Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis - No Spin News - Weekend Edition - February 24, 2024

Episode Date: February 24, 2024

Listen to this week's No Spin News interview with Law professor John Acevedo of Emory University, Law enforcement expert Aaron Cohen, and The DailyChatter's Philip Balboni. We also visit the No Spin News archives and Bill's conversation with Author and Fox News legal analyst, Gregg Jarrett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the NoSpin News Weekend Edition. Fannie Willis Update. All we have for you is that the judge, McCaffee, is going to make a decision whether to boot Fannie Willis off the case late this week or early next. Okay. And obviously everybody is going to be curious. to see how the judge handles it. But I wanted to find out what the political climate is

in Fulton County, Atlanta. So joining us from there is Dr. John Philippe Acevedo teaches at Emory University School of Law. Nice to have you, doctor. So to me, I'm an outside. outsider, but I know Fulton County, I've been there many times. To me, if I'm the judge, based upon what I heard in the courtroom, I boot Ms. Willis off the case because there's just too much extracurricular activity on a very important case like this that is a total distraction

and opens up avenues of appeal by the Trump lawyers. So I boot her. Am I wrong? Yeah, so Judge McAfee really suggested that he was going to consider that as well. So last Monday before any of the witness testimony began, he said he was worried not only about actual conflicts of interest, but the appearance of conflicts of interest. So I don't think you're wrong.

I think this is something on his mind. I don't envy his decision. But yeah, in criminal law in general, we don't want the appearance of impropriety. Okay. So judges have to make these decisions all the time about right and wrong, legal, illegal. So I'm sitting there, again, not a lawyer, never want to be a judge. But I'm seeing two people, the district attorney, and her top investigator, involved in a romantic relationship

during the investigation of Donald Trump and 19 others for vote interference, I'm seeing $700,000 paid to the boyfriend through Fannie Wilson's office, and I'm seeing Ms. Willis take at least five luxury trips paid for by the boyfriend. To me, that opens up an investigation because if she didn't reimburse him, that would be illegal, correct? It's interesting.

So here, the receiving of gifts itself is not. It's the failure to disclose, and it's not clear she disclosed to anyone that she received these gifts. If she reimburse them, then obviously there's nothing to disclose. There is no gift. but under Georgia law, if she received gifts and didn't disclose and didn't reimburse, then if she would be running a foul of the Georgia disclosure rules. Okay, so here I am, I'm the judge again. And Ms. Willis comes in and says, yes, I reimbursed for these trips in cash.

I'm going. Nobody does that. And if you did it in cash, let's see your withdrawal slip from the bank because these trips were into the thousands of dollars. She says, I didn't withdraw money from the bank. I had it under my bed because that's what black people do. I'm sorry, doctor.

I'm not buying that as a judge. I'm not buying any of it at all. How about you? Yeah, so this is an interesting point she raised. certainly flies in the face of anything most of us to do in 2024. I myself struggle to have $10 in my pocket to tip someone if I need to. Almost everything we do today is in credit cards on our phones. The only part of it that kind of rang true was that her father was a 70s activists. And if we look at the activists from that era, a lot of them did afford cash in

case they had to flee the government on short notice. Again, does that translate to a district attorney in present day Atlanta it's certainly out of the norm for most people in their everyday experience but that's when we're going to be left to the judge to determine if he believes her her father took the stand to back her up uh so we'll see no the father doesn't know he's just being a theoretician now there is word that the judge is under heavy pressure because of the political climate in fulting county is a very left-wing county very heavily democrat and that if he sanctions Ms. Willis, that his career could be in jeopardy. What do you think about that? It's interesting, and this kind of hits to your point early on. He's having a balance not

wanting to get overturned on appeal. One thing judges don't want to do is go through an entire trial and then see an appeals court throw it out and have to start over. It's a massive waste of their time, money, effort, irritates the jurors. So he really isn't a bind here. He doesn't want to prematurely sanction the district attorney's office. On the other hand, to let it go all the way through and then have it overturned because he didn't remove her is a huge cost as well. And what are the odds, in your opinion, being a legal scholar? If she stays on the case and it goes through and there is a conviction, what are the odds of it being overturned? From the evidence we've had now, again, assuming no new evidence, I think the odds are not great for being overturned.

