1 00:00:17,320 --> 00:00:20,160 Speaker 1: And we are back with another edition of the Federalist 2 00:00:20,239 --> 00:00:24,440 Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle, Senior Elections correspondent at the Federalist, 3 00:00:24,559 --> 00:00:29,359 and your experience shirpa on today's quest for Knowledge. As always, 4 00:00:29,359 --> 00:00:32,600 you can email the show at radio at the Federalist 5 00:00:32,679 --> 00:00:37,000 dot com, follow us on x at FDR LST, make 6 00:00:37,039 --> 00:00:39,960 sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcast, and of 7 00:00:40,000 --> 00:00:43,200 course to the premium version of our website as well. 8 00:00:43,679 --> 00:00:47,079 Our guest today is Ryan Banger, Senior vice president for 9 00:00:47,240 --> 00:00:51,560 Strategic Initiatives and Special Counsel to the President at Alliance 10 00:00:51,759 --> 00:00:56,359 Defending Freedom. Much to talk about on the liberty front 11 00:00:56,920 --> 00:00:59,759 this afternoon, and Ryan, thank you so much for joining 12 00:00:59,799 --> 00:01:01,640 us in this edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. 13 00:01:02,119 --> 00:01:04,239 Speaker 2: Well, Matt, it's my pleasure to be here. I'm a 14 00:01:04,359 --> 00:01:07,959 huge fan of the Federalist, have always enjoyed listening and reading, 15 00:01:08,079 --> 00:01:09,560 and it's a pleasure to be with you. 16 00:01:09,719 --> 00:01:12,040 Speaker 1: Well, the feeling is mutual. As I said before we 17 00:01:12,480 --> 00:01:15,680 started the podcast, you folks have always been busy. It 18 00:01:15,719 --> 00:01:18,920 just seems you're busier than ever these days because there 19 00:01:18,959 --> 00:01:22,159 are so many battles for liberty, there are so many 20 00:01:22,280 --> 00:01:27,359 overreaching arms in the government, and I know that this 21 00:01:27,599 --> 00:01:30,120 is a new era. There has been a check on 22 00:01:31,319 --> 00:01:34,599 a lot of the abuses we had seen for the 23 00:01:34,640 --> 00:01:39,519 four previous years, but the battles do go on eventually. 24 00:01:39,799 --> 00:01:42,200 I later on in the podcast, I want to talk 25 00:01:42,239 --> 00:01:47,239 about what is happening in Europe in the European Union 26 00:01:47,359 --> 00:01:51,040 that should be a red alert for those living in 27 00:01:51,079 --> 00:01:55,439 this brave new world of technology. We'll get to that 28 00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:57,560 in just a bit, but I wanted to talk about 29 00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:01,040 some of the cases you've been working on, and I 30 00:02:01,079 --> 00:02:05,400 think some more of the high profile cases, including the 31 00:02:05,439 --> 00:02:09,479 Babylon B. For those of us, particularly in the conservative 32 00:02:09,479 --> 00:02:12,560 movement in America, we're well aware of the satirical website 33 00:02:13,199 --> 00:02:16,680 the Babylon B and a Hawaii resident are suing the 34 00:02:16,759 --> 00:02:20,599 state of Hawaii after it passed a law that censors 35 00:02:20,719 --> 00:02:27,439 online content, including political satire and parody. You know, this 36 00:02:27,520 --> 00:02:30,400 is one of many stories, Ryan, one of many issues 37 00:02:30,439 --> 00:02:34,599 where we see again the left simply does not have 38 00:02:34,680 --> 00:02:42,120 a sense of humor, and it's a real problem for 39 00:02:42,439 --> 00:02:45,960 the First Amendment, a real salt on First Amendment. What 40 00:02:46,319 --> 00:02:48,280 is the case about and where does it stand today? 41 00:02:49,599 --> 00:02:52,719 Speaker 2: That's right, man, and Hawaii passed this law last year 42 00:02:52,719 --> 00:02:56,319 in twenty twenty four. It's entitled S. Twenty six eighty seven, 43 00:02:56,879 --> 00:03:01,120 and it imposes criminal and civil penalties for posting what 44 00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:04,439 they call digitally modified content that, in the words of 45 00:03:04,479 --> 00:03:08,159 the law, risks harming the reputation or electoral prospects of 46 00:03:08,159 --> 00:03:11,439 a candidate in an election or changing the voting behavior 47 00:03:11,479 --> 00:03:13,639 of citizens in an election. Now think about that for 48 00:03:13,680 --> 00:03:15,840 a minute. Isn't the whole point of a campaign to 49 00:03:16,000 --> 00:03:18,759 harm the electoral prospects of a candidate or to change 50 00:03:18,759 --> 00:03:20,639 the voting behavior or voters in an election. 51 00:03:20,919 --> 00:03:24,199 Speaker 1: Hey, that's my America, buddy, right there. That's that's the 52 00:03:24,240 --> 00:03:25,199 country I live in. 53 00:03:25,360 --> 00:03:29,719 Speaker 2: Yes, like outlawing politics basically. So this this law is 54 00:03:29,840 --> 00:03:32,759 very similar to laws that were passed in California about 55 00:03:32,759 --> 00:03:37,080 the same time that did functionally the same same thing. 56 00:03:37,599 --> 00:03:40,439 And the California laws in this Hawaii law they came 57 00:03:40,599 --> 00:03:45,199 they came about shortly after there were some digitally modified 58 00:03:45,360 --> 00:03:51,039 ads that were parodying Kamala Harris's announcement of her run 59 00:03:51,080 --> 00:03:54,039 for president. And these ads. You know, we've all seen 60 00:03:54,159 --> 00:03:56,759 types of ads like this now where AI is used 61 00:03:57,120 --> 00:04:01,120 to modify the voice of someone to cause them to 62 00:04:01,120 --> 00:04:06,039 say something on a digital image or a digital video 63 00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:09,280 that they just didn't say, And these things are often 64 00:04:09,520 --> 00:04:13,680 very identifiable as parody or satire. It's not difficult to 65 00:04:13,759 --> 00:04:17,079 tease out that this is not serious. And yet the 66 00:04:18,120 --> 00:04:21,480 lawmakers in California and Hawaii are so distrustful of their 67 00:04:21,519 --> 00:04:24,800 own citizens that they decided to pass these laws to 68 00:04:25,000 --> 00:04:29,519 make it unlawful to engage in good faith satire or parody. Now, 69 00:04:29,560 --> 00:04:31,279 there are some ways you can do it, but you 70 00:04:31,360 --> 00:04:34,720 have to place these giant disclaimers on the satire parody, 71 00:04:35,000 --> 00:04:38,399 calling it satire parody, which of course ruins the entire 72 00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:42,079 point of satire and parody, so it functionally makes it 73 00:04:42,120 --> 00:04:46,240 impossible to engage in this sort of time honored exercise 74 00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:49,759 of First Amendment freedom, and in particular in the political 75 00:04:50,120 --> 00:04:55,639 and electioneering contest context, where First Amendment freedoms are absolutely essential. 76 00:04:55,879 --> 00:04:58,480 Speaker 1: Well, how many times have we seen in American politics 77 00:04:58,519 --> 00:05:02,519 that politicians don't need any help ruining their reputation as 78 00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:05,519 they do it all on their own. But this really is, 79 00:05:05,759 --> 00:05:11,439 I mean, and it's again uncharted territory. This stuff has 80 00:05:11,480 --> 00:05:14,800 really popped up over the last couple of years, particularly 81 00:05:14,839 --> 00:05:19,199 with AI technology. What is the argument that folks in 82 00:05:19,240 --> 00:05:24,759 Hawaii and California have for trying to suppress this kind 83 00:05:24,800 --> 00:05:26,279 of political speech. 