Trump: ‘It’s no longer free speech.’

[CLAX1911]

"Key demo" is irrelevant. He had almost 2 million viewers.

Key demo likely isn't irrelevant that's why it's called the key demo.

 

[Yakshi]

If he can't think of a single reason why a key demographic can be irrelevant, then he isn't going to learn it here.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

President Donald Trump on Friday reiterated his claim that critical television coverage of him is “illegal” and pushed back on criticisms that his administration was taking actions that chill free speech.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/19/trump-no-longer-free-speech-00574219

And half the country celebrates. We are in a bad way.

 

[NotreDame]

Kimmel wasn't fired because of the FCC. He was fired because 129,000 viewers in the key demographic.

The information plausibly supports another, maybe an additional reason, ABC muted Kimmel, Carr’s threats pertaining to licenses, which would implicate free speech rights of the 1st amendment. Yes, there can exist more than one, singular reason for silencing Kimmel by ABC, and the financial reason does not negate or cancel a other reason that implicates free speech rights.

There’s sufficient information supporting a free speech violation as well.

Either way the network executives constantly losing money on them finally out enough of his bs

“Either way”? Not really. There wasn’t any Kimmel’s termination by ABC was imminent much less seriously contemplated. Kimmel’s remarks led to Benny Johnson’s serious outbreak of hemorrhoidal censorship butt hurt that the only soothing balm was to dial up Carr, cry to Carr, which then led Carr to make oh no so wise threats that implicate free speech rights but made life better for Benny when he chose to sit on his arse.

Kimmel’s protected speech is the first domino, triggering Johnson’s domino of hemorrhoidal butt hurt censorship that he cries to Carr’s which set Carr’s domino into motion of making threats to licenses which then led entirely or in part of the domino of ABC silencing Kimmel. The information does state Iger and Walden were concerned by Carr’s remarks and were considered when deciding what action to take regarding Kimmel.

But you're not guaranteed a job on TV program based on the First amendment.

You are correct. However, I didn’t assert any contrary notion. My argument, my position, there’s sufficient information to render as plausible ABC’s decision to bench Kimmel was in part based upon the threatening comments of Carr and the content of those threatening comments by Carr based upon his disapproval of Kimmel’s speech. This then renders as plausible a 1st amendment free speech clause violation.

That’s my position.

 

[CLAX1911]

The information plausibly supports another, maybe an additional reason, ABC muted Kimmel, Carr’s threats pertaining to licenses, which would implicate free speech rights of the 1st amendment. Yes, there can exist more than one, singular reason for silencing Kimmel by ABC, and the financial reason does not negate or cancel a other reason that implicates free speech rights.

I think it's more Kimmel being a disgrace that made the affiliates no longer want to carry his show

There’s sufficient information supporting a free speech violation as well.

Doubtful

“Either way”? Not really. There wasn’t any Kimmel’s termination by ABC was imminent much less seriously contemplated. Kimmel’s remarks led to Benny Johnson’s serious outbreak of hemorrhoidal censorship butt hurt that the only soothing balm was to dial up Carr, cry to Carr, which then led Carr to make oh no so wise threats that implicate free speech rights but made life better for Benny when he chose to sit on his arse.

There wasn't any censorship that's a lie. Kimmel show is garbage that no one watches and that the affiliates can't even sell ad time for. And him saying his disgusting comments about trailer was just the last straw

Kimmel’s protected speech is the first domino, triggering Johnson’s domino of hemorrhoidal butt hurt censorship that he cries to Carr’s which set Carr’s domino into motion of making threats to licenses which then led entirely or in part of the domino of ABC silencing Kimmel. The information does state Iger and Walden were concerned by Carr’s remarks and were considered when deciding what action to take regarding Kimmel.

Speech made on a broadcast network is not protected at least not from termination. Nobody has the right to be on TV.

You are correct. However, I didn’t assert any contrary notion. My argument, my position, there’s sufficient information to render as plausible ABC’s decision to bench Kimmel was in part based upon the threatening comments of Carr and the content of those threatening comments by Carr based upon his disapproval of Kimmel’s speech. This then renders as plausible a 1st amendment free speech clause violation.

I doubt it was based on threats by carr it's probably based on despicable comments by Kimmel.

That’s my position.

Your position is based on a censorship conspiracy theory that doesn't exist.

 

[GhostFence]

The article you posted is lying trash I wonder what to expect from scum like politico.

You're the liar here, not them. Politico is 100% truth here. And now Kimmel is back. You mad, bro?

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

President Donald Trump on Friday reiterated his claim that critical television coverage of him is “illegal” and pushed back on criticisms that his administration was taking actions that chill free speech.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/19/trump-no-longer-free-speech-00574219

And half the country celebrates. We are in a bad way.

