#firstamendment

So apparently, according to Trump and his entourage, he’s not just president — he’s the last, brave, freedom-loving knight of free speech. Yes, the same guy who sues comedians, bans reporters, and melts down every time someone calls him orange now wants us to believe he’s the First Amendment’s personal bodyguard.

The New York Times even quoted him:

“It is part of the mission of his presidency to defend free speech, open debate and dissent…”

Right. Because nothing says “open debate” like gag orders, threatening lawsuits against critics, and calling everyone who disagrees with you an enemy of the people. The man thinks “free speech” means “a 24/7 standing ovation.”

Then there’s his sob story about the media:

“The media is trying to cancel us … They are fighting to silence us.”

Silence him? He’s literally the loudest man on Earth. He’s got rallies, Truth Social rants, Fox segments, a book deal, and the entire presidency. That’s what “being canceled” looks like?

And let’s not forget his allies, who warn that if they don’t “do something,” the only voices left will be “the elites.” Translation: if we don’t muzzle critics, fact-checkers, comedians, and anyone who’s ever rolled their eyes at Trump, then poor Donnie might hear something mean about himself. And we can’t have that.

Here’s the thing: real free speech is messy. It means people can call you out, mock you, contradict you, and yes — even expose your lies. But Trumpworld’s version of free speech is basically: I talk, you clap. If you don’t clap, you’re censoring me.

So the next time they wail about defending free speech, remember: they don’t mean your speech, or my speech, or the press’s speech. They mean their speech — unchallenged, uncorrected, and completely free of consequences. It’s not a defense of liberty; it’s a loyalty oath wrapped in a Twitter rant.

Free speech cosplay, starring the guy who can’t handle a late-night joke.

by P.B. Wells

This ain’t the time for pretty words.

Pretty words are for wedding toasts and obituary columns nobody reads.

The bastards in charge, yeah, those glossy-eyed suits who smell like cologne and dead wallets, they’re gnawing on our rights, ripping them like bar peanuts, freedom of speech, freedom to gather, freedom to pray, all gone down their greedy throats.

Like vultures at a roadside deer. and you know vultures don’t wipe their mouths.

They see something that makes ‘em twitch, they draft a goddamn law, issue an “executive order,” slam the lid shut. weakness does that. fear does that. a limp prick wrapped in a $3,000 suit does that.

So who’s to blame? them, sure. but more the herd. that’d be us. the bloated, TV-fed herd snoring on the couch, beer in one hand, remote in the other, pissing away the last scraps of freedom.

Here's the Gandhi Math Algorithm. do the numbers. a dozen filthy rich pricks and their shiny-shoed errand boys can’t hold down 300 million if 300 million decide to stand up and roar into the smoke-stained ceiling, “fuck you!”

That's the math. that's the weapon. not bullets, not bombs. the raw chorus of "fuck you!" drilled into a tyrant's skull while he gulps his last cognac, hearing it echo as the glass slips from his hand.

History’s gutter is full of ‘em. emperors, Führers, kings, presidents, all the titled shits who never learned math. they end up sprawled face-down, sobbing in a pool of their own piss.

Congratulations Ryken Monahan of Murfreesboro, Tennessee. It's too late to delete all of your social media accounts now. Keep that same racist energy before you knew you were being recorded

I’m cryin they found out his name already and he started deleting his social media. This Tennessee trash tried to pretend he was playing peek-a-boo with a child or something when he saw he was being videoed.

These N'r defenders are confusing freedom of speech with freedom from consequences. The government isn’t arresting people for using racial slurs. Other citizens are choosing not to support, hire, or associate with someone after hearing what they said. That’s their freedom too.

"…the most potent threat to free speech comes not from the communist Chinese or the Bolshevistic Russian oligarchs, the Marxist dictators of South America, or the Islamofascists of the Middle East. It is emanating from the far-Left of the Democrat Party…"

ORIGINAL CONTENT: https://www.undergroundusa.com/p/free-speech-under-attack-the-marxists

READ, SUBSCRIBE, SHARE & EDUCATE: PROTECT FREE SPEECH

—AND NOW THEY’RE TERRIFIED

Once upon a time—by which I mean just a couple of years ago—you could get banned off the entire internet for saying something that, in retrospect, turned out to be 100% correct.

COVID origins? Banned. Election concerns? Banned. Saying men shouldn’t box women? Nuclear-level banned.

The Most Humble Blog wasn’t immune to the digital gulag, either. My entire Medium account—which I created about a year ago—was flagged, reported, and permanently nuked for violating the delicate sensibilities of the same people who spend their weekends dressed like discount Madonna impersonators.

I tried to acquiesce. A decision I’m still ashamed of.

I tried not rocking the boat, at least a little.

I thought, maybe, if I wasn’t too loud, if I just toned it down 5%, these lipstick-bearded hall monitors would let me exist.

But it was too late.

The mob had already decided. It didn’t matter if I changed the phrasing, softened the wording, or used gentler language—because it was never about the words.

It was about eliminating the wrong thinkers.