84 00:05:27,759 --> 00:05:30,800 Speaker 2: Well, I mean, the argument is effectively that this kind 85 00:05:30,800 --> 00:05:37,480 of speech amounts to a type of false advertising, false statement, 86 00:05:37,959 --> 00:05:41,519 or even defamation. And their argument is that you're appropriating 87 00:05:41,519 --> 00:05:49,160 these people's images and likenesses to spread effectively false intofammatory content. 88 00:05:49,199 --> 00:05:53,600 Now that is not at all what's happening with satire 89 00:05:53,759 --> 00:05:57,439 and parody. Satire and parody is really it's a time 90 00:05:57,560 --> 00:06:04,480 honored medium. It's something that American journalists, American satirists, humorists 91 00:06:04,480 --> 00:06:08,439 have engaged in throughout the history of our nation. It 92 00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:14,360 is a fundamental aspect of our political tradition. It is 93 00:06:14,439 --> 00:06:16,920 not a type of defamation. It is not a type 94 00:06:16,920 --> 00:06:24,399 of false advertising or false statement. It is intentionally humorous. 95 00:06:24,519 --> 00:06:30,639 It's an intentionally humorous medium that deploys speaks or language 96 00:06:30,680 --> 00:06:34,920 that everyone knows is not accurate to critique, to draw 97 00:06:35,000 --> 00:06:39,319 out contrasts. This is simply the opposite of defamation or 98 00:06:39,360 --> 00:06:42,720 false statement. So it's this is a really dishonest argument. 99 00:06:42,879 --> 00:06:46,600 Was really going on here, quite frankly, is these lawmakers 100 00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:50,399 fear critique, They fear criticism, and they want to stamp 101 00:06:50,439 --> 00:06:51,759 it out wherever they can. 102 00:06:52,680 --> 00:06:55,680 Speaker 1: Is this nanny state stuff too? I mean, I think 103 00:06:55,680 --> 00:06:59,720 about this. This goes way back, many many moons ago. 104 00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:04,839 I was a snot nosed student at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. 105 00:07:05,279 --> 00:07:09,480 I remember meeting up with some friends in Madison, Wisconsin, 106 00:07:09,600 --> 00:07:12,959 and that is where the Old Onion was published. It 107 00:07:13,040 --> 00:07:14,560 used to be funny at one time, by the way, 108 00:07:14,680 --> 00:07:16,920 I don't know if you know that, but you know, 109 00:07:17,040 --> 00:07:22,079 satirical newspaper and had some very funny stuff in there, 110 00:07:22,160 --> 00:07:24,920 some stuff that the average person just reading would say, 111 00:07:25,040 --> 00:07:31,600 this is ridiculous. It is obviously satire, obviously parody. But 112 00:07:32,920 --> 00:07:37,839 one of my friends significant others at the time turned 113 00:07:37,879 --> 00:07:41,160 to me while we were at a restaurant reading the 114 00:07:41,199 --> 00:07:46,800 Onion and said, is this for real? And so I 115 00:07:46,839 --> 00:07:52,839 think that there are you know, bureaucrats and politicians, certainly 116 00:07:52,839 --> 00:07:57,240 in California that at least tried to push the notion 117 00:07:58,079 --> 00:08:02,160 that the paternalistic or in their case, maybe I don't know, 118 00:08:02,279 --> 00:08:05,879 the maternalistic notion, whatever the case may be, that they're 119 00:08:05,879 --> 00:08:13,519 trying to protect the voter, the citizen from such harm. 120 00:08:13,639 --> 00:08:17,079 Speaker 2: That's actually quite that's very similar to what was argued 121 00:08:17,480 --> 00:08:20,560 in a piece of litigation, Coles versus Bonte, which is 122 00:08:20,600 --> 00:08:24,240 associated with our case. Very early on when the California 123 00:08:24,319 --> 00:08:28,920 law was passed, it was challenged. It was challenged by 124 00:08:28,959 --> 00:08:34,080 some podcasters, and a district court in California found that 125 00:08:34,159 --> 00:08:37,399 one of the California laws violated the First Amendment. And 126 00:08:37,440 --> 00:08:39,679 I thought what the court said was very telling because 127 00:08:39,679 --> 00:08:42,399 it goes right to what you just said, this notion 128 00:08:42,559 --> 00:08:46,559 that the government needs to protect citizens against, in the 129 00:08:46,600 --> 00:08:50,600 words of the California law, materially deceptive content. What the 130 00:08:50,600 --> 00:08:52,759 court said was, and I'm going to quote from the opinion, 131 00:08:53,159 --> 00:08:55,960 it said that the Supreme Court as issue precedent that 132 00:08:56,039 --> 00:09:00,919 illuminates that while a well founded fear of digitallypulated media 133 00:09:01,480 --> 00:09:05,240 may be justified, this fear does not give legislators unbridled 134 00:09:05,279 --> 00:09:10,039 license to bulldoze over the long standing tradition of critique, parity, 135 00:09:10,039 --> 00:09:12,960 and satire protected by the First Amendment. What the Court 136 00:09:13,000 --> 00:09:17,559 is effectively saying there is the First Amendment provides citizens 137 00:09:17,559 --> 00:09:22,559 with a wide birth to receive, consume, evaluate, read, and 138 00:09:22,720 --> 00:09:27,159 understand content for themselves. We have a we have put 139 00:09:27,159 --> 00:09:29,440 our thumb on the scale here in the United States, 140 00:09:29,720 --> 00:09:32,120 and we put our thumb on the scale of freedom, 141 00:09:32,759 --> 00:09:38,639 individual freedom to consume to evaluate information for ourself. We 142 00:09:38,759 --> 00:09:42,159 don't want the government getting in the way of that process. 143 00:09:42,440 --> 00:09:46,799 And what these bills do is they simply disrupt that 144 00:09:46,919 --> 00:09:50,360 balance in a way that offends the core tenets of 145 00:09:50,399 --> 00:09:53,440 the First Amendment. So, yes, there may be some concerns 146 00:09:53,480 --> 00:09:57,039 about deceptive content. Someone's always going to be fooled. But 147 00:09:57,159 --> 00:10:00,399 in the balance, the First Amendment protects the right of 148 00:10:00,399 --> 00:10:03,960 citizens to make that judgment for themselves, and that's what's 149 00:10:03,960 --> 00:10:04,639 at stake here. 150 00:10:04,879 --> 00:10:07,639 Speaker 1: It really is amazing to me, Ryan, and I know 151 00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:12,279 that this isn't a new point or some groundbreaking perspective here, 152 00:10:12,279 --> 00:10:16,840 but it seems to me that the left in this country, 153 00:10:17,399 --> 00:10:21,159 the left really in the Western world, has turned into 154 00:10:21,360 --> 00:10:24,320 what it accused the right of doing. And I think, 155 00:10:24,879 --> 00:10:28,279 don't you think that the Babylon b case is exactly 156 00:10:28,960 --> 00:10:30,879 representative or demonstrative of that. 157 00:10:32,320 --> 00:10:34,000 Speaker 2: I think it's very much so. And I think you 158 00:10:34,080 --> 00:10:37,759 put your finger on something that has really become true, 159 00:10:37,799 --> 00:10:40,759 and that is, for a long