Rachel Bovard: Trump DECLARES WAR On Tech Companies In Showdown With Republicans

Senior Director of Policy at the Conservative Partnership Institute, Rachel Bovard, weighs in on President Donald Trump's threat to veto a defense bill if lawmakers do not include a measure eliminating legal protections for social media companies.

About Rising:
Rising is a weekday morning show with bipartisan hosts that breaks the mold of morning TV by taking viewers inside the halls of Washington power like never before. The show leans into the day's political cycle with cutting edge analysis from DC insiders who can predict what is going to happen. It also sets the day's political agenda by breaking exclusive news with a team of scoop-driven reporters and demanding answers during interviews with the country's most important political newsmakers.

Follow Rising on social media:

Website: Hill.TV

Instagram: @HillTVLive

Twitter: @HillTVLive

Follow Saagar Enjeti & Krystal Ball on social media:

Twitter: @esaagar and @krystalball

Instagram: @esaagar and @krystalmball

[giftedgypsy]

Rachel Bovard is an excellent guest, and I appreciate your exploration of this topic. I actually saw it mentioned on CNN, with no explanation and just their standard "Trump tantrum" angle. I'd love to see a panel discussion on this.

[patrickd]

Rachel is definitely one of my favorite conservative guests.

[timmccarty]

Rachel is where its at...Smart and balanced!

[nathanandsugar]

I have two things for you: Anti-trust and anti-monopoly. Time to get out the hammers.

[jrad]

I don’t know if removing 230 would have the desired effect some ppl want

[darinsingleton]

While I undoubtedly would disagree with Ms. Bovard on any number of issues, I always appreciate hearing her insights and perspective.

[FloridaMan]

thank you Ryan Grimm for co-hosting. You guys did great! (Bring back Rachel when Saagar vacations)

[nickhyland]

Repeal 230 or throw a wrench in the Military Industrial Complex? Sounds like a win win to me!

[AmandaMarieBrinkley]

!!! !!! !!! Rachel has such a fantastic face! Sometimes i forget to pay attention to what she has to say. lol. Very Pretty. Very well informed and professional too. : )

[bassandtrebleclef]

Trump was elected to upset the apple cart. Vetoing this would certainly do that.

[glorfindel]

He ought to veto. Tech Companies have too much power.

[petersepall]

More internet censorship is coming and both party establishments are in agreement about it.

[HamishDuhnd]

Anti-Trust laws would be way more effective. Why don't they break up these tech companies, so that we don't have to treat them like publishers?

[teebone]

Donald Trump just want to go crazy on social media after he's out of office next month he doesn't want Twitter or Facebook to remove his post

[keepkalm]

Eliminating 230 also applies to email service and hosting. Just stop giving Facebook and Twitter protection, compared to email and other truly unbiased platforms, social media definitely takes an editorial stand and view on user content.

[joeherrera]

You know I actually like it if he defund the military but on the other hand he does know that this will effect his tweets right or anything he says in social media. Trump never thinks things through before he opens his mouth.

[corgeousgeorge]

Love Rachel. I'm a hardcore progressive/ leftist but if I ever had conservative leanings, it would be in her direction. I am in complete agreement that section 230 should be reformed and if it starts w/ removal? I'm fine with that. These platforms should absolutely be held to the same standard as newspapers etc.

[Critic_number_]

Always a good day when the lovely Ms. Bovard is on. She's agreeable and upholds the standards of the discussions, unlike some other contributors..

[richardhay]

I favor 230 reform but in the direction of an information free-for-all. No censorship!

[Pengalen]

The point of 230 is to create a neutral space for discussion. The big tech companies are failing to follow that standard, and should be held accountable. Entirely removing 230 wouldn't destroy those companies, but it would destroy the operation of the internet, to some significant degree, in the US. It is fairly irrelevant what they do in other countries, because they are probably already engaging in various kinds of mass censorship in those places.