The odds of it being appealed are absolutely. I think any defense lawyer would appeal this. It would be, I think, malpractice not to appeal it. If you're the defense counsel, you have to zealously advocate for your clients. And that's whether it's a former president or just an average citizen. So I think here, again, even that review is going to cause issues. And again, you mentioned the political climate. I think the judge is mindful of that in two ways.

On the one hand, they're elected officials. They are going to run for re-election. On the other hand, you don't want to have a criminal trial and conviction in which the majority of people believe it's unfair because that will undermine the entire criminal justice system. Yeah, but that breaks down on ideological run. Final question. If this goes ahead and Fannie Willis does prosecute and she gets her convictions, 20 of them involved,

and say she gets the lion's share, including Mr. Trump, it'll go to federal court after state accord. If state turns down the appeals, it definitely go into the federal system with all of this stuff. Would it not? Yeah, the all-criminal defense can appeal if they have a federal issue. to the Supreme Court, and this would be a federal issue. It would be due process rights, that there was double dealing of financial improprieties. It would be what the defense would argue, and that most certainly could go to the Supreme Court. Okay, so wrapping up our discussion, and I want to thank you for being very straightforward, by the way, is a good discussion.

If you're a judge and you know that, you know all of the problems that Ms. Willis has caused herself. Nobody else caused these problems. She did it. You move her out if you're looking out for the cause of justice and the state of Georgia. That's my conclusion. And I think that's one of the two we can reach. I mean, if you think about it, this is an own goal. I don't think we can describe it any other way.

Even if she's allowed to stay on the case, the jury pool is tainted against her to some degree. There's folks here in Fulton County already calling for a review of her other cases, particularly the supporters of Young Thug, which is also a RICO indictment. So in that sense, the damage is done in many ways of this case.

I just want to... Yeah, I want to clarify to the audience. He's a guy named Young Thug, big kind rapper in Atlanta. She went after him. Obviously, his people don't like her, so they're using this to advance his cause. Hey, Doctor, thanks very much. We really

appreciate it. I can't make a prediction on this. I mean, I know what the right thing is. You get fanny out of there. But the politics, boy. You're listening to the NoSpin News Weekend Edition. Let's face it, the U.S. economy is under stress. National debt rising, trade war, shaking the markets. And meanwhile, China is dumping the dollar and stockpiling gold. That's why I protected my savings with physical gold and silver through the only dealer I trust, American Hartford Gold. And you can do this. Get precious metals delivered to your door or place in a tax advantage, gold IRA. They'll even help you roll over your existing IRA or 401k, tax and penalty free. With billions in precious metals delivered thousands of five-star

reviews and an A plus from the Better Business Bureau. You can trust American Hartford Gold as I do. Please call 866-326-55-7576 or text bill to 99-88-99. Again, that's 866-3-26-5-76, or text bill to 9988-99. Hey, I'm Caitlin Becker, the host of the New York Postcast, and I've got exactly what you need to start your weekdays. Every morning, I'll bring you the stories that matter, plus the news people actually talk about, the juicy details in the worlds of politics, business, pop culture, and everything in between. It's what you want from the New York Post, wrapped up in one snappy show. Ask your smart speaker to play the NY Postcast podcast, listen and subscribe on Amazon Music, Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Joining us from LA, Aaron Cohen, founder of Cherry's Counter Terror, specializing in training law enforcement in violent situations.

Can you explain why we don't know what happened at the Waffle House in Indianapolis and at Kansas City Parade? Can you tell me why we don't know what happened after all this time? Well, I think it's exactly what you're leading into, Bill, which is that we've got political political restraints being put on the ability to be able to deduce

exactly who was behind the crime. I believe this was gang-related, which means that it's potentially black-on-black. It's a high possibility with black-on-black. You know, the Midwest bill has been in a gang war that's been developing for the last 20 years. So let's look at Kansas City.

