Interview with Michelle Malkin
By Valerie Maez
Published in the Four Corners Free Press, September 2019
Nationally known journalist Michelle Malkin will be speaking on October 12, 2019 at the Ute Mountain Ute Casino.
She is a mother, wife, blogger, conservative syndicated columnist, longtime cable TV news commentator, and the best -selling author of six books. She started her newspaper journalism career at the Los Angeles Daily News in 1992, moved to the Seattle Times in 1995, and has been penning nationally syndicated newspaper columns for Creators Syndicate since 1999. She is the founder of conservative Internet start-ups Hot Air and Twitchy.com. Malkin has received numerous awards for her investigative journalism, including the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws (COGEL) national award for the cause of governmental ethics and leadership (1998), the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award for Investigative Journalism (2006), the Heritage Foundation and Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity’s Breitbart Award for Excellence in Journalism (2013), the Center for Immigration Studies’ Eugene Katz Award for Excellence in the Coverage of Immigration Award (2016), and the Manhattan Film Festival’s Film Heals Award (2018). She has been married for 26 years, is the mother of two teenagers, and lives with her family here in Colorado. Follow her at michellemalkin.com
I contacted Michelle Malkin and she graciously agreed to an e-mail interview.
Question: To start with, have you visited Montezuma County previously? If not, will your itinerary allow you time to tour Mesa Verde?
Answer: Yes, I visited Montezuma County and Mesa Verde in December 2017 with my family. It’s one of the most fascinating places that I have been in Colorado and I can’t wait to come back.
Question: With all the issues surrounding journalism these days, in regards to social media platforms, should they be considered editors, and thus subject to laws of libel, defamation, and such?
Answer: Under the guise of operating as neutral content providers, social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have enjoyed broad legal immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. But, in the age of Trump, these Silicon Valley giants have put their thumbs on the scale and discriminated systematically against conservatives, immigration enforcement advocates, Trump supporters, pro-life activists, and anti-jihad journalists. They are no longer viewpoint-neutral providers and should lose their immunity.
As for the “issues surrounding journalism,” we have too many far-Left media outlets posing as neutral arbiters of the truth who get away with defaming individuals, e.g. the Washington Post’s sliming of the Covington Catholic high school boys. I fully support lawsuits against “mainstream” journalists.
Question: On the subject of immigration and birthright citizenship. How do we, as a nation, discern who is eligible? As a case in point, John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone a year before birthright citizenship was established for territorial possessions of the United States by Congress. During his campaign for President, Congress passed legislation to declare him a citizen so as to defuse the issue.
Answer: The McCain citizenship saga shows what is wrong with our immigration system at large: It’s arbitrary, selectively enforced, and untethered from our founders’ intent. The natural born citizen clause is plainly worded. McCain was not a citizen at birth, therefore he was not a “natural born Citizen” and thus was not “eligible to the Office of President” under the Constitution. Retroactive conferral of nationality or politically-driven congressional resolution makes a mockery of the system. So, of course, does the automatic birthright citizenship granted to millions of illegal aliens. But, that’s another story.
Question: Fiscal conservatism has long been a standard for Republicans running for office. The recent budget deal negotiated by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin is anything but conservative. Your thoughts on that.
Answer: For decades, Republicans have paid lip service to fiscal conservatism while voting for massive budget deals and out-of-control spending that amount to generational theft. Big Government Republicans have ruined the conservative brand.
Question: Some political analysts are saying that the Tea Party voters are becoming disenchanted with President Trump, and that if they bolt, he doesn’t have a viable path to re-election. Do you agree or disagree with that assessment and why?
Answer: I’m not sure which political analysts are saying this or what their definition of “Tea Party voters” is, but I voted for President Trump on one issue (which is ALL issues); American sovereignty. If President Trump turns his back on American workers, American families of victims of illegal alien crime, American law enforcement officers, and American homeland security personnel, he will be abandoning his fundamental campaign platform. So far, I have been pleased with many of the primary steps he has taken to restore order to our immigration chaos. But, I have been “disenchanted” with the pace of border wall-building, asylum reform, and taxing remittances. I am also disappointed with the direction of foreign guest worker program expansion or stasis. I voted for Donald Trump, not Ivanka or her husband, Jared Kushner.
Question: Any thoughts on who the Democrats will eventually nominate for President?
Answer: It doesn’t matter whether the Democratic candidate wears a skirt or pants, serves in the Senate, is retired, or has no job (looking at you, “Beto”). The nominee will inevitably end up being an open-borders, gun-grabbing, abortion-cheerleading, tax and spend redistributionist radical.
Question: Recently, at the National Conservatism Conference, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, commented on the idea that libertarianism should be excised from the Republican Party. Your opinion?
Answer: As a nationalist, I reject open-borders libertarianism driven by the insatiable corporatist appetite for cheap foreign labor, but I share common cause with libertarians on the desire for a more restrained foreign policy and end to endless wars.
Question: The New York Times has asked every member of the House of Representatives their position on the impeachment of President Trump. The idea that two-thirds of the Senate would conclude that impeachable offenses exist, given current evidence, seems extremely unlikely. However, as of July 29, 2019, 107 members of the House responded yes to the inquiry, with others undecided, leaning no at 100. The other 226 members have yet to respond. Do you envision it likely that the House of Representatives will vote for impeachment?
Michelle Malkin will be attending the annual Lincoln Day Dinner, hosted by the Montezuma County Republicans, as their Keynote speaker.
Tickets can be purchased online at montezumagop.com or by contacting Tom Seymour at 970.799.7708. It should be a great opportunity to meet and visit with her.