Is it still half?

 

[Jagged]

I think it's more Kimmel being a disgrace that made the affiliates no longer want to carry his show

Doubtful

There wasn't any censorship that's a lie. Kimmel show is garbage that no one watches and that the affiliates can't even sell ad time for. And him saying his disgusting comments about trailer was just the last straw

Speech made on a broadcast network is not protected at least not from termination. Nobody has the right to be on TV.

I doubt it was based on threats by carr it's probably based on despicable comments by Kimmel.

Your position is based on a censorship conspiracy theory that doesn't exist.

Even the affiliates didn't say that was the reason.

 

[CLAX1911]

Even the affiliates didn't say that was the reason.

Which affiliates?

 

[Fearandloathing]

President Donald Trump on Friday reiterated his claim that critical television coverage of him is “illegal” and pushed back on criticisms that his administration was taking actions that chill free speech.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/19/trump-no-longer-free-speech-00574219

And half the country celebrates. We are in a bad way.

You have the gift of understatement.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Come on…indoctrination was just fine when it was those pink haired LGBT+ teacher union folks sneaking kids off to underground pizza shops to get transitioned by illegals posing as vaccine pushing minions of big pharma…right before they ate the dogs and cats.

‘Merica!

You left out gays and transsexuals.

They will be pissed

 

[Jagged]

Which affiliates?

Sinclair.

 

[CLAX1911]

Sinclair.

Isn't Sinclair politically conservative maybe Jimmy Kimmel's disgusting comments bothered them.

 

[The AntiDonald]

The article you posted is lying trash I wonder what to expect from scum like politico.

It wasn't a comment about Charlie Kirk it was a lie that Jimmy Kimmel told that carries with it some pretty severe consequences and Kimmel's arrogance when he was asked to retract the LIE he told.

It's not a violation of free speech to suggest that if you behave poorly for a network that they can fire you.

They surely can. What can't happen is the government threatening to pull licenses or deny mergers unless you fire someone.

Anyway, how did that workout?

 

[The AntiDonald]

The information plausibly supports another, maybe an additional reason, ABC muted Kimmel, Carr’s threats pertaining to licenses, which would implicate free speech rights of the 1st amendment. Yes, there can exist more than one, singular reason for silencing Kimmel by ABC, and the financial reason does not negate or cancel a other reason that implicates free speech rights.

There’s sufficient information supporting a free speech violation as well.



“Either way”? Not really. There wasn’t any Kimmel’s termination by ABC was imminent much less seriously contemplated. Kimmel’s remarks led to Benny Johnson’s serious outbreak of hemorrhoidal censorship butt hurt that the only soothing balm was to dial up Carr, cry to Carr, which then led Carr to make oh no so wise threats that implicate free speech rights but made life better for Benny when he chose to sit on his arse.

Kimmel’s protected speech is the first domino, triggering Johnson’s domino of hemorrhoidal butt hurt censorship that he cries to Carr’s which set Carr’s domino into motion of making threats to licenses which then led entirely or in part of the domino of ABC silencing Kimmel. The information does state Iger and Walden were concerned by Carr’s remarks and were considered when deciding what action to take regarding Kimmel.



You are correct. However, I didn’t assert any contrary notion. My argument, my position, there’s sufficient information to render as plausible ABC’s decision to bench Kimmel was in part based upon the threatening comments of Carr and the content of those threatening comments by Carr based upon his disapproval of Kimmel’s speech. This then renders as plausible a 1st amendment free speech clause violation.

That’s my position.

And it's a good one. ABC should sue Trump and Carr for at least twice what Trump handed them months ago. Kimmel should join that suit for pain and suffering.

Trump and his Gistapo government need a tough lesson.

 

[CaughtInThe]

He's probably thinking of the stupid "fairness doctrine" which was repealed in the 80s.

Are you a libertarian?

 

[Blue Dog]

Its risible that President Trump is under the delusion he is the arbiter of what constitutes free speech….

 

[CaughtInThe]

With a dumbasses on the right don't understand is once they take free speech from people on the left then people on the right eventually lose it too.

You can't get any dumber than that.

 

[Roadvirus]

There wasn't any censorship that's a lie.

Carr's own words say otherwise.
So do Trump's.

 

[Fearandloathing]

$45 an hour, 4 hour minimum.

If you think that's too much Google it your damn self.

You get a plus for creative cowardice.


Either you own it......or its a lie.

 

[CLAX1911]

You get a plus for creative cowardice.


Either you own it......or its a lie.

K

 

[CLAX1911]

Carr's own words say otherwise.
So do Trump's.

So?

 

[CLAX1911]

They surely can. What can't happen is the government threatening to pull licenses or deny mergers unless you fire someone.