Kansas City, straight up, you had two black miners, black-on-black, opening fire at each other at this monster parade celebrating the Super Bowl. My question was, where was this security, given the height of all the domestic threats that are coming in from all over the world, from Iran to domestic terrorism here with the active shooters that are popping off.

Where we're at in 2024, intelligence and information, regardless of who are committing these crimes, that information needs to be released and need to be streamlined. There can be no politics involved whatsoever. Otherwise, like you said, you're never going to get to the root of the problem. You're not going to get more patrol on the streets. You're not going to get these gang task force funded with more money, which they need,

not just in Kansas City bill in Chicago. They just wrapped up a six-year investigation. Again, gang on gang, south side and west side Chicago. A monster gang problem over the last 20 years has been growing and growing. The problem is these liberal cities aren't being honest about it. And what it's doing is it's affecting the front line patrol and police officers' ability to be able to deal with it head on. And you cannot politic when it comes to crime, especially with this expanding game problem. But they are.

They are. And there's nobody except me reporting it. I don't know anybody else reporting this story this way. Now, some stats. African Americans comprise 13% of the American population. 2022, 52% of all homicides in the country were committed by African Americans, okay? 56% of murder victims, African American. Again, 13% of the population.

So you're just basically letting this, as you said, letting this go, there's no will to confront it at all. But if that Waffle House, that having a white guy, shooting that poor black woman, you know it would be everywhere in this country. Is that racism? Well, it's certainly a form of a placism. I mean, I don't know how else to explain it. You're sort of nailing it. Again, if you're not honest about what it is that you're seen with that shooting in Kansas City and with the shooting at the Waffle House, then you're unable to directly confront that threat head on, which is violent crime. Absolutely.

And it's worse than that. One of the ways that New York City confronted violent crime that worked under Giuliani and Bloomberg, the mayors, was stop and frisk. because the cops know in their beats, in their precincts, who the gang guys are. Everybody knows that, because they had tattoos, they run around, everybody knows. So they would stop them, frisk them, and find a lot of guns, and then prosecute them on gun crimes. But stop and frisk, gone. So after that left, the rise in violent gangs doubled or tripled, and so did the violent crime.

But there is no movement to bring back stop and frisk. Now, as a counterterrorism expert, do you believe in stop and frisk? Not only do I believe in it, but it's one of the critical layers of preventative measure that law enforcement needs. Look, Bill, you know, just because I come from the counterterror space, let me be clear, I spent the last 15 years working as a deputy for a sheriff's agency on the East Coast, a nice-sized sheriff's agency where I train that agency in counterterrorism, but also active shooter response with that highest threat of response to violence.

And what we saw in Kansas City was an active shooter. The fact that it was black on black or the fact that it was crime, related or gang related, which is drug related, you still have the same effect at the end, the same violent outcome. It terrorizes the community. I didn't want to be clear. We don't know yet if these minors, war members of gangs, or if they're black. We heavily suspect that is the case, but we don't know.

And I want everybody to understand it. Final question for you. When you put ethnicity, skin color, equity, whatever it may be, over honesty, then you have danger, public safety, danger. That's my opinion. Am I wrong? No, you're not wrong. You have to be brutally honest about shaping a mosaic to be able to look at the threat so that you develop policies and procedures, Bill, to be able to combat those threats in order to protect these

communities. That's the bottom line. I agree with you 100%. Law enforcement has the capability, but to be able to really do the job, the way Giuliani did it. He was very effective. Stop and frisk is a must. And being honest about the genesis of those threats to be able to categorize those games, to be able to look at that as a drug problem, the Mexican Senaloa cartels, their fentanyl, with their crack cocaine coming up from the South. All that gets distributed by these baseline gang members, and that has to be looked at honestly. Otherwise, you're going to have another decaying gang city.

