Transcription
I'm joined now by Congressman Daniel Goldman. Thanks for joining me.
Thanks for having me, Brian.
So, we've just watched as Donald Trump successfully pressure Jimmy Kimmel off the air and we're watching as his administration officials, including FCC chairman Brendan Carr, are doing a victory lap and uh uh basically putting in place the steps for the next cancellations. Is there anything that can be done as far as Congress is concerned given the fact that this seems like it's a pretty overt attack on the First Amendment?
Yeah, look, I think um to to the degree that we get response from the administration there, we can certainly uh try to conduct oversight, but as you know, well, we're in the minority. We don't have subpoena power. And uh this administration has ignored pretty much all Democratic requests for information. It is very clear that they do not believe that they answer to Democrats. Um, so we have to take the next step here and that is to really rally the people and it's not just to oppose Donald Trump's actions. It's not just to pressure uh vulnerable Republicans uh with opposition to these authoritarian tactics. We have to go back to true advocacy and hold the businesses and corporations that are bending the knee to Donald Trump accountable.
Um it is outrageous to me not only that Donald Trump and Brendan Carr forced Jimmy Kimmel off based on uh absolutely nothing that is I mean frankly it's not no hate speech. It's nothing. I mean there it is literally just part of his uh comedic comedic show. But the fact that NextStar, which is of course uh hoping to get approval for a merger, and Disney um ultimately acquiesced and we're seeing this over and over and over again. And you have Mark Zuckerberg at the White House say a asking after he announces a $600 billion uh investment in the United States, which he already had. Asking President Trump, oh, I I wasn't sure what number you wanted me to say. Is was that okay? Right? you know it is across the board whether it's law firms whether it's corporate America whether it's media companies we have to stand up for the dem our democracy because if we don't stand up for it and we don't force not only our elected officials but also uh the corporations that we use um to do so then uh we don't we are really really falling uh down a rabbit hole right now.
You know, the the way that this was able to be effectuated was because uh Brendan Carr at the FCC was able to to dangle the prospect of either approving or rejecting this requested merger that would give I believe Nextstar uh by merging with Tangga, like some something like 80% uh control of local TV in this country. And and the reason that they're able to do that is they're seeking an exemption to the rule that prevents them from from having that much consolidation. It's it's basically otherwise a massive violation of of of antitrust in this country. Why does a partisan actor like a president's appointed FCC chair have the ability to subvert these rules that are put in place uh to prevent monopolistic behavior uh unilaterally?
Look, this is why Donald Trump has busted every norm and obviously many laws and constitutional uh requirements. the there was never previously a political component to the approval of any mergers or acquisitions um to you know so many things uh crypto for example or regulation of of financial regulation um there are policy differences and there are policy disagreements but Donald Trump has turned all of this into a partisan battle and political warfare fair. Not just that, he's also using his power for his own purposes, his own political purposes. So, he is not just threatening, he is using the Department of Justice to investigate his enemies. He is using the FCC to threaten media companies with losing their license if they don't stop any criticism of him. And it's all part of a larger scheme here, which is to undermine every form of accountability so that he can continue to take more authoritarian control over our government. That's the really the there's no other way of looking at it right now.
You know, prior to coming into Congress, uh you were an attorney. Um obviously during during the impeachment uh proceedings, you were you were very present there as well. using using your past experience, is there any um is there any likelihood or or is there any grounds for some type of lawsuit on First Amendment grounds against this administration either on behalf of of Jimmy Kimmel himself or or some other uh some other party, some other litigant uh to be able to push back on on what we're seeing happen at the hands of the administration?
Yeah, I think so. I I think Jimmy Kimmel should sue. And um what's what's shameful is that Disney did not stand up to Trump. Yeah. Force him to actually take away their license if that's what he was threatening and then if they did file suit. Now Disney in theory is a private company and it has you know reputational considerations. So, you know, the First Amendment doesn't apply in the same way, but the direct coercion by the government that is connected to Jimmy Kimmel's suspension um makes this a a government issue in my view. And you know, I'm not a first amendment expert, but uh I think it's important that uh everyone um take every measure they can to fight against this authoritarian uh regime. And I am especially concerned about corporate America who seems and the tech world where they seem like you know what I'm happy to just give up our democracy as long as you know I get the regulation or the lack of regulation that I want that will make me billions of dollars. Uh and it's kind of disgusting. Um, and it's part of the reason why our system has become um, so divided and so unequal is that you have these folks on top who are mingling with Donald Trump and bending the knee to him and then he's p, you know, giving them back the policies that they want and that's how policy is now being made, right? It's uh it it's really really um anti-democratic and and unacceptable.
I mean there there really are like to put this as indelicately as possible like they are they are show showing themselves exposing themselves as complete horrors for this administration whether it's CBS whether it's ABC whether it's Meta whether it's Amazon and the Washington Post whether it's the LA Times I mean on outlet after outlet after outlet including these outlets that that have hid behind these these glossy slogans like democracy's eyes and darkness back when it wasn't challenged back when it didn't mean anything to say it was just a bumper sticker because who cares no one's actually coming for those things. So why not just say it? Why not just bolster our credentials and and our reputation uh by saying this kind of stuff? The mo it really is telling that the moment it's challenged, the moment that they actually have the opportunity to stand up and defend the things that they have said about themselves, that they're the the esteemed fourth estate that's going to stand up and and protect democracy when all else fails. The fact that when they have this opportunity, they just bend the knee, capitulate instantly to Donald Trump, shows that they're not just full of now. They're not just these awful stewards of democracy now, but it was it was all a scam the whole time because now is when they can actually bear out that thesis that what they were saying was accurate.