time, the political left 160 00:10:41,159 --> 00:10:45,399 has positioned itself as the guardian of freedom of speech, 161 00:10:45,480 --> 00:10:49,600 always accusing the political right of conservatives being the ones 162 00:10:49,639 --> 00:10:53,120 who want to stamp out free discourse. And those two 163 00:10:53,159 --> 00:10:56,960 positions have changed dramatically. If they ever were true, they're 164 00:10:57,039 --> 00:11:01,679 certainly not true today. The guardians of free speech, the 165 00:11:01,759 --> 00:11:05,320 guardians of free discourse, the champions of the First Amendment 166 00:11:05,720 --> 00:11:08,879 are really on the right. They're conservatives. I mean, look 167 00:11:08,879 --> 00:11:11,519 at what President Trump did when he took office on 168 00:11:11,639 --> 00:11:14,840 January twentieth. Right out of the gate, he issued an 169 00:11:14,840 --> 00:11:19,320 executive order restoring freedom of speech and ending federal censorship, 170 00:11:19,399 --> 00:11:23,639 calling out federal censors for the pressure that they had 171 00:11:23,720 --> 00:11:26,240 placed on private companies during the course of the Biden 172 00:11:26,279 --> 00:11:32,080 administration to tamp down, eliminate, and throttle speech on issues 173 00:11:32,080 --> 00:11:35,759 as important as COVID nineteen policy or election interference. And 174 00:11:35,799 --> 00:11:40,519 so you see here this is a prime example of 175 00:11:41,039 --> 00:11:44,480 the conservative side of the political ledger standing up and 176 00:11:44,639 --> 00:11:47,960 championing free speech against abuses by the left. 177 00:11:49,000 --> 00:11:52,159 Speaker 1: Yeah, no doubt about it. And you mentioned I mean, 178 00:11:52,360 --> 00:11:55,720 and that is exactly what all of this comes down to. 179 00:11:56,399 --> 00:12:00,600 It should be a wide birth. That's what courts have 180 00:12:01,120 --> 00:12:04,799 continually recognized. I hope they continued. Not all courts, but 181 00:12:05,159 --> 00:12:09,720 most have continued to recognize it that the First Amendment 182 00:12:09,919 --> 00:12:15,399 that Americans practicing in these areas should be given a 183 00:12:15,440 --> 00:12:18,639 wide berth, a wide berth like Larry Craig, a former 184 00:12:18,759 --> 00:12:23,000 politician from Washington, enjoyed and the airplane bathroom stalls. 185 00:12:23,360 --> 00:12:25,000 Speaker 2: I think you have to be a certain age to 186 00:12:25,720 --> 00:12:28,360 capture that joke. But yes, I know of what you speak. 187 00:12:28,720 --> 00:12:30,279 Speaker 1: That was a lot of build up to get to 188 00:12:30,399 --> 00:12:35,080 Larry Craig, wasn't it. I'm sorry, I just I you know. 189 00:12:35,159 --> 00:12:39,679 And again, these podcasts they're you know, they're widely edited, 190 00:12:39,799 --> 00:12:42,960 so this is you get the full mechanism behind it all. 191 00:12:43,320 --> 00:12:46,600 This case in California, by the way, there's supposed to 192 00:12:46,639 --> 00:12:47,879 be a ruling soon, is there not? 193 00:12:48,840 --> 00:12:50,799 Speaker 2: There is. We're looking forward to getting a ruling. We 194 00:12:50,919 --> 00:12:53,639 argued this case on the fifth of August, so about 195 00:12:53,639 --> 00:12:57,799 a week ago, and we're anticipating a ruling from the court, hopefully. 196 00:12:57,480 --> 00:12:59,960 Speaker 1: Sim very good. Where do you think it's all had? 197 00:13:01,039 --> 00:13:02,879 Speaker 2: I think we're going to win. I really do think 198 00:13:02,919 --> 00:13:07,120 that this is an instance where the free speech violation, 199 00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:10,919 the First Amendment violation, is so apparent that it's going 200 00:13:10,960 --> 00:13:13,639 to be very difficult for the court not to spot 201 00:13:13,639 --> 00:13:15,840 it and not to call it out for what it is. 202 00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:18,679 Speaker 1: This is really a Gavin Newsom legacy thing. And now, 203 00:13:18,840 --> 00:13:21,679 obviously it takes the legislature to put this through. But 204 00:13:22,039 --> 00:13:27,159 didn't Newsome really hammer this. Hasn't he hammered this for 205 00:13:27,200 --> 00:13:29,519 the last couple of years he did. 206 00:13:29,559 --> 00:13:32,879 Speaker 2: In fact, these two laws in California that we are challenging, 207 00:13:33,480 --> 00:13:37,440 both of both were laws that he demanded the California 208 00:13:37,480 --> 00:13:41,600 Assembly pass in the wake of the Reagan USA video. 209 00:13:41,679 --> 00:13:47,200 This was the satirical video that Matt Kamala Harris's campaign announcements. 210 00:13:47,679 --> 00:13:51,639 He really put his name and his weight behind these 211 00:13:51,679 --> 00:13:53,600 bills and demanded the Baby Bass. 212 00:13:57,080 --> 00:13:59,480 Speaker 3: Here's what happens when you pick winners and losers in 213 00:13:59,519 --> 00:14:02,559 a free market economy. The Watchdot on Wall Street podcast 214 00:14:02,639 --> 00:14:05,600 with Chris Markowski. Every day Chris helps unpack the connection 215 00:14:05,720 --> 00:14:08,480 between politics and the economy and how it affects your wallet. 216 00:14:08,639 --> 00:14:13,600 Biden gave car manufacturer Rivian six billion dollars. Now Rivian 217 00:14:13,679 --> 00:14:17,320 is losing forty one thousand dollars for every car sold. 218 00:14:17,360 --> 00:14:19,919 That is not a business model. Whether it's happening in 219 00:14:20,000 --> 00:14:22,399 DC or down on Wall Street, it's affecting you financially. 220 00:14:22,480 --> 00:14:24,840 Be informed. Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast 221 00:14:24,840 --> 00:14:27,519 with Chris Markowski on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get 222 00:14:27,519 --> 00:14:58,919 your podcasts. 223 00:15:49,440 --> 00:15:55,159 Speaker 1: Let's look at the banking in America. ADF has been 224 00:15:55,240 --> 00:15:57,879 on the front lines of that, working with the White 225 00:15:57,919 --> 00:16:03,320 House on the Executive Order on that front, leading the 226 00:16:03,440 --> 00:16:09,159 charge really for years in the States on the banking laws. 227 00:16:09,200 --> 00:16:13,559 But one client in particular, wanted to talk about Indigenous 228 00:16:13,600 --> 00:16:22,039 Advance Ministries was debanked by the Bank of America. Again, 229 00:16:22,240 --> 00:16:28,039 this all stems back to some Obama era policies by 230 00:16:28,080 --> 00:16:31,519 a quasi government agency. I mean that really led all 231 00:16:31,559 --> 00:16:36,240 of this in the name of consumer protection. Ultimately, it 232 00:16:36,279 --> 00:16:40,679 appeared to a lot of us who you know, follow 233 00:16:40,759 --> 00:16:42,840 these things and a lot of us that don't follow 234 00:16:42,879 --> 00:16:48,000 these closely. Hey, they're playing favorites here. And that is 235 00:16:48,080 --> 00:16:52,679 exactly what we see the government working once again with 236 00:16:52,960 --> 00:16:58,840 private businesses or demanding that private businesses do their dirty 237 00:16:58,879 --> 00:17:03,039 work in opposition to the Constitution. Where is that case 238 00:17:03,120 --> 00:17:04,960 and where do you see it all going? 