And the problem with that is it's going to spill over, and it's just going to get worse and more dangerous. Yeah, innocent people are getting killed now, like crazy. And neighborhoods are being terrorized and destroyed. I don't know of anybody doing this. I don't know if anybody in the country, I don't know any governor, any mayor, anybody. Trying to get this under control.

Mr. Colin, thanks very much. We appreciate your time. This is the NoSpin News Weekend Edition. Power, politics, and the people behind the headlines. I'm Miranda Devine, New York Post columnist, and the host of the brand new podcast, Podforce One. Every week, I'll sit down for candid conversations with Washington's most powerful disruptors,

lawmakers, newsmakers, and even the President of the United States. These are the leaders shaping the future of America and the world. Listen to Podforce One with me, Miranda Devine, every week on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast. You don't want to miss an episode. Hey, it's Sean Spicer from the Sean Spicer Show podcast, reminding you to tune into my show every day

to get your daily dose inside the world of politics. President Trump and his team are shaking up Washington like never before, and we're here to cover it from all size, especially on the topics the mainstream media won't. So if you're a political junkie on a late lunch or getting ready for the drive home, new episodes of the Sean Spicer Show podcast drop at 2 p.m. East Coast every day. Make sure you tune in. You can find us at Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast. You may know that we have a foreign news partner. I've mentioned it before. It's the Dailychatter.com. And we work with Daily Chatter because we don't have our own foreign correspondence and they do to accumulate information all over the world.

And if you go to Dailychatter.com every day, there's a very readable, I dispatch, and you'll learn a lot. I do. I get it every morning. Okay. The guy who runs it is named Phil Balboni, and I used to work for Mr. Balboni. He has a local reporter slash analyst in Boston at WCBBTV, a classic television station. All right, Phil, I got to ask you a series of questions, and I want your best take on it. So all over the Internet, it's Russia's now winning the war against

Ukraine. Is that true? They're beginning to advance on the front lines in some key places. So they're not winning yet, but they are definitely, they have momentum, whereas the war was stalemated for quite a long time. So the Russians took Bakht, many of your viewers who will remember that name. And now just last week, they took Avdivka, another kind of strategic Egypt town, and they're attacking in a couple of other places along the line, which is 600 miles long. So I would say Russia is not winning, but they are moving in the direction of winning. Okay.

What is the goal for Putin, total domination of Ukraine? I don't think so. I think he wants to keep what he's won. So Crimea, which Russia took in 2014, along with part of the eastern part of Ukraine. But getting Crimea was a huge thing for Putin personally, and I think he wants to protect that. All right. So he wants a treaty that says, we're going to stop this war, but wherever Russia is in Ukraine, Russia gets to keep. I think yeah well he's made a lot of advances since 2014 so now the territory that Russia took

yeah the eastern part of the two years ago when the war when the war began two years ago this Sunday by the way so it's the second anniversary of the war already they gained a lot of territory I think Putin would like to keep that I don't think he feels now that he is any way he is going to take all of Ukraine that's not going to happen okay so He doesn't want to occupy the whole country that would be, you know, because he's taking a lot of casualties. There was a British report out yesterday that 300,000 casualties the Russians have taken. Do you believe it's that high? I do. Yeah. I do. I think the Ukrainians have lost over 100.

Wow. 300,000 Russians, 100,000 Ukrainians. Now, as you know, there's a 90 million, I'm sorry, billion with a big, 90 billion dollar aid package that's being held up in Congress now. although it passed the Senate by a wide margin, 70 to 29, to send more material to Ukraine. I think this will get through eventually, but the delay is helping Putin, correct? It definitely is, yeah. I mean, I think the Ukrainians are running out of soldiers. They're running out of weapons, ammunition, artillery shells. So every day, every week that goes by that more aid isn't delivered to them, they are losing. And I think that's been part of some of the recent setbacks that they've had is because.