There is a big difference though between what happened in Trump's first term and what is happening now. There were there was a there were a lot of corporations. There were a lot of business leaders who spoke out against Donald Trump, who opposed what he was doing um and took him on. I mean, even Jeff Bezos was uh ridiculed and attacked constantly by Donald Trump and uh he still managed to try to hold the line. And certainly, as you point out, who's going to stand up for our First Amendment if not the media, freedom of the press. Yeah. But this time around, we're seeing a totally different view. And I think the reason is that they know Donald Trump is completely for sale, that everything is transactional. They know if they give a million bucks to his inaugural that he will make sure that his policies line their pockets. And they'd rather do that than have to fight with him. And that's how we lose uh the fundamental values that this country is founded on.
Congressman, what are you hearing from your colleagues? I mean, the Republican party is this self-proclaimed uh uh stalwart, bull work against against the censorship of the left. So, like, are any of them trying to justify this? Are you hearing rumblings from people who are uncomfortable with this, but you know, who who who may or may not be willing to to speak out? Like, what is what is the general sense on the on the other side of the aisle?
I hear very little opposition. Yeah. um you know the the the idea that they've been talking about Charlie Kirk as a beacon of free speech and uh to remember him as such a a leader in that area and wanting to have debate and then they turn around five minutes later. Yeah. literally support the the president in um in uh his blatant violation of the First Amendment and Brendan Carr and start, you know, accusing the left and trying to silence the left or silence anyone who even criticizes not Charlie Kurt's, you know, supports Charlie Kirk's murder, which we all uh abhore and condemn, but start saying, "Well, you know, looking at what his legacy is and saying, you know, maybe he said some things that were not so great." Oh, that's off limits. You cannot say anything bad about Charlie Kirk. And it's like, give me a break. You guys are the ones who are the free speech absolutist. You were so upset about censorship by the Biden administration on social media. you had an entire uh subcommittee that I was on last Congress on the weaponization of the federal government and using it to censor um social media companies and Republican viewpoints. And here then you just turn around, you're saying, "Well, no, it's really I only object if it's speech that I like, right? I got no problem cancelling speech I don't like." Right?
What is the natural conclusion of what we're seeing right now? Like clearly clearly this is I mean not a slippery slope is is the most generous way to put this but we've watched again I I listed out the whole the whole slew of of companies that have capitulated to the Trump administration um or or that have or uh in instances where the Trump administration has successfully lobbyed to get these people kicked off the air whether it's Colbear whether it's Kimmel uh whether it's you know uh suing ABC or CBS or Meta and getting them all to capitulate. What is what what does this look like a a month, 6 months, a year down the line?
Well, we're at a a real fork in the road right now. Um because this latest action was so far and away the most egregious and it was so out in the public and it was so clear that it is an absolute move that even if you look at the merits of it and what Jimmy Kimmel said there's nothing wrong with it, right? Uh, I mean, certainly the the Republicans, I mean, Donald Trump himself started accusing the left of being responsible for Charlie Kirk's murder before the perpetrator was identified or arrested, right? And that's all Jimmy Kimmel was saying. So, but even putting that aside, right, is the idea that you can threaten the license of a media organization because you don't like what they say and that they acquies is next level here. We continue to go further and further and he continues to push the envelope. And so, look, there are different ways we can do it. Donald Trump is not going to care what I say or what your listeners likely say or likely what your listeners say. But there are many Republicans in the House especially who are vulnerable in their elections next year. And the closer and closer that we get to those elections, the more and more the pressure that the American public puts on them will have an impact because Donald Trump does not want to lose the majority. That's why he's uh rigging the entire district uh rigging the entire system by redistricting all over the country. Um but if he starts to see that the polling and the the prospects for his House majority and their vulnerable members are getting worse and worse that will have an impact on him. And so I think it's got to be a combination of that and then putting pressure on corporate America to stand up for our values. Um which I wish we didn't have to do but we certainly do now.
I want to ask one more question here and it's a little bit of a selfish question but in as we continue to recognize the extent to which legacy media and these legacy outlets are not in it to to defend first amendment rights or free speech or democracy itself. I think the onus does fall more and more on folks in the independent media space to pick up uh to pick up where where legacy media isn't meeting the moment. And so there is some concern um that as Donald Trump has leaned on these legacy outlets that he that he'll then turn his attention to uh the platforms where all of uh our content content creators where all of our content is posted um and to to try and you know lean on Tik Tok, lean on Google, lean on uh YouTube and Instagram and Snapchat to to suppress speech that is you know like he's doing everywhere else critical of him. And so is there do you have concern about that? Is there any bull work to prevent him from overstepping in very much the same way that he's overstepping as it relates to legacy media?
Yeah, I am I am concerned. I mean, look, the legacy media world, as you describe it, is now there almost all of it is just part of larger corporations that are public companies that have earnings and have shareholders and are far more worried about their bottom line than they are about the First Amendment. What if he goes after the platforms? um we're in a different world because remember that's exactly what they have been railing against right for years and the platforms are immune you know they do have immunity from uh from liability for that's that section 230 immunity correct right yeah but you know the idea that Elon Musk could just decide that all right I'm just going to you know suppress as they whatever the word is uh you know whatever uh speech or whatever comments I don't like uh is really dangerous and that's where I do think Congress has a role because yes there's free speech and yes these social media platforms may have immunity from liability for being held responsible for something you say. Um, but they use their algorithms in a very specific and particular way and Congress can regulate those algorithms and there's a lot of talk about doing it and I think that we're going to have to ramp up those efforts.
All right. Well, we will leave it there. I appreciate your leadership on this issue and thank you for the time today.
Thanks, Brian. Take care.
[Music]