---

Chief Twit Elon Musk is making a big deal out of unfettered free speech. Scuttlebutt is that he’ll let Trump return. Free speech, yes. Yelling fire in a crowded theater, no. How much of what is propagated out there crosses the line? How many people buy it without any critical thinking?

Notes an article by Robert Reich in the Guardian, “Elon Musk’s Paul Pelosi tweet proves he has no business running Twitter…If Musk’s tweet doesn’t raise bright red warning signs all over the world about his judgment and character, I don’t know what will…Just three days after Elon Musk bought Twitter, he posted a tweet promoting the baseless allegation that Paul Pelosi, the husband of the speaker of the House, who was assaulted on Friday at the couple’s home, had been drunk and in a fight with a male prostitute.”

The article continues, “The police found Paul Pelosi, 82, attacked with a hammer inside his home by a man, David DePape, who had entered through the back door, seeking the speaker. Musk’s tweet, later deleted, came in response to a tweet posted on Saturday by Hillary Clinton, attacking Republicans for spreading ‘hate and deranged conspiracy theories’ that she said had emboldened the man who attacked Nancy Pelosi’s husband. In a reply to Clinton’s post, Musk wrote: ‘There is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye’ and then shared a link to an article in a faux newspaper, the Santa Monica Observer, in which the gonzo allegation about Paul Pelosi appeared. This is the same Santa Monica Observer, by the way, that in 2016 claimed that Clinton had died and that a body double was sent to debate the Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump.”

A CNN story adds, “Elon Musk on Sunday gave credence to a fringe conspiracy theory about the violent attack on Paul Pelosi. The new Twitter owner tweeted a link to an article full of baseless claims about Pelosi. The article was posted on a website that purports to be a news outlet. Musk, who has 112 million followers on the platform he now owns, posted the baseless story about Pelosi in response to a tweet from Hilary Clinton at 8:15 am ET. He later deleted the tweet around 2 pm, but not before racking up more than 28,000 retweets and 100,000 likes.”

Did Musk cross the “yelling fire in a crowded theater” line? Based on the citations below and the number of retweets and likes, one could certainly make an argument that he meets the incitement threshold and did indeed cross the line.

Britannica.com notes, “Second, a few narrow categories of speech are not protected from government restrictions. The main such categories are incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, child pornography, fighting words, and threats. As the Supreme Court held in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the government may forbid ‘incitement’—speech ‘directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action’ and ‘likely to incite or produce such action’ (such as a speech to a mob urging it to attack a nearby building).”

Wikipedia adds, “… the phrase ‘shouting fire in a crowded theater’ has become synonymous with speech that, because of its danger of provoking violence, is not protected by the First Amendment.”

Regardless of legality or advisability, it’s incumbent upon people to check it out before letting it out. In other words, use critical thinking skills to determine if the information is credible or just a bunch of hogwashing. Musk himself seems to have not employed critical thinking before publishing the tweet. And many people jumped right on his “Kool-Aid bandwagon.”

Ironically, the current call for “free speech” a la Musk ultimately will backfire. Once the autocrats/oligarchs rule the roost, history proves they will severely curtail and punish free speech. If you doubt it, look at Russia now. That’s where we’re heading.

###

Before voting, take the time to research facts and use your brain to connect the dots—instead of blindly drinking the Kool-Aid peddled by Trump and his hogwashing allies. In the same vein, avoid mindless consumption of the extreme left’s Kool-Aid.