Well, why aren't the NATO countries delivering ordinance and arms to them? Why is it all on us? They are. No, the Germans are. The French have been, the Dutch, the Polish. and others have been delivering money and weapons, but it's not enough because, you know, they stopped really preparing for Russia during the end after the end of the Cold War. So believe it or not, they don't have enough weapons factories to build the artillery shells, the tanks, and make the

bullet. So they can't manufacture stuff like we can. All right, let's switch you over to Israel. So Netanyahu is a guy who's going to do what Netanyahu wants. It doesn't matter who pressures him. Am I right in that assessment? Yeah, you are. Okay. So you're going to do what he wants. And the Israeli people want Hamas to be destroyed.

But I don't think you can destroy the entire terror network of Hamas. Am I wrong? You can. No, you're right there too. So, you know, Israel, the I, The IDF, the Israeli defense forces, claim they've killed 14,000 Hamas fighters since the war began. Today is day 138 of the war. But, you know, by all estimates, there were up to 40,000 Hamas fighters before the war began on October 7th.

So, you know, simple math tells you that there's a lot of people left to fight. And that doesn't include the young men in Gaza who probably would do. anything to put on a uniform or whatever they wear and join the battle. And fight the Jews. All right. So Netanyahu's end game then is getting the hostages back and killing as many radical Palestinians as he can. That seems to be what we're looking at. It does. He does not have a game plan for when the war stops when the shooting. stops. And that is the biggest problem of all, is that, you know, since 1948, the Jews and the Palestinians have lived sometimes in peace, sometimes in war, but they've never found a permanent

solution. And until one is found, even if the fighting stopped tomorrow, it wouldn't stop forever. No, I know. And when you hear this two-party state, there aren't two parties. There's Israel, but there's no Palestinian United Front to negotiate with it. There's the Palestinian Authority, but they're very weak. They're weak. I mean, yeah, very weak. Okay, so Iran is involved with Hezbollah, to some extent,

Hamas, and they want this war to continue forever, correct? They do, because it's all to their advantage. of their proxies in Lebanon, you know, in Gaza itself, in Syria, in particular, in Iraq, in Yemen, you know, militias and others that they arm in support and train. So anything that ties down the United States is a plus for Iran. Right. And they're not going to stop. I mean, they're going to create violent chaos wherever they are. And they are arming and financing, Hamas, Hezbollah, as you mentioned, the Houdis in Yemen and on and on and on. So that doesn't seem like there's any hope there at all,

because the mullers are just not going to stop. No. But you know, there are good actors here, so the Saudis would like the fighting to stop, the Qatari's who are helping negotiate to ceasefire. Right. And Egypt, that's right, bad for business. Egypt, you know, wants the fighting to stop.

So there are people who will help and support and help to rebuild. Gaza, but the Israeli government has to be willing to compromise, and they've not, so far. Okay, but they had before October 7. And if we were the United States that had suffer, and you know, you saw what happened after 9-11, I mean, what we did, so you got to keep that in mind. Why do you think the United Nations hates Israel so much? Well, I don't think I would put it that way, Bill. I mean, I think. think the United Nations, do you mean the Secretariat or do you mean the countries that make the countries, I mean, when you vote, every country votes for an immediate ceasefire with no

hostage release or anything else, that works to Israel's disadvantage. I think the United Nations hates Israel. I don't agree. I think that it's hard for us in the United States, which is one of the reasons why I created my company to help people get more information about the world. The rest of the world is not supportive of what Israel is doing right now. And, you know, 29,000. Why, after that horror on October 7, you would feel everybody say, look, Israel is justified to try to get these Hamas terrorists out of there.

Why aren't they sympathetic? They are sympathetic to that. But, I mean, I'm sure you realize that 29,000 Gassans have been killed since the war began. Most of them, women and children, they have had 30,000 airstrikes. That's over 200 every day. 80% of all the buildings in Gaza have been destroyed or damaged. It's been a, I think, by any measure, they've overdone it. Nobody objects or disagrees.

have a right to defend themselves. It's how they've gone about it. Did we overdo it on Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Personally, I think we did what we had to do. All right. So it's a debatable issue, but I still think that there is an anti-Israel bent inside the United Nations. Led by African countries, interestingly now, South Africa and this and I'm going, wait a minute, And you guys are the underdogs in Africa. Israel is certainly the underdog. Why aren't you sympathetic? Do you have any perspective on that?

