3 ms·
None of his tweets call for "unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment". Whatever the likely effect of exposing this deal, the government cannot be allo
by leereeves 5y ago
None of his tweets call for "unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment".
Whatever the likely effect of exposing this deal, the government cannot be allowed to suppress reporting it simply because it is outrageous enough to cause angry responses. That's perverse.
If public outrage over "alarmingly lucrative" government contracts is prosecuted as harassment, we're lost.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Nothing in his message calls for "unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment". The law does not require a call for those things, it requires a purpose and likelihood of inciting them. Both intent and likelihood of effect are things that are routinely found (in criminal law generally) without an explicit call.
- Tostino 5y agoThat is a weak argument if i've ever seen one. Should we stop journalists from publishing anything about egregious abuses of power, because that might insight someone in the public to action?