239 00:17:06,160 --> 00:17:10,039 Speaker 2: Right? Well, you're mentioning Indigenous Advanced Ministries. That's a nonprofit 240 00:17:10,119 --> 00:17:13,880 run by a wonderful man named Steve happ in Tennessee, 241 00:17:14,440 --> 00:17:19,480 and they serve literally serve orphans and widows in Kampala Uganda. 242 00:17:19,799 --> 00:17:22,000 I mean this is they're doing the Lord's work in 243 00:17:22,079 --> 00:17:25,839 every sense of the word. And what Steve learned in 244 00:17:25,839 --> 00:17:28,039 twenty twenty three, as he was packing his bags and 245 00:17:28,079 --> 00:17:32,319 about to leave for another trip to Uganda to help 246 00:17:32,359 --> 00:17:34,720 the ministry to serve these people who are in need, 247 00:17:35,119 --> 00:17:38,319 he learned from Bank of America that his bank accounts 248 00:17:38,319 --> 00:17:40,599 have been canceled. They were no longer going to do 249 00:17:40,640 --> 00:17:43,480 business with Indigenous Advance. And what they told him was 250 00:17:43,519 --> 00:17:47,240 they didn't want to do business with a organization of 251 00:17:47,720 --> 00:17:52,960 Indigenous Advance's quote business type and that i AM had 252 00:17:53,079 --> 00:17:56,440 that Indigenous Advance had exceeded the bank's quote risk tolerance. 253 00:17:56,519 --> 00:18:00,680 So apparently it's very risky serving orphans and widows GANDHA 254 00:18:01,039 --> 00:18:04,000 and what we see you mentioned this earlier, these de 255 00:18:04,200 --> 00:18:07,720 banking instances, you never get a straight answer from these banks. 256 00:18:07,720 --> 00:18:11,400 We had a very similar situation arise right before that 257 00:18:11,759 --> 00:18:15,599 with Ambassador Sam Brownback and his group NCRF where they 258 00:18:15,640 --> 00:18:19,200 were de banked by J. P. Morgan Chase under very 259 00:18:19,240 --> 00:18:24,160 similar shady justifications. And what we find is oftentimes these 260 00:18:24,200 --> 00:18:27,279 banks are responding to demands that they engage in an 261 00:18:27,319 --> 00:18:31,480 analysis of what's called reputational risk and Reputational risk is 262 00:18:31,519 --> 00:18:34,920 a factor that federal regulators have asked banks to take 263 00:18:34,960 --> 00:18:37,440 into account when they're doing business with customers. And this 264 00:18:37,559 --> 00:18:42,160 is really anything that could bring public disapproval on the bank, 265 00:18:42,519 --> 00:18:45,960 up to and including public disapproval of the politics or 266 00:18:46,119 --> 00:18:48,799 viewpoints of customers doing business with the banks, So as 267 00:18:48,839 --> 00:18:52,359 an open invitation for banks to engage in censorship, fully 268 00:18:52,400 --> 00:18:56,000 as an urging or prodding to these banks to engage 269 00:18:56,000 --> 00:19:00,359 in censorship based on the viewpoints of their customers. And 270 00:19:00,599 --> 00:19:04,240 it's really a huge problem. And we were very grateful 271 00:19:04,240 --> 00:19:07,440 to President Trump who just last week announced an executive 272 00:19:07,559 --> 00:19:11,279 order calling on federal regulators to stop using this kind 273 00:19:11,279 --> 00:19:14,559 of reputational risk formulation and get back to the business 274 00:19:14,559 --> 00:19:17,200 of doing banking based on the merits, not based on 275 00:19:17,279 --> 00:19:22,039 ideolog iological viewpoints. It's our position at eightyf that there 276 00:19:22,079 --> 00:19:25,839 should be no religious or political test just to open 277 00:19:25,839 --> 00:19:28,680 a bank account. And I think that President Trump as 278 00:19:28,759 --> 00:19:30,839 well in his way to making that a reality. 279 00:19:31,039 --> 00:19:33,559 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's not just your viewpoint. I think that is 280 00:19:33,640 --> 00:19:37,680 the Constitution, isn't it. I mean, isn't that at the 281 00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,759 core of a lot of different concepts in the Constitution. 282 00:19:43,079 --> 00:19:47,000 The equal treatment first and foremost, and that you can't 283 00:19:47,000 --> 00:19:51,279 have a litmus test on one business or another if 284 00:19:51,319 --> 00:19:55,000 that business is engaged in legal activities. And I can 285 00:19:55,039 --> 00:20:01,799 think of nothing more legal than helping orphans in something 286 00:20:01,920 --> 00:20:07,920 I'm sure that Zoran Donnie would appreciate. 287 00:20:07,359 --> 00:20:10,279 Speaker 2: As well in New York City. 288 00:20:10,319 --> 00:20:13,240 Speaker 1: In New York City, yes, well, it really is. 289 00:20:14,160 --> 00:20:16,799 Speaker 2: It's really something to behold. And you're right at the 290 00:20:16,839 --> 00:20:19,400 Constitution if it condemns anything in the First Amendment's a 291 00:20:19,480 --> 00:20:23,240 viewpoint discrimination by the government. But this is not the 292 00:20:23,279 --> 00:20:27,880 only example of the government using its regulatory heft to 293 00:20:27,920 --> 00:20:31,559 push banks into engaging and highly questionable behavior. We look 294 00:20:31,559 --> 00:20:34,440 at what happened just last year with the House Selects 295 00:20:34,440 --> 00:20:37,880 Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Government at least a report 296 00:20:38,319 --> 00:20:43,160 detailing how Treasury Department officials and federal regulators pressure financial 297 00:20:43,160 --> 00:20:47,240 institutions like Bank of America, which debanked Indigenous Advance, to 298 00:20:47,359 --> 00:20:51,799 surveil American's private financial data. I mean, there were reams 299 00:20:51,839 --> 00:20:56,480 of reams of emails, documents, reports cited by the House 300 00:20:56,720 --> 00:21:01,200 subcommittee showing that these uh, these regulars were leaning on 301 00:21:02,000 --> 00:21:06,880 large banks to surveil customers who were doing such nefarious 302 00:21:06,920 --> 00:21:09,799 things as making purchases from Dick's Sporting Goods or Bass 303 00:21:09,839 --> 00:21:13,279 Pro shops or Cabellas in and around the DC area 304 00:21:13,799 --> 00:21:16,039 around the time of January sixth, and it just a 305 00:21:16,079 --> 00:21:22,400 complete financial dragnet on transactions of venicent Americans simply going 306 00:21:22,440 --> 00:21:25,720 about their lives purchasing things at sporting goods stores. And 307 00:21:25,799 --> 00:21:29,200 yet this is what the Treasury Department was directing these 308 00:21:29,240 --> 00:21:31,920 banks to do. And in fact, the report also detailed 309 00:21:32,240 --> 00:21:35,759 that the Treasury Department shared a report from this group 310 00:21:35,839 --> 00:21:39,440 called the Institute of Strategic Dialogue with ISD, which is 311 00:21:39,480 --> 00:21:42,960 a very left wing group out out of Europe, which 312 00:21:43,079 --> 00:21:46,960 was detailing various nonprofit groups as threats to national security, 313 00:21:47,319 --> 00:21:50,640 one of which was adf our own group, my group, 314 00:21:51,400 --> 00:21:54,960 and telling banks to be wary of transactions involving these groups. 