Today, Secretary of State Marco Rubio went on Face the Nation and was confronted with this historical illiteracy from host Margaret Brennan:
NEW: Secretary of State Marco Rubio smacks down CBS News' Margaret Brennan after she bizarrely claimed the Holocaust happened because of too much free speech.
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) February 16, 2025
Brennan verbally struggled as she tried relating JD Vance's comments on free speech to Nazis.
Brennan: "[Vance] was… pic.twitter.com/9n1TdcRy1i
The cut off text reads:
Brennan: "[Vance] was standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide..."
Rubio: "I have to disagree with you. Free speech was not used to conduct a genocide."
"The genocide was conducted by an authoritarian Nazi regime that happened to also be genocidal because they hated Jews... There was no free speech in Nazi Germany. There was none."
All of this came as part of a larger discussion over some European leaders crying like babies because J.D. Vance criticized Europe’s descent into fascist limitations on Freedom of Expression. If you want to see that larger discussion, this clip provides it:
Secretary of State Marco Rubio defends @JDVance's "historic" speech last week in Munich, leaves ABC's Margaret Brennan speechless after she tries to claim that free speech was "weaponized" by the Nazis. Incredible exchange: 👇 pic.twitter.com/GYLZfopVwP
— Scott Morefield (@SKMorefield) February 16, 2025
(Morefield accidentally calls CBS ‘ABC’ and corrects himself in subsequent post.)
But we prefer the shorter clip because we think the more newsworthy element is that Brennan, a journalist, is actually arguing against Freedom of Expression—and doing it with an absolutely historically ignorant argument. And while we appreciate how Rubio pushed back against Brennan’s premise, we think he could have done a better job by recognizing what her actual claim is: Her actual claim is that if they only had hate speech laws in the Weimar Republic, that it might have stopped Hitler and, therefore, it might have stopped the Holocaust from happening.
She isn’t stating it well, but we are pretty sure that this is what she really means.
But this argument ignores the fact that the Weimar Republic did have hate speech laws and they actually helped the Nazis. First, as the Nazi party rose, these laws gave them the glamour of being ‘forbidden fruit’ (not to mention giving them a Streisand Effect). For instance, one poster used to promote the rise of the Nazi explicitly used the Weimar’s censorship regime against them, saying:
Recommended
Why is Adolf Hitler not allowed to speak? Because he is ruthless in uncovering the rulers of the German economy, the international bank Jews and their lackeys, the Democrats, Marxists, Jesuits, and Free Masons! Because he wants to free the workers from the domination of big money!
The censorship was cited as a concrete example of how various groups (including the Jooooooos) were controlling everything to the detriment of the regular German people. In addition to that, these laws also helped the Nazis once they gained power because these laws established the principle that the expression of certain ideas that were deemed dangerous by the government could be suppressed, which Hitler and the Nazis exploited to justify suppression of anti-Nazi speech. If Weimar law had been strictly dedicated to the right to peacefully express any viewpoint, however vile, the way that American law is, then it would have been unprecedented for Hitler to censor his opposition and thus would have been seen as more alarming to the common German citizen.
This author happened to know most of this based on prior education, but Nico Perrino, Executive Vice President of FIRE (which now stands for ‘Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’ and generally serves as an uncompromising advocate for Freedom of Expression), wrote a thread in response to her claim, with more scholarly citations:
“You’re standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to commit a genocide.”
— Nico Perrino (@NicoPerrino) February 16, 2025
Utterly false. It’s called the “Weimar fallacy” and Margaret Brennan should know better than to engage in it.
Germany had plenty of hate speech codes. Indeed Hiltler was banned from speaking…
The cut off text:
Indeed Hiltler [sic] was banned from speaking in parts of Germany for a number of years.
The censorship did nothing but make Hitler a martyr. Goebbels conducted a whole propaganda campaign on the back of it. ‘He alone of two billion people on Earth may not speak in Germany,’ read the slogan.
Germany had no free speech and no rule of law — and millions died because of it.
He goes on in a thread and all of it is gold:
Former ACLU President and @TheFIREorg Senior Fellow on the “Weimar fallacy.”
— Nico Perrino (@NicoPerrino) February 16, 2025
Nadine’s father was a Holocaust survivor.pic.twitter.com/atmo8qPjTR
(The fact this is being said by a former president of the ACLU speaks to how the current ACLU has lost its way on Freedom of Expression.)