I think it's their colonial, colonialist history. Colonial thing? Yeah. Okay. I got it. All right. Last question for you. You managed me for a little while in the 1980s.

That must have been hell. It wasn't actually. I mean, I want your viewers to know that you were, you were a damn. good reporter and you know you were you were a pleasure to work with i mean you're the same guy you were 40 years ago uh you know uh very confident smart sometimes a little opinionated uh maybe you rub some of your colleagues the wrong way from time to time but uh no you were great and that's why you've been friends 40 years there were two news directors that were outstanding and i'm going to have the other one from wcbs tv on next week

week. Steve Cohen, you know him. But when I was working for you in Boston, and Boston is my second home, as you know. I mean, when I go to Boston, everybody thinks I'm from Southie. I was different than most of the other reporters because I was so brash, B-R-A-S-H. And I remember that. But we let you do something we'd never let anybody else do before, which was to do comments. on the 11 o'clock news. That was a first. You know, and that was interesting

because the ratings went up because I was monitoring them. And the reason that you and Coppersmith, the general manager, put me on, was that, and this is fascinating, after the weather in Boston, everybody turned off and go to sleep. But then you put this madman O'Reilly on

at the end of the show, hoping that people would stay up, which they did. Which they did. the funny thing about it was that the reigning queen of news in boston natalie jacobson huge huge anchor up there she hated me she was she was just look at me like what is this i think i think you threatened her a little bit well i threatened every but you stuck up to her i mean you said no we're doing this for the good of the whole newscast here natalie

And I admired that very much because I knew she wouldn't even introduce me. She wouldn't even read the lead. Her husband, Jed Curtis, who was the co-anchor, had to do it. Right. So anyway. We had an amazing team. I mean, I'm sure many of your viewers remember the 1980s in television news. It really was the golden age.

That was the apex. Absolutely. We had standards. You sent reporters all over the world. I remember Martha Raditz, who's. now on ABC. She sent her to the Philippines when they had the big uproar there. I mean, it was really, it was really, number one, a pleasure to work with you, which is why we've stayed in touch all these years. And number two, it had a tremendous impact, Channel 5 and Boston,

on the whole New England area. That's gone. And I'm not quite sure why it disappeared. Last word, do you know why? Because of viewers aren't there anymore. I mean, you know, people have migrated it off to, you know, a hundred or a thousand or a million different places. You know, that 11 o'clock news that people watched you on in the 1980s, I bet the audience is maybe 25% of what it used to be. Of what it was. Yeah, they're all scattered. Yeah.

All right, Phil Dobony, it's daily chatter, one word.com. Can't get much easier than that. If you're interested in foreign news, and it's straight. It's straight. Okay. I want everybody to go and check it out. Thanks, Phil. Good to see you, man.

Pay care. Great to see you, Bill. Okay. Here's a gem from the No Spin News Vault. All right, free speech. So is it under siege in America? In my opinion, it is. But this goes back a while.

Let's go back to 1925, almost 100 years ago, when the most famous free speech case in history was evolving. This was about the teaching of evolution in public schools. Before 1925, most public schools were not allowed to teach evolution. They had to say, God created everything. And evolution, no, couldn't mention it. Okay. Clarence Darrow, you know the name, very famous attorney. He takes up the case, and he wins in Tennessee. Now, there is a book. just came out yesterday called Trial of the Century. And it chronicles what happened in the most famous free speech case in America.

It's written by Greg Jarrett. You may know him, Fox News Legal Analyst and a guy I've known for decades who never seems to age. Jared always kind of got the little Dick Clark thing coming down. It doesn't really seem to age very much. And he wrote the book. So congrats on the book. We hope people will check it out. Very important subject. You know I write history books, and yours is a history book as well. Right. What was the most important thing you learned, you yourself, from the research you did for this book?

