what you are seeing? just keep your mouth shut. we know there is a lot of hypocrisy when it comes to the un leadership when it comes to the biden administration pelosi s comment. and here at home protest are underway in both d.c. and new york over the olympic games, griff. just kicking off here in washington. christina : live in los angeles, christina thank you. jacqui: for more on the beijing olympics we have fox s political analyst and democratic strategist david. thank you both are being with us appreciate your time. thank you proquest good to be with you. speaker pelosi clarified she said look she s not trying to normalize china s brutality. but the athletes need to fear for their safety over there and should not draw the ire of the chinese. but democrats even are criticizing pelosi saying she was in the wrong. david i will go to you first. your thoughts on what she said. is a four-time all american
china is looking to be the world s head they want to be the world superpower they are doing it as a dictatorship at this particular time. i don t think we should stand for it. that is not our democratic values. and it should not change because we are in another country. jacqui: david what is your thought on that? do you think we should have had a presence accompanying the athletes to be able to put across a stronger message? i think that diplomatic boycott makes sense. they are appointed officials and people around these athletes to help them navigate tricky waters pretty hate to see politics cap in the middle of the olympics it did not work in 1980 with the boycott. so let s be real two politics does not need to become a part of the olympics for there s a lot of leverage now china was looking for the world. i could find ways to maximize that leverage for just a little worry that could create a backlash we do not human rights to get worse not better in china. jacqui: i want to move o
is alleging. it is particular problematic and it also highlights the issue we have with a big tech via social media or these companies that have left-leaning leadership and imposes there will on the users that use their platforms. this is a problem or i think the government has to be taking a deep look as to what is going on. so everyone should be treated equally. jacqui: david your thoughts? rex i agree at section 2:30, 26 years out of date. this is social media means 2022. the truth is the trigger is in violence, hatred, hate speech or is it free speech? it sounds an awful like free speech domain. and so you cannot pick and choose what you want. that is just not fair pay to go to a whole new social media platform. just because it s an anti- mandate message does not mean you have the right to pick and choose. these companies have to grow up regulations have to catch up and get ahead of them. not to mention the mandates have not been effective.