“In this 1920s cartoon by Philipp Rupprecht, Hitler is depicted as having his mouth sealed with tape that reads ‘forbidden to speak.’ The text beneath this image reads, ‘He alone of two billion people on Earth may not speak in Germany.’”https://t.co/i2iza4TVZo pic.twitter.com/SVPuBiOlgK
— Nico Perrino (@NicoPerrino) February 16, 2025
That last post links to a page at FIRE’s website that demolishes this ‘Weimar Fallacy’ in detail and it is where we got the quote from the Nazi poster.
That is one point we wish Rubio had made—that Weimar hate speech laws actually helped the Nazis. Another point we wish he had made was that Freedom of Expression is necessary for Democracy to exist. As we wrote in a VIP piece:
The syllogism is simple:
1. If you have a right to vote, you have a right to make an informed choice.
2. To make an informed choice, you need to receive information from others.
3. To receive information from others, those other people need to be able to speak freely.
4. Therefore, freedom of expression is necessary for any kind of free and fair election.
Countries that have hate speech laws, therefore, violate the principle of Democracy. They don’t have truly free and fair elections.
So, we appreciate Rubio pushing back, but his answer could use some improvement. But to be fair, Brennan didn’t properly express her wrongheaded argument as we noted above and one can't expect Rubio to be ready to respond to every ignorant argument against Freedom of Expression.
And it speaks to deep problems in the CBS Newsroom that Brennan could believe this wrongheaded, ahistorical nonsense and air it as if it is fact. She is not saying some people believe that a lack of censorship led to the holocaust. She is stating it as a fact, as if no one could rationally disagree with her, like you might say that the Earth goes around the Sun. And it speaks to a dangerous groupthink at CBS News—most likely because there is no one there who thinks differently on this issue, or at least no one is willing to speak those thoughts out loud. The left loves to tout its support for diversity, but they place no value in diversity of thought.
More reactions:
So let me get this straight - the maniacal tyrant Adolph Hitler, the brutal Gestapo, a cold blooded military war machine, and cowardly politicians of The Reichstag were persuaded to carry out Holocaust by free German citizens practicing free speech?
— Daniel Garza (@danielggarza) February 16, 2025
What a repugnant assertion.
@CBSNews should be embarrassed by Brennan’s performance. Not only is she showing that in order to attack the Trump administration she will say almost any mindless thing that comes to her, but she is also demonstrating her complete lack of historical knowledge.
— markm (@markm_1776) February 16, 2025
Margaret Brennan: “You know who else enjoyed Free Speech? Hitler.” pic.twitter.com/Mnyek5ycQ6
— Thulsa Doom (@TheButcher2020) February 16, 2025
Margaret got dunked on. These people and their revisionist history will no longer sell.
— SherriMutts4me (@mutts4me_sherri) February 16, 2025
Rubio did the job, defend and support the concept of free speech and individual liberty.
— brumars (@brumarsh) February 16, 2025
JD did issue an historic speech, one that shold not be underestimated on its message and timing.
This is leadership, and we are seeing DJTs administration issuing leadership daily, and the…
The cut off text:
This is leadership, and we are seeing DJTs administration issuing leadership daily, and the world is not used to seeing it.
How can a journalist of her supposed standing be this weak on free speech? It’s truly stunning… are they corrupt, incompetent or just stupid?
— Blondie… The Vanilla Villain (@Calamityjane77) February 16, 2025
As our late friend John Hoge would say ‘embrace the power of and.’
If the media had the capacity to feel shame, they would ask @margbrennan to take a long vacation and consider a different profession. https://t.co/Ds3205zjc5
— Fusilli Spock (@awstar11) February 16, 2025
Let fools like @margbrennan enjoy all the free speech she wants so the world can see how truly deranged her and her ilk are!
— NON NOBIS DOMINE (@VerumEstLiberta) February 16, 2025
We are reminded of the old saying: ‘Leftists want Conservatives to shut up. Conservatives want leftists to keep talking.’
I knew that political partisanship has destroyed any pretense of neutrality by the mainstream media. What I didn't know was how ignorant journalists are about history.
— Joel M. Petlin (@Joelmpetlin) February 16, 2025
No, @margbrennan, free speech wasn't weaponized into committing genocide in Nazi Germany. Jew hatred did that.
