. So one of the most interesting micro stories are sort of like substories of the entire
Trump being banned from Twitter and parler being kicked off at the Apple store is the
story of Republican Senator Josh Haley's book.
So I'm going to kind of catch everybody up quickly.
If we're not all on the same page, the story won't make a lot of sense.
So the meat of the story is as follows.
Republican Senator Josh Hawley got a lot of attention before January 6th, and he got an
attaboy from Donald Trump because Josh Haley was the first Republican senator to say he
would be objecting to the electoral vote count on January 6th.
There had been a number of members of the House of Representatives who had said, we
will object, I will object.
But for the objections to actually stop the count and lead to the two hours of debate
that normally would would take place.
You also need a senator to object.
And Josh Hawley was the first senator to say, I will be objecting, cut to January 6th and
we have a violent insurrection led by Trump.
And after they were able to resecure the Capitol building later on January 6th and they reconvened,
Josh Hawley kept going with his objections and his bogus arguments about the election.
So as a result of that, Josh Holley lost a business opportunity.
Book publisher Simon and Schuster decided they don't want to have anything to do with
Josh Holly anymore.
And they said, we are backing out of the book deal that we had made with Josh Holly.
Now, remember, Simon and Schuster is a company that exists in the United States, meaning
they get to decide who they work with.
They get to decide what book they publish.
It's not the government.
If the government got to decide what book Simon and Schuster published, we would be
more like a country with centralized control of industry.
Some might call them communist countries.
We would not be what we are.
If anybody were able to tell Simon and Schuster, you must publish Josh Holli's book.
Well, Josh Holly went on Tucker Carlson's program last night, and they both seem to
not understand how capitalism works all of a sudden.
Let's get into it.
Sarah, thanks so much for coming on.
So there you're now one of the most despised people in America, so I appreciate your taking
the time from being hated to come on the show tonight.
But I want to ask you specifically about what happened between you and Simon and Schuster,
and I should say I publisher Simon Schuster.
I have a book contract for a future book with Simon Schuster that's making me very uncomfortable
watching what they did to you.
And what grounds did they cancel your book contract.
So let's even stop there just for a moment.
Tucker says now he himself is uncomfortable because he has an upcoming book deal with
Simon and Schuster.
Well, you know what, Tucker?
You can act on that.
You can deal with that.
If you're uncomfortable with what Simon and Schuster did, you have the power to say to
Simon and Schuster, I don't want to do the book with you anymore.
I'm going to find some right wing publisher or whatever the case may be.
That's how capitalism works.
If Tucker decides I'd rather not work with Simon and Schuster, I'd rather not accept
the money.
He can say to them, I'm out, let's continue.
Well, they don't like the exercise of free speech.
Tucker, I think is at the end of the day, I mean, this is really about the First Amendment.
It's really about free speech.
And Simon and Schuster didn't like me doing what Democrats in Congress did in two thousand
one and two thousand five in twenty seventeen when Democrat members of Congress objected
during the certification process in order to try to have a debate about election integrity.
You know, that's the First Amendment at work.
That's democracy at work.
But Simon and Schuster and unfortunately, a lot of people on the left now decided that
the First Amendment is something that they no longer support.
And I'll just say this, Tucker.
At a time of division, we've got to rally around the things that unites us as Americans.
And I think the First Amendment and free speech has got to be at the top of that list.
So this is not about the First Amendment.
Why do they keep talking about the First Amendment?
Josh Hawley has a right.
As a lawmaker, it's not really even about speech.
As a senator, Josh Hawley can object to votes on the grounds he objected to them.
Simon and Schuster, as a corporation that exists in the United States, can decide, we
want to publish a book with Josh Hawley or we don't.
That's it.
That's the full story here.
Josh Hawley is wrong that this is about the First Amendment or about free speech.
And he also either forgets or doesn't know or pretends not to know that even if it were
a free speech issue, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the consequences of that
speech.
Speech has consequences.
It's called capitalism, which they support.
Tucker then also appears not to get it.
So if some Polish, some creepy low IQ politician.
He says, I want to shut down, OK, I get it, but a publisher is literally the guardian
of the First Amendment.
If you're a publisher, you exist because of the First Amendment.
Your duty is to protect the First Amendment.
But the people around Simon and Schuster are now so crazed with ideology that they can't
bear to hear a contrary view expressed.
I mean, what does that portend for the country?
Well, I think it really shows, Tucker, that we're in a period where the First Amendment
values and principles of freedom of speech, also freedom of worship, freedom of religion,
these things are really under attack by some quarters, by many quarters.
That is not at all what this is about.
This has nothing to do with Simon and Schuster wanting to suppress speech or not being willing
to hear a different opinion.
Simon and Schuster made a business decision.
Josh Holley is a disgusting, depraved extremist agitator.
His actions on January 6th, Conferment Simon and Schuster decided, you know, the books
we would sell by doing this book with Josh Holly for us don't outweigh the downside to
our business of working with him.
And they made a decision.
How can anyone argue against Simon and Schuster is unilateral right to make that decision?
Now, if Simon and Schuster said we refuse to publish books by or employ black people.
Whoa, hold on a second.
Now we're violating nondiscrimination laws.
That would be a very different story.
But Simon and Schuster simply said, we don't want to do business with someone.
And Holly goes to the First Amendment here.
Take a look.
And again, I come back to the fact that this is something the First Amendment is something
that unites us as Americans.
And in this time of division, in this time of chaos, we've got to we've got to stand
strong for that.
If you're wondering why, when reporters go to Trump rallies and they interview people,
the people start talking about this is a First Amendment violation and that's a First Amendment
violation.
And this violated by free speech or trumps free speech.
This is why they are bombarded constantly with people who either don't understand or
are deliberately lying to them about what is a free speech issue, what is a first First
Amendment issue when it has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
So, you know, every time I ask this, a bunch of people say, Tucker definitely knows this
is not really about speech.
Josh Hawley probably also knows they're being disingenuous, that maybe that maybe it doesn't
matter why they're doing it.
It's bamboozling a lot of people.
And again, it goes back to education and media literacy.
If more people were better educated, they wouldn't fall for this nonsense about this
being an issue of speech.
Let me know what you
think