315 00:21:54,960 --> 00:21:58,279 And so it was just really a grotesque abuse of 316 00:21:58,440 --> 00:22:04,039 federal regulatory effort authority to strong arm banks into engaging 317 00:22:04,039 --> 00:22:11,759 in ideological, ideological, political, even faith based discrimination in ways 318 00:22:11,839 --> 00:22:15,559 that abuse the Constitution. So it was really shocking what 319 00:22:15,599 --> 00:22:17,720 was happening. I know a lot of people will say, 320 00:22:17,920 --> 00:22:20,279 at least people on the left will say, this debanking 321 00:22:20,359 --> 00:22:24,400 concern it's really artificial, it's made up well it's not. 322 00:22:24,799 --> 00:22:27,200 All you have to do is read the House Selects 323 00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:32,319 Subcommittee Committee's report on the events that took place around 324 00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:35,279 the financial dragnet around January sixth to find out exactly 325 00:22:35,279 --> 00:22:38,960 what was happening. So this de banking Executive Order is 326 00:22:39,000 --> 00:22:40,920 badly needed, and I think it's kind of be a 327 00:22:40,960 --> 00:22:42,880 relief not just to those who are at risk of 328 00:22:42,880 --> 00:22:44,279 being de banked, it's going to be a relief to 329 00:22:44,319 --> 00:22:47,559 banking institutions who know the policy of the federal government 330 00:22:47,640 --> 00:22:49,680 is no longer to lean on them to engage in 331 00:22:49,720 --> 00:22:50,640 overt discrimination. 332 00:22:51,119 --> 00:22:55,279 Speaker 1: It is absolutely unconscionable what a lot of Americans unfortunately 333 00:22:55,279 --> 00:22:59,839 have gone through in the so called name of consumer 334 00:23:00,119 --> 00:23:05,480 protection or in some cases national security. Our guest today 335 00:23:05,599 --> 00:23:09,480 is Ryan Banger, Senior vice president for Strategic Initiatives and 336 00:23:09,559 --> 00:23:14,599 Special Counsel to the President at Alliance Defending Freedom. And 337 00:23:14,960 --> 00:23:18,640 I guess that Ryan really goes back to the point 338 00:23:19,720 --> 00:23:23,400 for those living under the delusion that this is no 339 00:23:23,519 --> 00:23:28,319 big deal. It's not really hurting anybody. Your clients and 340 00:23:28,640 --> 00:23:32,720 many we know out there had a very difficult time 341 00:23:33,160 --> 00:23:38,359 doing business making a living simply because they were targeted 342 00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:40,480 in these operations. 343 00:23:40,480 --> 00:23:45,720 Speaker 2: Correct, That's exactly right. It was very disruptive for Steve 344 00:23:45,759 --> 00:23:48,240 and Indigenous Advanced Ministries when he lost access to his 345 00:23:48,240 --> 00:23:52,240 bank account and he has several employees and Uganda, these 346 00:23:52,240 --> 00:23:55,160 people don't live paycheck to paycheck. They live meal to 347 00:23:55,279 --> 00:23:59,079 meal and they're waiting to receive their pay so they 348 00:23:59,079 --> 00:24:01,119 can purchase dinner that night. So I mean this was 349 00:24:01,160 --> 00:24:04,759 a substantial disruption to a ministry like Indigenous Advance that 350 00:24:04,839 --> 00:24:08,519 is serving people who are really on the edge, living 351 00:24:08,599 --> 00:24:11,880 on the edge societally in places like Uganda. 352 00:24:12,920 --> 00:24:16,279 Speaker 1: Yeah, and exactly the good work they are doing that 353 00:24:16,440 --> 00:24:18,720 comes to a complete halt. So not only are you 354 00:24:18,839 --> 00:24:22,400 talking about the people who are running these charitable groups, 355 00:24:22,799 --> 00:24:26,279 you're talking about the people who are benefiting from them. 356 00:24:26,720 --> 00:24:29,319 And of course the left will say, well, you know, 357 00:24:28,440 --> 00:24:32,400 you didn't care about that when you were cutting Usaid 358 00:24:32,559 --> 00:24:35,680 and all of these sorts of things. We're talking about 359 00:24:35,720 --> 00:24:41,440 tax payer money going into some pretty suspect organizations. That's 360 00:24:41,480 --> 00:24:46,200 a difference. These folks are a nonprofit that are working 361 00:24:46,559 --> 00:24:51,400 through the donations of people who want to see orphans 362 00:24:51,680 --> 00:24:56,359 and people you know, badly displaced, whatever the case may be. 363 00:24:56,559 --> 00:24:59,960 In a foreign country, Christian ministry trying to help. 364 00:25:00,839 --> 00:25:03,880 Speaker 2: It's a very different thing when the government. On the 365 00:25:03,960 --> 00:25:06,799 one hand, you talked about USA. This is government large 366 00:25:06,839 --> 00:25:12,240 ass being distributed amongst various recipients. But here Indigenous Advanced 367 00:25:12,279 --> 00:25:16,319 Ministries INCRF, Ambassador Sam Brownback, you can even open the 368 00:25:16,359 --> 00:25:19,480 aperture and include other instances where the government has an 369 00:25:19,480 --> 00:25:22,519 attempted to silence people. Think about Jack Phillips a masterpiece 370 00:25:22,599 --> 00:25:25,759 cake shop. I mean, in each of these instances, the 371 00:25:25,799 --> 00:25:29,599 government is using its authority, the power of the state, 372 00:25:30,079 --> 00:25:33,839 to shut down silence, to erase the voice or the 373 00:25:33,880 --> 00:25:37,920 presence of someone whom the government disagrees with. And that 374 00:25:38,119 --> 00:25:41,839 is a gross abuse of government power. It's a tremendous 375 00:25:41,880 --> 00:25:46,720 threat to individual liberty. It is completely anathema to our 376 00:25:46,799 --> 00:25:50,319 constitutional system of government. The government should not be leveraging 377 00:25:50,359 --> 00:25:55,720 its regulatory power simply to oppress those whose viewpoints those 378 00:25:55,759 --> 00:26:00,680 who are running government find offensive or take issue with against. 379 00:26:00,680 --> 00:26:03,440 That is contra our system of government. 380 00:26:04,440 --> 00:26:07,480 Speaker 1: It is, and it is happening all over the place. 381 00:26:07,599 --> 00:26:14,279 I mean, obviously it is most hitting, most damaging when 382 00:26:14,279 --> 00:26:19,200 it occurs in our constitutional republic, going against the very 383 00:26:19,240 --> 00:26:23,400 principles that founded this republic. But now we're seeing it 384 00:26:23,440 --> 00:26:26,240 of course, we've seen it for a long time in 385 00:26:27,079 --> 00:26:32,200 other Western civilizations, and you know, it's the intersection of 386 00:26:32,279 --> 00:26:36,799 technology and so called security and privacy and all of 387 00:26:36,799 --> 00:26:43,119 those sorts of issues. And while they put up the 388 00:26:43,240 --> 00:26:45,799 name or do these things in the name of privacy, 389 00:26:46,440 --> 00:26:50,400 we are seeing more and more the invasion of privacy. 390 00:26:51,119 --> 00:26:54,839 One of the areas that you're working on, you're taking 391 00:26:54,839 --> 00:26:58,400 a look at and at least warning some folks about, 392 00:26:58,680 --> 00:27:05,720 is a proposed in the European Union. Very creepy surveillance 393 00:27:05,839 --> 00:27:09,279 state sort of stuff. First of all in Britain, but 394 00:27:09,319 --> 00:27:13,000 the EU is now seriously considering a proposal that would 395 00:27:13,160 --> 00:27:17,680 essentially end all private encrypted messaging by requiring that all 396 00:27:17,759 --> 00:27:23,839 messages be scanned by the government in the name of safety. 