[Fury]

"It’s protected speech." Oh, good grief. Read the Brandenburg 1st Amendment case. This is marginally borderline "protected speech" at best.

I have read it.

And you conviently forgot the two prong test regarding "Immediacy of incitement"

(1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and

(2) is likely to incite or produce such action."

IMMINENT LAWLESS ACTION.

IS LIKELY TO INCITE OR PRDUCE SUCH ACTION.

Good grief. Do better.

[castlebrew]

Good grief, do better yourself. I have read the case; studied it in a Constitutional Law course.

Read the entire statement in question.

“Off to the gallows with him” is imperative statement - a command. Seems pretty inciting of imminent action, as commands aren’t generally meant to be ignored.

As I said - marginally borderline protected speech, at best.