Image 01 Image 03

Tim Walz in 2023 When Talking About Voting: ‘No Guarantee to Free Speech on Misinformation or Hate Speech’

Tim Walz in 2023 When Talking About Voting: ‘No Guarantee to Free Speech on Misinformation or Hate Speech’

CONTEXT: The statement was about lying to people about how to vote, when to vote, how to vote, etc.

Presumptive Democrat VP candidate Gov. Tim Walz said on MSNBC last year “there’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy” when discussing voting issues.

(America is a Constitutional federal republic.)

He brings up misinformation and free speech. I’m including the whole text for context, which is always important (emphasis mine):

HOSTESS: I want to just, before I ask you another question, I want to talk about what you just mentioned about misinformation because oftentimes before in political chapters, disinformation, telling people where to vote the wrong way, these were considered shenanigans but it’s becoming more ominous. Can you talk about that and what you will do to ensure that there are penalties for that?

WALZ: Yeah, years ago, it was the little things. Telling people to vote the day after the election, and we kind of brushed them off. Now we know it’s intimidation at the ballot box. It’s undermining the idea that mail-in ballots aren’t legal. I think we need to push back on this. There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. Tell the truth. Where the voting places are, who can vote, who is able to be there. And watching some states continue to weaken the protections around the ballot I think is what is inspiring us to lean into this. Again, all we’re asking is to make it easy and simple as possible to exercise their right to vote and participate in our democracy.

Walz would be correct overall if he didn’t add in that sentence!

Indeed, you shouldn’t mislead voters. Don’t lie about voting places, how to vote, when to vote, etc.

That doesn’t mean there’s no guarantee of free speech on misinformation or hate speech! That’s a dangerous statement from Walz.

52 U.S. Code § 20511 outlines penalties regarding voting interference. I do not see a penalty for lying or spreading misinformation. If I misread it, please let me know.

I know each state is different, but I won’t dissect 50 voting laws.

What do you guys think?

I’m also begging the right…please always provide context instead of seven second videos. Don’t be like the left. Please.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

He loves commie china, took his honeymoon there, ms smells the burning tires no doubt, and been there over 30 times

No surprise here

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/08/kamala-harris-chooses-vp-deep-ties-communist-china/

No, he is not correct on any counts.

Publicly stating to vote after the election is not intimidation. (Saying you’ll be lynched if you dare to vote, that is intimidation).

Mail in ballots are not legal unless a state legislature says they are — not the courts, not the governor and certainly not election workers.

What states are “weakening protections around the ballot box”? Those who demand ID?

Making voting simple and easy is not the objective. It is making the elections fair, and if that involves inconvenience such as having identification and actually getting off the couch to go vote, so be it.

    WTPuck in reply to George S. | August 7, 2024 at 5:20 pm

    Yup. I don’t recall the word “convenient” mentioned in the Constitution. I’ll have to check it again.

This guy is a wanna be dictator. He’s a dick, and he looks like a tater.

And of course, the dems get to decide what constitutes misinformation or hate speech. Here’s how it goes:

Trump watching prostitutes piss on a bed in Moscow – FACT
Hunter’s laptop showing 10% for Big Guy – MISINFORMATION
Biden not being sharp as a tack – HATE SPEECH
Anything WSJ publishes – MISINFORMATION
Anything NYP publishes – DOUBLE MISINFORMATION
Everything NYT publishes – FACT

“There is freedom of speech, but I cannot guarantee freedom after speech.”
― Idi Amin

Amending the First Amwndment to reduce the protection of speech is nothing new for Democrats.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/04/hillary-clinton-rewrite-first-amendment-joel-gehrke/

destroycommunism | August 7, 2024 at 4:36 pm

and at least 60 million so called americans agree with it

Crone-harlot, Harris, and, clown Walz, are two wannabe little-Stalins/Maos.

I’d rather contract bubonic plague than spend one minute in a room with either of these vile, smug, arrogant, dim-witted, incompetent and narcissistic reprobates.

“Tim Walz in 2023 When Talking About Voting: ‘No Guarantee to Free Speech on Misinformation or Hate Speech’”

Tell me you’re a wannabe authoritarian socialist without telling me you’re a wannabe authoritarian socialist.

BigRosieGreenbaum | August 7, 2024 at 9:04 pm

Isn’t he spreading misinformation and I think what he was saying is hate speech, given that I hate what he said?
He thinks misinformation and hate speech are dangerous. I’ll tell you what’s more dangerous, little wanna be dictators, stupid little wanna be dictators.

    No, hate speech is not speech that someone hates; it’s speech designed to stir up hatred against some group of people. But Walz is wrong; it is fully protected. There is no “hate speech” exception to the first amendment.

The Supreme Court said in Alvarez that some lies are also protected speech, so long as they don’t harm anyone, but it has not laid down a clear rule for when lies are protected and when they aren’t.

52 U.S. Code § 20511 outlines penalties regarding voting interference. I do not see a penalty for lying or spreading misinformation. If I misread it, please let me know. I know each state is different, but I won’t dissect 50 voting laws. What do you guys think?

Read this, about Douglass Mackey’s dubious conviction under 18 USC § 241.

I sure as Hell don’t want him deciding what any speech is.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair | August 8, 2024 at 10:37 am

It’s undermining the idea that mail-in ballots aren’t legal. I think we need to push back on this.

LOL.

Walz doesn’t understand how negatives work. In this case, he is finally being truthful and correct – though thoroughly unintentionally.

Mail-in ballots must be stopped. They are ridiculous. The ONLY reason why anyone would want mail-in ballots allowed would be to commit fraud. That is it. They have to be stopped.

There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. Tell the truth. Where the voting places are, who can vote, who is able to be there.

People have the responsibility to find out the truth about elections themselves. If someone is dumb enough to believe some random person online about voting day, then that’s just tough. There are no protections in the Constitution for retards. If you are too dumb to find out when the election is and where your polling station is, then you are too dumb to vote.

In that case, Timpon better shut his mouth. He’s Sergeant Stolen Valor,