Replies

I like Drudge but I do think he edged a little too close to the "line" on this. It is like yelling fire in a movie theater. Drudge just did it as a surrogate for the bonehead who originated the idea. He will probably just get a explanation as to why this can be dangerous and maybe a warning

Drudge is completely protected. The principle of "yelling fire" is unprotected when there really isnt a fire. Schenck v. United States (1919) In short, speech that needlessly endangers human life.

Druge was reporting a fire: The Guardian. They were the one's who speech posed a "clear and present danger" to the President of the United States. ("the First Amendment does not apply to words that 'will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent'...." Schenck, Dennis, et al) The question in my mind is jurisdiction and International law. I would imagine that the The Guardian has the necessary minimum contacts in the United States for our Federal Courts to take jurisdiction and prosecute; and they should.