From capitol hill with congressman Kelly Armstrong, a member of the committee. You can also join the conversation on facebook and twitter. Washington journal is next. Host the view of what is known as canon rotunda as we start our Washington Journal Program for today. It is today House Democrats will unveil two articles of a b of impeachment. Obstruction of justice other on abuse of power. You can watch that on cspan. You can follow along at cspan. Org. If you havent done so already, download the radio app and listen as you are out and about. Up until the time of the press conference at 9 00, we will take your calls on this move by House Democrats on articles of impeachment and here is how you can let us know what you think. 2027488001 for republicans. Emocrats, 2027488000 and independents, 2027488002. If you want to text us, you can do so at 2027488003. Post on our twitter feed at cspanwj and you can post on facebook at facebook. Com cspan. Here to walk us through what might be expect
The Heritage Foundation hosted this event where panelists debated the pros and cons of existing laws. Good afternoon. My name is david azerrad, director of the simon center principles and politics and the Family Foundation fellow here at the Heritage Foundation. Its my pleasure to welcome you to the Heritage Foundation for this panel discussion. The freedom of the press as all americans know is enshrined in the First Amendment. A free press is a necessary component of republican selfgovernment and a hallmark of a free society. That is not in question. In fact, its a nonnegotiable. Free speech, however, is not the exclusive prerogative of the press. The First Amendment you will remember protects the freespeech rights of all americans, not just those who so happen to have an in a in journalism. The prez, in other words, is itself subject to free speech just like everyone else is. Journalists do not take well to criticism and i say this as recovering journalist myself. There is a tendency
Free speech is the prerogative of the press. It protects the free speech writes of all american, not just those who so happen to have a name in journalism. The press, in other words, is itself subject to free speech just like everyone else is. Journalist, however, do not take well to criticism and i say this as a recovering journalist myself. There is a tendency in the media to equate criticism of the press, however well founded with an attack on the freedom of the press itself, but i think you can be committed to free speech while attacking those who abuse it. Whats more, the freedom of the press like all freedoms is not without limits. There are no prior restraints on publication. Those days are thankfully, long behind us, but the press is responsible for what it says especially if it defames an individual. Libel laws are also an integral part of a free society. In the 1964 Landmark Supreme Court ruling of New York Times b. Sullivan, the Supreme Court considerably raised the burden o
It is my pleasure to welcome you to the Heritage Foundation. Freedom of the press is enshrined in the First Amendment. It is a necessary component to republican selfgovernment and a hallmark of a free society. That is not in question. In fact, it is a nonnegotiable. However, is not the exclusive prerogative of the press. The First Amendment protects the freespeech rights of all americans, not just those who happen to have an m. A. In journalism. The press itself is subject to free speech just like everyone else. Journalists do not take well to criticism. I see this as a recovering journalist myself. There is a tendency in the media to equate criticism of the press with an attack on the freedom of the press itself. But i think you can be committed to free speech while attacking those who abuse it. What is more, the freedom of the press, like all freedoms, is not without limits. There are no prior restraints on publications. Those days are thankfully long behind us. But the press is resp
With respect to the appellants allegation that the housing accountability act applies, we would disagree with that assertion. Adding twobedrooms does not make you eligible under the housing accountability act has been the citys position. We do not see this as something you would have to approve, or the Planning Commission will have to approve. Even the unit otherwise we would not be here. Being code compliant, they would not need it for that reason. That is not even what is before anyone, because we have a building that is technically before you. The third unit is again just added. That is not what is on appeal. What is on appeal is the two unit building. The concern of the displacement of the tenant, 30 plus years, as i understand it. The commission did not think that this was appropriate project, the end of the day. They denied the application. I am available for questions. You commented on the haa, which im glad you did. What about the argument that there are constraints on the Plan