Well, I took a cue from you. When you write your books, you make them exciting. History can be exciting if you're a good story. storyteller. So frankly, I tried to emulate you. The climactic moment in the trial is when Clarence Darrow, who's out of options, he knows he's losing, the jury's against him, the judge and ordained minister is against him, and Scopes is about to be convicted. And on the other side is the great fundamentalist leader William Jennings Bryan, who's the prosecutor in the case who helped to get this law pass criminalizing the teaching of evolution. And what does Darrow do? He does something extraordinary, Bill. He calls the prosecutor to the witness stand and the judge is mortified. You can't do that. But Darrow was counting on Brian Ziga, who then stood up and said, Your Honor, I have no fear. I'm happy to give testimony to everyone about how the Bible should be taken literally. And so the judge is so worried the courtroom is going to collapse. because, you know, there's hundreds of people packed in there. People are feigning because of the searing heat in the summer of Tennessee, 1925. So they moved the cross-examination of Brian by Darrell outside on a platform left over from the 4th of July activities.

I have a picture in the book where you can see thousands of people convened in front of the platform, and there are these two lions, two great orators, icons in American history, facing off and in the end darrow utterly destroyed brian so much so that a broken man just days later he lays down for a nap and he never wakes up wow i did not know that it's a remarkable story yeah so brian dies shortly after uh um darrow dissect him on the stand now americans believe that freedom of speech is you know sacrosanct in stone but as we just used a setup now if you speak your mind even a responsible person like samantha ponder you can be labeled and you can be condemned and you

can be maligned and defamed and there's nothing you can do about that is there no very little and social media, as valuable in some ways that it is, is to blame. I mean, look, people can create fake accounts, fake names, they can say whatever they want, and they can't be held accountable, and, you know, frankly, neither can the platforms under current law. So, you know, what we're seeing in America today is the same free speech rights that are under assault bill, whether it is, you know, partisan censorship and political discourse or polarizing disinformation campaigns,

classroom indoctrination of punitive cancel culture under the guise of social justice, whereby, and we see this almost every day, conformity of thought, supplants robust debate. And that's why this story, the trial of the century, is so important, because bill history is now repeating itself i agree the 100% on that um and it even even worse than what you say because the corporate media controls information flow yes you can go on the internet and you can hear private voices but the mass media flow is now controlled by these large corporations who basically blackball and silence people they don't like so when i was on the

factor on Fox News, as you will know. I was on Letterman and Leno and The View when Barbara Walters was there and all the network warning shows. I could spread my message. Now you won't see anybody from Fox on any of those shows. All right? They're blacked out. They're canceled. Nobody, okay, can get access to that. Publishing industry, you want to write a contrarian book. Don't go to Simon and Schuster, okay, although they have a new CEO and maybe he'll change, and I hope he does change the culture. But it's very, very hard now if you don't conform to the leftist view of the world that the major corporations have embraced, you're shut down completely. And that's not freedom of speech. No, Bill, it's not.

And in many ways, I also blame the mainstream media have been whitting accessories to the erosion. and the assault on on free speech uh i mean just look at their conduct in the phony trump russia collusion narrative that they drove yeah uh you know they never bothered to verify or corroborate any or apologize i mean they won they won pulitzer prizes i know i know and that says it all right The book is Trial of the Century. I've started it. It's very interesting to read it, and particularly if you are interested in your country and whether we can make a comeback in the freedom of speech area.

Do you think we can, Jared? Last question. Can we make a comeback and have robust debate, as you put it? Well, I'm deeply worried that we cannot. We are seeing... Too far gone. books being banned, art shows being censored,

it seems to be getting worse and worse. It reminds me of the Joe McCarthy Red Scare area of the 1950s in which if you dared to dissent, you were punished. You bet. All right, Greg Jarrett, thanks very much to taking a time.

Good luck with the book. Thank you for listening to the NoSpin News Weekend Edition. To watch the full episodes of the NoSpin, news visit bill o'reilly.com and sign up to become a premium or concierge member that's bill o'reilly.com sign up and start watching today