Falsely shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater is not protected Free Speech. (See: Schenck v. United States).
Crude political hyperbole is not a knowing and willful threat against the President of the United States. (See: Watts v. United States). Hope that clears it up for you.
It's quite debatable whether the speech in question was merely "crude hyperbole". It's certainly not cut and dried enough to justify your snotty antagonism.
You're skating on thin ice, and if you don't start displaying a little more civility, you're likely to not be around here much longer.
So if you'd like to remain a member in good standing in this community, I'd suggest you tone down your conceited, smart aleck insults...
Crude political hyperbole is not a knowing and willful threat against the President of the United States. (See: Watts v. United States). Hope that clears it up for you.
Yes, that helped - again proven to me that half this country's problems are caused by these judges semantically tap-dancing to allow "crude threats", i.e. "and if they put a rifle in my hand it is the people that put the rifle in my hand, as symbolized by the President, who are my real enemy."
The protester identifies a specific target and the judge declares it "symbolism"?
Here are some others where that judge, no doubt, classify them as "crude threats" and mere "symbolism":
ALERT – Second Trump Advisor Survives ASSASSINATION Attempt. This is Terrifying.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3517355/posts
VIDEO: Public School Teacher Fires Water Pistol At Projection of Trump, Screams "Die!"
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3517537/posts
Crawford Central School Board member defends 'clean head shot' Trump posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3517497/posts
Allowing these people to shoot off their mouths with no fear of repercussion will only encourage others, and maybe one of them will say, "Hey, now THERE's an idea!"