get into a vicious cycle. So it's really, really hard. Much harder to build consensus today, than at any time, of the 50 years I've been involved in this.
And, you know, there's a lot of discussion now, about how you curbed those entities.
In order to guarantee that you're going to have, you know, some accountability, on the facts, et cetera.
But look, if people go to only one source. And the source they go to is sick.
And, you know, has an agenda. And they're putting out disinformation.
Our First Amendment stands as a danger block to the ability to be able to just, you know --
GLENN: Notice. Notice, they are not talking about who the final arbiter is.
On mis and disinformation.
The arbiter, that they are asking for, is them!
That they will alert social media and everybody else. This is not true. This is true. Just like they did with the Hunter Biden laptop.
This is not true.
This is Russian disinformation.
When they knew the truth.
You're seeing what they want to do.
They are telling you, what they will do.
Now, we have to choose.