397 00:27:23,920 --> 00:27:28,039 What's going on here and why is this so important 398 00:27:28,039 --> 00:27:28,480 to watch? 399 00:27:30,079 --> 00:27:33,279 Speaker 2: Well? The European Union has certainly become one of the 400 00:27:33,279 --> 00:27:37,880 world's leaders in stepping on citizens' fundamental rights to engage 401 00:27:37,880 --> 00:27:39,640 in free speech. I hate to say that, but it's 402 00:27:39,680 --> 00:27:42,160 really true. And look at what Jade Vance said in 403 00:27:42,240 --> 00:27:44,559 February of this path of this year, when he was 404 00:27:44,599 --> 00:27:48,160 speaking at the Munich Security Conference talking about threats to 405 00:27:48,200 --> 00:27:50,599 the West, threats to Europe and what he said in 406 00:27:50,599 --> 00:27:53,000 his speech I think rings true today, especially in light 407 00:27:53,039 --> 00:27:55,640 of this new development. He said, I worry. What I 408 00:27:55,680 --> 00:27:58,039 worry about in the West is the threat from within, 409 00:27:58,200 --> 00:28:02,200 the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, 410 00:28:02,759 --> 00:28:06,279 values shared with the United States, including freedom of speech. 411 00:28:06,720 --> 00:28:09,519 And at ADF, we have been representing client after client 412 00:28:09,920 --> 00:28:14,799 whose rights have been violated by European government officials who 413 00:28:14,880 --> 00:28:18,119 are trying to silence their literally silence their speech, even 414 00:28:18,240 --> 00:28:21,160 silent speech. You take the case of Adam Smith Connor 415 00:28:22,599 --> 00:28:26,519 in the UK, who was silently praying on a sidewalk 416 00:28:26,559 --> 00:28:31,680 and accused of violating an ordinance that prohibited sort of 417 00:28:31,720 --> 00:28:36,559 disruptive demonstrations opposing abortion. So you look at the case 418 00:28:36,599 --> 00:28:41,440 of Isabelle Vaughn Spruce, silently praying, arrested and prosecuted for 419 00:28:41,519 --> 00:28:45,240 a thought crime. Look at the case of Olivia Taschi 420 00:28:45,240 --> 00:28:47,519 Bolt who was simply holding a sign in one of 421 00:28:47,559 --> 00:28:50,000 these buffer zones that said here to talk if you want, 422 00:28:50,039 --> 00:28:53,200 didn't say a word, didn't it cost anyone convicted find 423 00:28:53,240 --> 00:28:57,359 twenty thousand pounds, and so over and over again we're 424 00:28:57,400 --> 00:29:00,359 seeing in the UK gross violations. These are these are 425 00:29:00,400 --> 00:29:02,440 easy cases under the First Amendment, and yet here in 426 00:29:02,880 --> 00:29:05,960 the UK we're seeing these prosecutions go forward. And of 427 00:29:05,960 --> 00:29:09,559 course we're still representing after six years Member of Parliament 428 00:29:09,599 --> 00:29:12,839 Priivy Rassen and in Finland who has been prosecuted criminally 429 00:29:12,880 --> 00:29:16,839 simply for sending a social media post urging her church 430 00:29:16,880 --> 00:29:19,960 to be faithful to biblical sexuality. So that brings us 431 00:29:19,960 --> 00:29:23,119 all the way to what you just talked about here 432 00:29:23,240 --> 00:29:28,799 is what some are calling the Chat Control Proposal, very 433 00:29:28,799 --> 00:29:30,880 similar to the Online Safety Bill that I think you 434 00:29:30,920 --> 00:29:34,039 were probably referencing earlier in the UK. But the Chat 435 00:29:34,079 --> 00:29:37,000 Control Proposal, which is coming up for a vote this 436 00:29:37,160 --> 00:29:41,799 October at the European Union, would require the scanning of 437 00:29:42,359 --> 00:29:46,319 private messages, messages sent on apps like Signal or proton mail, 438 00:29:46,640 --> 00:29:51,640 even encrypted messages in the end, encrypted messages, requiring the 439 00:29:51,720 --> 00:29:56,400 scanning of these messages for illegal content. Now it's being 440 00:29:56,480 --> 00:29:59,799 billed right now as an effort to cut track down 441 00:29:59,880 --> 00:30:03,400 on on child sexual abuse material child pornography, which, of 442 00:30:03,440 --> 00:30:08,039 course that's a laudable goal. Everyone should be opposed, vehemently 443 00:30:08,039 --> 00:30:11,880 opposed to the distribution of c SAM and child pornography. 444 00:30:11,920 --> 00:30:14,680 It's it's a scourge in our society. The question that 445 00:30:14,720 --> 00:30:16,440 we're asking here, though, is a different one, and that 446 00:30:16,599 --> 00:30:22,200 is is the methodology that the European Union is using 447 00:30:23,240 --> 00:30:26,559 under this justification? Is it going to be consistent with 448 00:30:26,599 --> 00:30:30,240 the protection of individual rights when every single text message, 449 00:30:30,279 --> 00:30:33,680 every single email is going to be scanned by an 450 00:30:33,720 --> 00:30:38,519 AI tool and there is really no limit on what 451 00:30:38,680 --> 00:30:42,359 the EU can decide to do with that information. I mean, 452 00:30:42,400 --> 00:30:46,400 this is an open invitation if there ever was one, 453 00:30:46,440 --> 00:30:52,319 to censorship, to political retribution, to engaging in the policing 454 00:30:52,359 --> 00:30:56,839 of thoughts of dissent. You know, certainly the people who 455 00:30:56,839 --> 00:30:58,759 are working on this bill, we're going to say no, no, 456 00:30:58,799 --> 00:31:03,559 that will never happen. However, you know, Europe's history on 457 00:31:03,599 --> 00:31:06,359 this front in terms of respecting civil rights has not 458 00:31:06,480 --> 00:31:10,359 been sterling for the past several decades, and I think 459 00:31:10,400 --> 00:31:12,079 we have cause to be suspicious. 460 00:31:12,759 --> 00:31:16,000 Speaker 1: Indeed we do. There's a lot to unpack there, of course. 461 00:31:16,079 --> 00:31:21,240 But again, this idea, this proposal is all brought up, 462 00:31:21,759 --> 00:31:24,759 as you mentioned, you know, in the name of something 463 00:31:24,880 --> 00:31:28,759 very laudable, and that is protecting children. Lord knows we have, 464 00:31:29,279 --> 00:31:34,920 uh you rising crimes against children and it is heartbreaking. 465 00:31:34,960 --> 00:31:38,359 But how how do they propose to walk that line 466 00:31:38,599 --> 00:31:41,519 when they're using it seems like to me a very 467 00:31:41,640 --> 00:31:46,119 big net. And what's the vetting process? Like, have they 468 00:31:46,160 --> 00:31:51,599 discussed that? How do they decide which, you know, text messages, 469 00:31:51,640 --> 00:31:56,519 which which electronic digital communications they decide to use. Is 470 00:31:56,559 --> 00:32:01,279 there some protection at all for the average citizen in 471 00:32:01,359 --> 00:32:03,720 Europe or anywhere sending messages? 