Raskin Accuses Comer of Hypocrisy In Newsmax Cruscade

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) tore into Rep. James Comer (R-KY) on Tuesday during a House Oversight Committee meeting on a bill introduced by Comer, The Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act, aimed at protecting social media companies from government pressure.

Raskin, the ranking member on the committee, called out Comer, who is the chairman, over his recent remarks publicly threatening AT&T and DirecTV to renew their business dealings with Newsmax – “or else.” DirecTV dropping Newsmax has become a cause célèbre for many on the right, who claim the move is aimed at silencing conservatives. DirecTV has repeatedly claimed the decision was made over Newsmax demanding a rate increase, which was not economically viable for DirecTV.

“If we’re going to confront this problem of people using their public offices and state power to try to intimidate, then let’s do it in a comprehensive way. Let’s take an example, Mr. Chairman, that you’ll recognize immediately,” Raskin began, adding:

Over the weekend you appeared on Newsmax and you boasted that you had told AT&T, a private company, that they needed to restore Newsmax to carrying DirecTV or face the consequences. To quote you verbatim, quote, ‘I’m very upset that DirecTV doesn’t have Newsmax on there. I’ve been in constant communication with the leadership of AT&T and DirecTV. I’ve strongly encouraged them to meet with your CEO, Mr. Ruddy, to get this worked out or else.’ Or else!

“Now, I have no opinion about whether or not AT&T should carry. Newsmax apparently was purely a business decision, according to the Wall Street Journal, and I’ll ask unanimous consent to introduce this editorial by The Wall Street Journal called ‘The Right’s Wrong Attack on DirecTV over Newsmax. A commercial dispute isn’t about censoring conservatives,’” Raskin continued, adding:

Without objection, so we can submit that there was also a letter written by 42 of our colleagues, including the chairman, directly to AT&T, demanding that they carry Newsmax.
And the premise of it was there is some kind of left-wing conspiracy or so on and the Wall Street Journal completely debunked that, saying political coercion of business is as distasteful from the right as it is from the left.

But if threatening official coercive pressure like this, follow our orders or else, applied against, not just private social media entities, which is what they’re proposing this bill, but against any media entity, it would transform politics in America and the meaning of the First Amendment.

“But if we’re going to do it, let’s do it. And the First Amendment says if this is going to apply to the Internet and if it’s going to protect Twitter, arguably, which is the conceit or pretense of this bill, it should also protect AT&T against getting coerced into making a deal it doesn’t want to make, and spending millions of dollars it doesn’t want to spend with Newsmax,” Raskin concluded.

Comer’s bill “prohibits Biden Administration officials and federal bureaucrats from using their authority or influence to promote censorship of speech or pressure social media companies to censor speech.”

Watch the full clip above via C-SPAN.

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com