That is a conspiracy theory all to remove a failing late night host that nobody watched?

Anyway, how did that workout?

The conspiracy theory like all others it didn't happen. Kimmel just sucks.

 

[NotreDame]

Your position is based on a censorship conspiracy theory that doesn't exist.

Except when it factually isn’t. Nothing I’ve written constituted as a “conspiracy theory.” There’s no conspiracy anywhere in my position.

I think it's more Kimmel being a disgrace

So what? There isn’t a little pregnsnt, neither is there a little implication of 1st amendment free speech rights. There doesn’t exist a de minimis violation of free speech.

/There’s sufficient information supporting a free speech violation as well/

Doubtful

To the contrary, the nformation I submitted previously, and repaosted below is sufficient. Your terse skepticism isn’t a refutation but mere disagreement.

There wasn't any censorship that's a lie

You love to allege someone “lied.” You said it of Kimmel. Alleging someone “lied” in print above is potentially libelous as lies are actionable under libel actions. Knock it off.

I make those remarks because I NEVER wrote or said there WAS or IS censorship. I will not tolerate your bullcrap of falsely crying wolf by alleging someone is or has lied for your convenience when they haven’t.

Re-read what I wrote that you Intentionally mislabeled as a “lie.”

Kimmel show is garbage that no one watches… was just the last straw

a regurgitated analysis of your prior factual analysis that elides all the information and facts.

Posted below from a prior post:

Carr said, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way…These [COMPANIES] can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead…remedies we can look at…You could certainly see a path forward for suspensionover this…This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney.”
[Emphasis mine.]

Carr also stated: “[R]eally sort of past time that a lot of these licensed broadcasters themselves push back on Comcast and Disney, and say, 'Listen, we are going to preempt, we are not going to run, Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcaster[s] are running the possibility of fines or license revocations from the FCC if we continue to run content that ends up being a pattern of news distortion.'"

ABC, NexStar, and Sinclair have licenses issued by the FCC.

NexStar is pursuing acquisition of Tegnar, which requires the acquiescence of the FCC, specifically FCC Chair Carr’s approval is necessary for NexStar to acquire Tegnar.

There were meetings Wednesday afternoon, which included Iger and Dana Walden, executives, at times Kimmel, discussing, inter alia, how to address Kimmel’s remarks and Carr’s comments and the Trump Admin weighed heavily. From Rolling Stones: “In the hours leading up to the decision to pull Kimmel, two sources familiar with the matter say, senior executives at ABC, its owner Disney, and affiliates convened emergency meetings to figure out how to minimize the damage. Multiple execs felt that Kimmel had not actually said anything over the line, the two sources say, but the threat of Trump administration retaliation loomed.

"They were pissing themselves all day," one
ABC insider tells Rolling Stone. Even before Trump won the 2024 election, he and some of his closest advisers had plotted how to use the FCC and other powerful federal organs to punish late-night
comics who Trump has hated for years.”

The above provides and establishes a sufficient basis to reasonably believe free speech rights were implicated.

You’ve said NOTHING to the above constituting as a refutation.

Speech made on a broadcast network is not protected at least not from termination. Nobody has the right to be on TV.

Admitted as true and irrelevant to the argument I’ve made. The ABOVE can be true and a free speech violation exist. Your reply ignores your comment above can coexist with a free speech violation.

I doubt it was based on threats by carr it's probably based on despicable comments by Kimmel.

This is a substantive refutation. Yes, possibly, however, the information, which may or may not be true as reported, reveals Carrs comments did play a role in Iger and ABC executives decision. “Multiple execs felt that Kimmel had not actually said anything over the line, the two sources say, but the threat of Trump administration retaliation loomed.

"They were pissing themselves all day," one
ABC insider tells Rolling Stone. Even before Trump won the 2024 election, he and some of his closest advisers had plotted how to use the FCC and other powerful federal organs to punish late-night comics who Trump has hated for years.”

This ^^^ can form a sufficient basis for a free speech violation, as Volokh correctly concluded in the link provided in a prior post.

 

[Fearandloathing]

That is a conspiracy theory all to remove a failing late night host that nobody watched?

The conspiracy theory like all others it didn't happen. Kimmel just sucks.

Wow...

That's a lot of conspiracy!

And all this time I thought Kimmel was just another late night asshole with adequate writers.

I NEVER realized he was so ****ing powerful as to frighten all of MAGA and the ultra brave president of the United States!

One guy with writers!

Holy ****! That's either one mighty ****ing giant of a comedian or a self sensitive tiny little penis adult with a severe inferiority complex.

I'm going with the miniature penis theory....I mean he does play golf.....that big phallus golf club sure appeals to him