CBS News is having a year, and it got much worse on Sunday. 

Star anchor Margaret Brennan kicked the day off by claiming that "weaponized free speech" was the cause of the Holocaust. You know, because the Weimer Republic was famous for its broad speech protections, a tradition that carried over into Adolf Hitler's regime. Wait, what?

SEE: Margaret Brennan Claims Free Speech Was 'Weaponized' By the Nazis

Secretary of State Marco Rubio defends @JDVance's "historic" speech last week in Munich, leaves ABC's Margaret Brennan speechless after she tries to claim that free speech was "weaponized" by the Nazis. Incredible exchange: 👇 pic.twitter.com/GYLZfopVwP

— Scott Morefield (@SKMorefield) February 16, 2025

Little did we know that was just the warm-up, though. On Sunday evening, "60 Minutes" aired an all-timer, plumbing the depths to reach lows formerly thought impossible. 

To start, the "investigative news program" did an entire segment on why free speech is bad, fawning over German laws that throw people in jail for posting "disinformation," and be sure to stick around because that comes back into play later in the episode. Here's the CEO of an NGO called "HateAid," an ironic name if I've ever seen one, explaining how free speech must have "boundaries" lest people rely on it to "say anything they want."

“Free speech needs boundaries… Without boundaries, a very small group of people can rely on endless freedom to say anything that they want, while everyone else is scared and intimidated,” says Josephine Ballon, CEO of HateAid. https://t.co/YjlBa7YJ3s pic.twitter.com/xqI88oiiO2

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) February 17, 2025

BALLON: Free speech needs boundaries, and in the case of Germany, these boundaries are part of our constitution. Without boundaries, a very small group of people can rely on endless freedom to say anything that they want, while everyone else is scared and intimidated. 

INTERVIEWER: And your fear is that if people are freely attacked online that they'll withdraw from the discussion. 

Understand, this was not an adversarial interview where "60 Minutes" pushed back on such illiberal tripe. It was a promotional video. What exactly is "online violence," which the interviewer mentions in her question? How does a supposed news outlet let that descriptor be used without defining it? And while Ballon's next comment isn't the irony overload I was citing above (we'll get there), it certainly qualifies for the list.

BALLON: This is not only a fear, it is already taking place. Already half of the internet users in Germany are afraid to express their political opinions and they rarely participate in public debates online anymore. Half of the internet users.

I wonder why half of Germans might be scared to post their political opinions online. What could possibly cause so many people to live in fear of what they say? Could it be because Germany throws people in jail for speech its officials deem to be "disinformation?"

Posting or reposting false information in Germany can be a crime, and the punishment for repeat offenders can include jail time. pic.twitter.com/25OLFeLfna

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) February 17, 2025

Anytime the government gets to decide what is "false information," that will inevitably lead to erroneous decisions on what that entails. The attempt to quash truthful information about COVID-19, from the fact that the vaccines didn't stop the spread to the origins of the virus, is just one example. What Germany is doing is no better than what China does concerning speech. Wrapping it up in fear-mongering about "extremism" doesn't change that.

Here's where things get worse for "60 Minutes." During the same episode, they ran a sob-story segment about USAID workers being fired, with someone named Kristina Drye being interviewed.

“Twelve days ago, people knew where their next paycheck was coming from. They knew how they were going to pay for their kids' daycare, their medical bills. And then, all gone overnight,” says Kristina Drye, who was fired in the USAID shutdown. https://t.co/cysOqteb8p pic.twitter.com/bUcOAnhMjs

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) February 17, 2025

DRYE: People are really scared. I think that, you know, twelve days ago, people knew where their next paycheck was coming from. They knew how they were going to pay for their kids' daycare, their medical bills, and then, all gone overnight.

INTERVIEWER OVERDUB: All gone overnight for Kristina Drye and Adam Dubard, fired this month in the chaotic shutdown of foreign aid distribution by the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID. More than 8,000 USAID employees were sent home by the administration. 

In broad terms, I don't think trying to make overpaid government bureaucrats who spent their time dolling out taxpayer money to foreign entities into victims is going to be very effective. Did "60 Minutes" run segments shedding tears for the people who lost their jobs when the same bureaucratic state pushed for the shutting down of the country for COVID-19? Or what about the workers who were left hanging when former President Joe Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline? I could spend all day listing examples. 

Now, are you ready for the big twist? In the same episode "60 Minutes" lauded anti-free speech laws in Germany under the guise of policing "disinformation," it turns out they lied about who Drye and Dubard were. It turns out both were not actual USAID employees by contracted consultants, with one being a speechwriter for Samantha Power, the politically appointed head of the agency during the Biden administration. 

🚨🚨60 Minutes pulled in 2 comms consultants who were never actual employees of USAID and presented them as though they were longtime employees who were fired for lack of "loyalty." 🚨🚨 https://t.co/dxinUlR3T0 pic.twitter.com/nGdEp65DVL

— Eli Steinberg (@HaMeturgeman) February 17, 2025

So a major news outlet promoted laws that punish the spreading of "disinformation" and then proceeded to spread disinformation for partisan gain. You can't make this stuff up. Truly, CBS News is on another level right now.