And in case there was any lingering illusion that these platforms were “neutral,” the dismissive response from Medium’s staff confirmed everything I needed to know:

They weren’t just tolerating censorship; they were leading it.

They weren’t punishing bad behavior; they were enforcing ideology.

They weren’t just banning “harmful speech”; they were shutting up anyone who didn't fall in line.

It didn’t even matter that they were the ones who sought me out.

It didn’t matter that they came into my inbox spewing the most profane, unhinged, sexually explicit insults they could string together.

It didn’t matter that they violated every rule on the site.

They had the backing of the moderators.

Because this was never about rules. It was about who gets to speak.

THE GREAT SILENCING—AND THE RISE OF THE RESISTANCE

For years, censorship was camouflaged as virtue.

It wasn’t “banning opposing views”; it was stopping hate. It wasn’t “erasing dissenting voices”; it was protecting marginalized people. It wasn’t “crushing free speech”; it was curating a safe space.

And if you dared question the censors?

You were labeled a menace to society faster than a blue-haired Twitter addict could say, “Report and block.”

The problem? The lies didn’t hold up.

The same experts who silenced COVID skeptics were later forced to admit that lab-leak theories were “plausible.”

The same tech giants who buried election concerns suddenly stopped banning people for asking questions.

The same people who claimed "speech is violence" suddenly had nothing to say when the violence was against people who disagreed with them.

And then, something happened that completely shattered their monopoly on the conversation:

Trump got back into the picture.

And love him or hate him, he did something no other politician had the balls to do:

He put these censor-happy pussies on notice.

Unless there’s a proveable direct threat against a person, people should be able to say whatever the fuck they want. Period.

Not “if it aligns with corporate-approved narratives.” Not “if it doesn’t hurt anyone’s feelings.” Not “if it’s deemed acceptable by a bunch of unwashed Twitch moderators.”

Whatever. The fuck. They want.

And suddenly?

The entire censorship machine started backpedaling.

NOW THEY’RE SCARED—AND THEY SHOULD BE

Let’s be real. These people never believed in free speech.

They believed in speech control.

They thrived under the old system—where they could run around platforms, flagging people they didn’t like, getting them deplatformed, demonetized, and erased from existence.

But now?

Now they’re absolutely terrified.

Why?

Because they know they can’t win without silencing the opposition.

Because they know they don’t have the numbers.

Because they know that without biased moderators holding their hands, their arguments fall apart faster than a Dollar Store wig in a rainstorm.

And for the first time in years, these people are realizing:

They don’t own the internet anymore.

They don’t get to dictate what’s “allowed” anymore.

They don’t get to be the arbiters of truth anymore.

The free speech Renaissance is here, and they are shitting bricks.

WHAT COMES NEXT?

The fight isn’t over.

These platforms aren’t suddenly pro-free speech out of some moral awakening.

No, no, no.

They’re only backing off because:

They got exposed.

Their narrative fell apart.

And people stopped being afraid.

But don’t think for a second they aren’t waiting for their chance to clamp down again.

The second they think they can regain control, they’ll try it again.

Which is why now, more than ever, you have to:

🔥 Speak your mind. 🔥 Refuse to self-censor. 🔥 Push the conversation forward, no matter how “taboo” it is.

Because the second we go quiet?

They win.

And fuck that.

🔥 REBLOG if you refuse to be silenced.

We filed our opposition to CTIA’s petition asking the Supreme Court to review the 9th Circuit’s conclusion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with Berkeley’s health and safety warning about cell phones. Here’s a clue to why no court in this FOUR YEAR litigation has yet to agree with CTIA — it’s effectively the same warning that the FCC requires manufacturers to include in every cell phone manual, just applied to retailers, not manufacturers, and no one, ever, has challenged that “compelled speech” by the FCC, including CTIA. You can read the opposition here.

But here’s a pro-tip for anyone trying to understand what this case is about. The issue before the Court has nothing — let me repeat, NOTHING — to do with whether cell phones cause cancer or any other harm to individuals. The issue — and really, the only issue — is whether a local jurisdiction must survive intermediate First Amendment scrutiny before it may require a health and safety warning. 

That sounds a bit law-geek-like, but it is critically important. This is a classic example of what Elena Kagan was describing when she charged conservatives with “weaponizing” the First Amendment. Because the single and most obvious consequence of such a NEW rule would be exactly what conservatives want here — the end of the practical ability for local jurisdictions to regulate through mandatory warnings. This is, as we’ve said from the start of this case, the ghost of Lochner in the guise of the First Amendment. 

You may not like safety warnings. I share a skeptical view about the utility of many of them. But never in the Supreme Court’s history has it applied intermediate First Amendment review to a mandatory health and safety warning. That’s why, in the last case where conservatives were trying to weaponize the First Amendment in this way, Justice Thomas wrote that the Court did  “not question the legality of health and safety warnings long considered permissible.” National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, 138 S. Ct. 2361, 2376 (2018). Yet here is the CTIA asking the Court to create a new First Amendment barrier to something “long considered permissible.”