472 00:32:04,440 --> 00:32:07,000 Speaker 2: These are all the right questions to ask. Unfortunately we 473 00:32:07,039 --> 00:32:09,400 don't know the answers. I mean, this bill is still 474 00:32:09,440 --> 00:32:13,400 being debated vehemently at the European Union. They haven't even 475 00:32:13,440 --> 00:32:15,640 really agreed on what the text of the bill will be, 476 00:32:15,839 --> 00:32:19,079 much less the implementation details that you're discussing here. But 477 00:32:19,400 --> 00:32:22,839 what you're talking about are the natural questions that everyone 478 00:32:22,920 --> 00:32:25,599 has to ask, and unfortunately the track record in the 479 00:32:25,599 --> 00:32:28,759 EU is not great. Just look at another piece of 480 00:32:28,839 --> 00:32:31,200 legislation that has been on the books there for some time, 481 00:32:31,240 --> 00:32:34,960 the Digital Services Act. The Digital Services Act allows the 482 00:32:35,000 --> 00:32:38,160 European Commission to engage in content moderation at a grand 483 00:32:38,200 --> 00:32:42,039 scale when it comes to large online sites with forty 484 00:32:42,039 --> 00:32:47,079 five million users per month or more. It imposes all 485 00:32:47,119 --> 00:32:52,880 sorts of takedown requirements. It deputizes a large number of 486 00:32:53,480 --> 00:32:56,960 trusted content checkers or content flaggers, many of whom are 487 00:32:57,000 --> 00:33:00,359 members of NGOs that are left leaning in their ideaology 488 00:33:00,680 --> 00:33:04,079 to flag this content for platforms, and platforms have to 489 00:33:04,119 --> 00:33:07,200 comply with these requirements on pain of paying up to 490 00:33:07,240 --> 00:33:11,759 a six percent of global annual revenue fine for violent 491 00:33:12,279 --> 00:33:15,559 This is a huge hammer for these platforms that are 492 00:33:15,599 --> 00:33:19,599 covered under the Digital Services Act. And again what we've 493 00:33:19,599 --> 00:33:24,000 seen from the DSA is they're really there aren't reliable 494 00:33:24,079 --> 00:33:29,480 protections in terms of protecting freedom of speech, free discussion, 495 00:33:29,559 --> 00:33:31,799 free discourse. I mean, look at what's Look at what 496 00:33:31,839 --> 00:33:36,039 happened to Pivey Racinan in Finland, prosecuted for simply sending 497 00:33:36,119 --> 00:33:39,759 out a tweet asking her church to remain faithful. Look 498 00:33:39,799 --> 00:33:42,680 what happened in the UK over the just when the 499 00:33:43,079 --> 00:33:46,119 when the riots of the past year were taking place, 500 00:33:46,160 --> 00:33:50,720 people were being imprisoned and jailed for blog posts, for 501 00:33:50,920 --> 00:33:55,720 social media posts. Keir Starmer has been very adamant that 502 00:33:55,920 --> 00:33:59,160 the UK, the Crown Prosecution Service has the right to 503 00:33:59,200 --> 00:34:04,319 prosecute things being said on the Internet. So there's really 504 00:34:05,039 --> 00:34:07,079 we can't take any comfort in the way that the 505 00:34:07,119 --> 00:34:12,599 European leadership has been enforcing or deploying their existing tools 506 00:34:12,599 --> 00:34:15,360 to date, and this would just give them the ultimate dragnet, 507 00:34:15,440 --> 00:34:19,639 the ability to pry into private conversations on text and email. 508 00:34:19,960 --> 00:34:22,320 Speaker 1: Perhaps this is a naive question, but you know, some 509 00:34:22,440 --> 00:34:24,840 of this stuff doesn't surprise me about some members of 510 00:34:24,880 --> 00:34:28,519 the European Union's even doing this kind of stuff before 511 00:34:28,559 --> 00:34:33,119 the Internet, with all kinds of communications long before that said, 512 00:34:33,159 --> 00:34:38,480 what happened to the United Kingdom. There is definitely been 513 00:34:38,599 --> 00:34:42,760 a turn for the worse when it comes to individual 514 00:34:42,880 --> 00:34:46,360 rights individual liberties in the United Kingdom over the last 515 00:34:46,360 --> 00:34:47,199 couple of decades. 516 00:34:48,119 --> 00:34:50,440 Speaker 2: There really has and I know that this is a 517 00:34:50,480 --> 00:34:52,599 place where we have been focusing at ADF quite a 518 00:34:52,639 --> 00:34:55,320 bit of our attention in the last couple of years. 519 00:34:56,000 --> 00:34:58,159 But you look back to Kere Starmer when he was 520 00:34:58,199 --> 00:35:01,039 working with the Crown Process Accution Service all the way 521 00:35:01,119 --> 00:35:04,920 back in twenty twelve. He argued, there's actually an article 522 00:35:05,280 --> 00:35:09,400 that he was quoted in as stating in response to 523 00:35:09,880 --> 00:35:14,199 complaints that he was policing language online, he said, look, 524 00:35:14,360 --> 00:35:16,719 I'm quoting from him. If an offensive message is taken 525 00:35:16,760 --> 00:35:19,840 down very swiftly and there is remorse, then it may 526 00:35:19,840 --> 00:35:22,519 not be proportionate to have a criminal prosecution of. 527 00:35:22,639 --> 00:35:26,360 Speaker 1: Coorse, you have to range for your communication. 528 00:35:27,039 --> 00:35:29,880 Speaker 2: This is in twenty twelve. This is the person who 529 00:35:29,960 --> 00:35:32,639 is now leading the government in the UK. So it 530 00:35:32,639 --> 00:35:34,840 shouldn't become as any surprise that would come to this 531 00:35:34,960 --> 00:35:37,480 point given that Cure Stormer has always been someone who's 532 00:35:37,519 --> 00:35:42,400 been very favorable toward censorship of speech. Look at what 533 00:35:42,480 --> 00:35:46,119 happened just last year. UK Crown Prosecution Service on its 534 00:35:46,360 --> 00:35:50,159 X handle in the middle of the post right aftermath 535 00:35:50,280 --> 00:35:55,199 said I quote think before you post content that incites 536 00:35:55,280 --> 00:35:57,920 violence or hatred. Isn't just harmful, it can be illegal. 537 00:35:58,960 --> 00:36:01,199 And it also said and remind those close to you 538 00:36:01,239 --> 00:36:06,159 to share responsibly or face the consequences. That's called chilling speech. 539 00:36:05,880 --> 00:36:08,599 Speaker 1: Right there no doubt about it. And I tell you 540 00:36:08,679 --> 00:36:11,880 George Orwell is sitting up in his gravegoing I told you, 541 00:36:12,400 --> 00:36:14,440 I told you this is where we're heading. 542 00:36:14,800 --> 00:36:16,519 Speaker 2: It is, but I'll tell you there is that there 543 00:36:16,559 --> 00:36:19,760 is a real pushback right now in the UK. A 544 00:36:19,800 --> 00:36:21,880 lot of people are standing up and saying this has 545 00:36:21,920 --> 00:36:26,440 gone way too far. If you look at now Faraj, 546 00:36:26,519 --> 00:36:29,280 I mean he he very well could be the next 547 00:36:29,280 --> 00:36:32,039 Prime minister if this continues. I know he's spoken out 548 00:36:32,079 --> 00:36:36,920 forcefully against against this sort of censorship regime. So there 549 00:36:36,960 --> 00:36:40,480 really are some signs of life in the UK, but unfortunately, 550 00:36:40,519 --> 00:36:44,119 the current regime is just not terribly friendly to freedom speech. 551 00:36:44,400 --> 00:36:46,920 Speaker 1: Yeah, so we look at that, what we've looked at 552 00:36:46,960 --> 00:36:50,880 what's happened in Great Britain over the last couple of 553 00:36:51,000 --> 00:36:54,719 years in particular, we look at this kind of policy 554 00:36:54,960 --> 00:36:58,039 that the EU is proposing, and we say, in America, 555 00:36:58,719 --> 00:37:01,480 who good thing, We're not over there. I'm just I'm 556 00:37:01,480 --> 00:37:04,760 glad to be an American with this constitution we got, 557 00:37:05,000 --> 00:37:08,000 you know, at the outset of the program, the outside 558 00:37:08,000 --> 00:37:11,079 of the podcast, we've been talking about the abuses by 559 00:37:11,079 --> 00:37:17,000 our own government. So where do you see the the 560 00:37:17,039 --> 00:37:21,599 big government types, the newsoms and others already doing some 561 00:37:21,719 --> 00:37:27,480 of this stuff, adopting similar measures that we see in 562 00:37:27,519 --> 00:37:32,079 the European Union in the suppression of speech. 