We will not be silenced (but you might)
When Free Speech is convenient
Free speech is only sacred when it's convenient. Civil rights groups decry censorship at the federal level while their local allies push for restrictions on dissent. Members of the Charter Review Commission mirror the very overreach they claim to oppose, proving that for some, free speech only applies when they agree with what's being said.
An open letter from civil rights groups recently warned that the federal administration is undermining fundamental rights and democratic protections. It says that critics are being silenced, the press is under attack, and the legal system is being eroded. The letter calls for defending democracy and spreading awareness.
Excerpts from the letter include:
“In America, our government cannot do whatever it wants… We have a free press, the right to protest, to hold our government accountable…administration is arresting and threatening people who criticize the government. This means our right to speak freely about government actions can now be silenced… Censoring and attacking journalists for sharing facts… Join us in saying: We will not be silenced.”
The local reality: hypocrisy in action
What’s more interesting is who has endorsed this letter and who is amplifying it, while at the same time pushing for the very censorship they claim to oppose.
Last week, Jim Stoffer, in his role as Charter Review Commissioner (CRC) for District #1, asked the Commission to consider adopting rules that would effectively censor me—a citizen who takes publicly available records and distributes them to subscribers to hold government accountable. This is the very definition of the "Free Press" that Stoffer and others claim to defend.
“We have a free press, the right to protest, to hold our government accountable.”
His strongest ally in this effort? CRC Chairwoman Susan Fisch, a prominent leader in the Clallam County League of Women Voters. Just last week, Fisch proposed reconvening the Bylaws and Rules Committee to examine how the First Amendment applies to Commissioners' online reporting—seemingly targeting one Commissioner in particular. She characterized CC Watchdog’s reporting as “attacking” and “intimidating,” even comparing it to a time when she required FBI protection. As CRC Chair, she is leveraging her position to reshape the rules to align with her own preferences.
“In America, our government cannot do whatever it wants.”
Now, Charter Review Commissioners who refuse to “toe the line” face a chilling message: conform or be targeted. Failing to do so may lead to retaliatory ambushes, like the one carried out at last week’s CRC meeting, without public notice or proper transparency of the agenda.
“…administration is arresting and threatening people who criticize the government. This means our right to speak freely about government actions can now be silenced…”
Clallam County Watchdog remains the only news source covering the CRC, which is in a crucial year of determining how our county government will function for all its constituents. Yet, instead of embracing transparency, CRC members who advocate for restrictions on speech appear to be mirroring the very behaviors condemned in the open letter they endorse.
“Censoring and attacking journalists for sharing facts.”
The question remains: Are proponents of this open letter about federal issues applying the same principles to local governance? Or is this just another example of selective outrage—where free speech is defended only when it aligns with the majority’s preferred views?
Tomorrow (Thursday), the CRC Bylaws/Rules Committee will meet at 4:00 p.m. in the Board of Commissioners Board Room, 223 East 4th Street, Room 160, Port Angeles. Virtual and in-person attendance is allowed; instructions are here. This meeting is open to the public and will focus on the ethical guidelines and First Amendment rights for Charter Review Commissioners, specifically clarifying what they are prohibited from reporting.
On last week’s Equitable Wednesday, readers were asked if government-funded or community aid programs should be required to serve all people equally, regardless of gender or identity. Of 233 votes:
91% said, “Yes, prioritize equal access.”
1% said, “No, some groups need priority.”
8% said, “Depends on the program’s mission.”
If any of our local newspapers (other than Watchdog) would report local meetings, pending taxpayer information/actions, local controversies, etc, then we would not need a watchdog. However this is not the case, and I am grateful for the CC Watchdog to bring together all the relevant information enabling all of us to make an informed decision. Many of the persons in this community are imports to Clallam County and need tutoring on the local issues. Jeff plays a vital role in this.
Seems to me. As long as there is no conflict of intrest. And you are not proffiting from the disclosures. All good. It seems to be the norm in the democrat side of Washington to silence anyone who dissagrees with their liberal and usually skewed veiws. And im talking about even non gov people. Like neighbors ect.