Free speech weaponized? They cracked down hard on the NSDAP and many places banned Hitler from making speeches.
— Bosque (@BasqueOli) February 16, 2025
The Nazis never replaced the Weimar constitution, they used the preexisting legal structure to crack down on their opponents. Not that this lady would care. https://t.co/wQ2scg6Bpq pic.twitter.com/GxvIIICmsp
Ban the term “weaponizing” for anything other than ordnance. How’s that for a speech restriction? https://t.co/XCpaZykIER
— Randy Barnett (@RandyEBarnett) February 16, 2025
We are sure Barnett is being sarcastic about suppressing the term, but his expression of annoyance at the term ‘weaponizing’ is spot on.
She cannot keep this gig. Even @CBSNews must have a shred of self-awareness. https://t.co/LQfUDd6ZOy
— Mark Davis (@MarkDavis) February 16, 2025
Respectfully, they don’t have even that much self-awareness. This ignorant hostility to Freedom of Expression is who they are. The legacy press, people who literally owe their livelihoods to the First Amendment, are increasingly hostile to Freedom of Expression and it is part of why it is correct to say that increasingly the legacy media is an enemy of the American people.
Of course, there are other people still in Brennan’s bubble:
The full context. @margbrennan is owed a major apology, especially since the Nazis took advantage of free-speech laws to incite, etc.. The problem of course is not free speech, but perversion of free-speech laws to incite and enable violence… https://t.co/DsEfJT9jQl
— Nitzkiah b’ Avigdor Czarnecki ✡️✝️🇺🇸🇮🇱 (@Nickidewbear) February 16, 2025
Moving on to smarter commentary:
Well, @margbrennan should immediately resign and cancel her show, excessive free speech is too dangerous 😬
— KK Berd 🇺🇸 (@keny_berd) February 16, 2025
lol, the knots these people will tie themselves in just to “get Trump” is incredible
Reminder: Democrat Margaret Brennan echoes her fellow Dems here that believe free speech can be weaponized and therefore free speech and the platforms/people that promote/facilitate it MUST be regulated/controlled because people speaking their minds are ‘dangerous.’ https://t.co/mB13JJCy9w
— Super Journalist (Retired) - JOURN-EL of Skrypton (@Magnum_CK) February 16, 2025
Indeed, we are constantly reminded of our favorite quote from President Kennedy:
Reminds me of this quote from President Kennedy
— (((Aaron Walker))) (@AaronWorthing) February 14, 2025
Cc @JDVance https://t.co/7pfG6faGFX pic.twitter.com/pU4AQ5LISD
Of course, one should always be careful about these image quotes. Always follow the advice that Lincoln gave in this totally real quote:
Jokes aside, there are many quotes attributed to famous people when they didn’t actually say those things. But in this case, Kennedy really said it, and indeed we like to include even more from the speech where he said it:
We welcome the views of others. We seek a free flow of information across national boundaries and oceans, across iron curtains and stone walls. We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.
You can read the whole speech, here:
Source:https://t.co/1uG6iyDpOI
— Michael S. Kochin 🗑️ מיכאל קוצ'ין (@mskochin) February 2, 2022
But isn’t it amazing how different this is from the current Democratic Party philosophy that holds that somehow foreigners are not allowed to even express themselves in relation to American politics—claiming that this is somehow ‘foreign interference?’ It’s a far cry from Kennedy saying ‘We seek a free flow of information across national boundaries’ and it speaks to how much the Democratic Party elite has left President Kennedy’s values behind.
But our joke is that the modern Democratic Party leadership completely agrees with President Kennedy: They are indeed afraid of the American people and they think that is a good thing. That’s why they don’t want the average American to have Freedom of Expression, and that’s certainly why they don’t want us to have the right to bear arms, either.
RELATED: WATCH: You Are NOT Going to Believe Who ITV Sidelined on Holocaust Remembrance Day
'Bollywood Thirst Traps:' Iowahawk Roasts a Racist for Attacking J.D. Vance’s Family as Only He Can
Joe Biden’s Potential Incompetence Threatens Chaos in Our System (And We Should Embrace the Chaos)
Ana Navarro-Cárdenas Gets Wrecked on Bad Pardon History (And Let’s Talk about Hunter’s Pardon)
Join the conversation as a VIP Member