563 00:37:34,280 --> 00:37:36,400 Speaker 2: And you know, unfortunately we have seen that here in 564 00:37:36,440 --> 00:37:39,599 the US. But I'm very hopeful. I'm very hopeful. Like 565 00:37:39,679 --> 00:37:43,039 you said, we do have the blessing and the good 566 00:37:43,079 --> 00:37:47,239 fortune to live in the nation that, of all the 567 00:37:47,320 --> 00:37:50,000 nations in the world, has the strongest protections for freedom 568 00:37:50,000 --> 00:37:52,840 of speech. We are uniquely blessed to have the First 569 00:37:52,880 --> 00:37:58,119 Amendment to have a strong, multi century body of jurisprudence 570 00:37:58,159 --> 00:38:01,800 that uphold free speech right. So we do have our issues, 571 00:38:01,880 --> 00:38:04,679 we have our problems. We certainly have those who would 572 00:38:04,719 --> 00:38:08,280 love nothing more than to engage in a European style 573 00:38:08,679 --> 00:38:13,159 censorship regime or worse. But we have the First Amendment. 574 00:38:13,199 --> 00:38:17,280 We have a strong and robust tradition of enforcing free 575 00:38:17,280 --> 00:38:21,519 speech rights. So I am I remain very hopeful for 576 00:38:21,559 --> 00:38:25,239 the United States, and I think that our task today 577 00:38:25,760 --> 00:38:29,079 is to catechize and educate our citizenry on the value 578 00:38:29,119 --> 00:38:32,880 and the importance of the First Amendment on the critical 579 00:38:33,760 --> 00:38:37,719 aspects of freedom of speech to our liberty. And for 580 00:38:37,920 --> 00:38:39,599 those who are coming up, they're going to be seasoned 581 00:38:39,599 --> 00:38:42,440 the reigns of the government decades from now to be 582 00:38:42,639 --> 00:38:48,400 fully catechized as believers in the penultimate value of freedom 583 00:38:48,440 --> 00:38:48,800 of speech. 584 00:38:49,559 --> 00:38:53,639 Speaker 1: Yes, and I think it though does bear that. And 585 00:38:53,719 --> 00:38:58,039 perhaps it was apocryphal from Benjamin Franklin. But the comment 586 00:38:58,679 --> 00:39:03,639 at the Constitution Constitutional Convention, Republic, if you can keep 587 00:39:03,679 --> 00:39:07,000 it you talk about the generations have had, We've already 588 00:39:07,079 --> 00:39:13,079 seen what generations coming up are the people who will 589 00:39:13,159 --> 00:39:21,320 be the public leaders in America talking about how they 590 00:39:21,519 --> 00:39:27,360 don't believe free speech should effectively hurt people's feelings or 591 00:39:27,400 --> 00:39:31,760 offend somebody. There is a whole generation of people in 592 00:39:31,800 --> 00:39:35,360 this country who have been taught that free speech is 593 00:39:35,400 --> 00:39:38,800 fine unless it offends certain groups, or this group or 594 00:39:38,800 --> 00:39:40,719 that group. Are you concerned about that. 595 00:39:42,079 --> 00:39:44,519 Speaker 2: Always? I think we have to be concerned because there 596 00:39:44,559 --> 00:39:47,559 will always be those who will make the argument that 597 00:39:47,599 --> 00:39:51,280 freedom of speech just simply isn't worth the cost, and nothing, 598 00:39:51,400 --> 00:39:54,039 no good comes without a cost. And yes, freedom of 599 00:39:54,079 --> 00:39:56,519 speech does come with a cost. And we've made the 600 00:39:56,559 --> 00:40:01,079 decision in the United States when we when our founders 601 00:40:01,199 --> 00:40:04,239 wrote the First Amendment, when we adopted that Amendment and 602 00:40:04,280 --> 00:40:06,800 we have enforced it ever since. We have made the 603 00:40:06,800 --> 00:40:10,079 decision that there are moments where freedom of speech is 604 00:40:10,119 --> 00:40:12,880 going to result and result in hurt feelings, where it's 605 00:40:12,920 --> 00:40:16,840 going to result in difficult relationships, and it's actually it 606 00:40:16,880 --> 00:40:20,760 could even result in instances where their strife and discord. 607 00:40:21,880 --> 00:40:25,400 But that is a better world to live in than 608 00:40:25,440 --> 00:40:29,920 a world where speech is completely squelched, where the government 609 00:40:29,960 --> 00:40:35,119 controls every thought, every word, every communication, where no one 610 00:40:35,199 --> 00:40:40,000 has the freedom to think big thoughts, to dream big dreams, 611 00:40:40,679 --> 00:40:44,559 to engage in robust public conversation. We have made the 612 00:40:44,599 --> 00:40:47,239 decision in the United States that we would rather live 613 00:40:47,440 --> 00:40:50,840 We would rather live in a world where toes can 614 00:40:50,880 --> 00:40:52,440 be stepped on, feelings can be hurt. But at the 615 00:40:52,559 --> 00:40:55,480 end of the day, everyone has the right to enter 616 00:40:55,519 --> 00:40:58,920 the public arena and speak their mind, and to speak 617 00:40:58,920 --> 00:41:01,320 it well, and to pursue with their fellow citizens if 618 00:41:01,320 --> 00:41:04,679 they can, or to fail in the process. So that's 619 00:41:04,679 --> 00:41:06,840 the regime we live in, and I would rather live 620 00:41:06,880 --> 00:41:07,599 in no other place. 621 00:41:08,199 --> 00:41:10,719 Speaker 1: I agree with you one hundred percent. All of that said, 622 00:41:11,360 --> 00:41:16,639 are you concerned that our criticism of the United Kingdom 623 00:41:16,800 --> 00:41:21,400 and its government cure Starmer is putting together an arrest 624 00:41:21,440 --> 00:41:22,639 warrant for us right now? 625 00:41:23,800 --> 00:41:30,760 Speaker 2: Well, there are issues of extra territorial application. But I 626 00:41:30,800 --> 00:41:33,440 certainly hope I didn't offend his feelings. But if I did, 627 00:41:33,880 --> 00:41:35,239 that's the price of free speech. 628 00:41:35,920 --> 00:41:38,920 Speaker 1: Well, mister Starmer, I hope I offended your feelings because 629 00:41:39,239 --> 00:41:45,239 you have acted grotesquely against individual liberties. And it's not 630 00:41:45,360 --> 00:41:49,400 something we hear in the United States. Broke away from 631 00:41:49,920 --> 00:41:54,039 your nation, your powerful nation, some two hundred and fifty 632 00:41:54,079 --> 00:41:57,519 years ago. Respect, that's for sure. So bring them on, buddy, 633 00:41:57,679 --> 00:42:01,320 Bring on your warrants plan to go over there anytime 634 00:42:01,360 --> 00:42:04,960 soon anyway. Thanks to my guest today, Ryan Bangerd, Senior 635 00:42:05,039 --> 00:42:08,880 Vice President forced Strategic Initiatives and Special Counsel to the 636 00:42:08,920 --> 00:42:13,960 President at Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization that does exactly 637 00:42:14,159 --> 00:42:19,000 what its name says, defends freedom. You've been listening to 638 00:42:19,039 --> 00:42:21,840 another edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle, 639 00:42:21,920 --> 00:42:25,840 Senior Elections correspondent at the Federalist. We'll be back soon 640 00:42:25,920 --> 00:42:29,840 with more. Until then, stay lovers of freedom and anxious 641 00:42:29,840 --> 00:42:44,800 for the Fray.