Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

I’m getting closer and closer to being done with CNN. I know it’s just a business that doesn’t give a **** about whether the country that made it possible continues to exist, but at some point coddling insurrectionists becomes intolerable and unforgivable. https://t.co/WrbaVPU4pl — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(SUMMARY) With h/t to @BWLFPeacock. https://t.co/MWMX4So63g — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

@UConnquistador I’ll tell you why I added “white”—and candidly while I wasn’t thinking of Jews like myself when I did. Folks not in vulnerable classes are significantly more likely to create their own boutique notion of “free speech” that harms the vulnerable. That’s the history of this subject. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

@A_EH1982 That said, the terms of service on Twitter do preclude the incitement of violence, but in theory allow for advocacy of violence. For instance, imagine if someone wanted to start a Twitter feed advocating war with Iran. I doubt that Twitter would immediately shut down the account. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

@A_EH1982 One can’t incite violence because that violates criminal statutes, and technically a private company could have civil liability for violence originating in incitement on its platform, but that is different from the Constitution mandating that private companies bar certain speech. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If Ron DeSantis thinks white Floridians are too fragile and stupid to learn about the history of racism in America or the fact that some men love men and some women love women, he can just say that he thinks so little of his constituents—leave the Constitution the hell out of it. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If Best wants to aid, abet, and profit from substacks spreading vax disinformation that kills people, he can say that—as a moral and commercial matter—that’s what he *wants*, regardless of commercial pressures and constitutional rights militating for him to make a different call. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If Elon Musk wants people advocating genocide in America on Twitter, he can damn well say that—as a moral and commercial matter—that is what he *wants*, regardless of what his prospective customers on Twitter would have wanted or what the Constitution gives him every right to do. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

What I’ve a problem with, then, is men who are such *cowards* that they turn their own moral and commercial elections into *constitutional* questions when the USC has *nothing* to do with whether f*ckwad sleazebag killer-for-profit disinformation merchants get their blog hosted. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

So can Chris Best choose to platform COVID-19 disinformation merchants, thereby knowingly endangering public safety? Yes—he can. And that’s a *commercial* and *moral* decision with f*ck-all to do with “free speech”—as free speech says Best can regulate disinformation as he likes. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

A separate question is whether a private company with significant leeway to regulate speech within its ambit can decide not to regulate speech that kills people—like COVID-19 disinformation—and then be indignant when that elective commercial judgment devastates its public image. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

But by the same token, there’s nothing more consistent with the history of free speech in America than a private company deciding to hurt its own bottom line by ignoring its customers. What it can’t do is wrap itself in the mantle of free speech—it’s making a commercial decision. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

There’s nothing *more* consistent with the history of free speech in America than folks publicly threatening not to patronize a private company unless the company *uses* its power to regulate speech to create a community in which vulnerable persons don’t feel threatened/harassed. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

What I’m *sick* of is rich white men who have something short of a second-grade education in the history of “free speech”—I’ll throw Joe Rogan and Donald Trump in here, too—*lecturing* people who are smarter, better educated, and more principled than they are about “free speech.” — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

I’d have no problem with Elon Musk, Chris Best, or Ron DeSantis announcing that they want to profoundly change America—its history, traditions and values—by transforming how we deal with speech. Because the announcement of such a stupid, dangerous course of action is their right. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Fact: private entities can regulate the *hell* out of speech without running afoul of “free speech.” Fact: free speech has a public safety component. Fact: free speech includes demanding that private entities muzzle certain speech. Don’t like these facts? Great! *Still* facts. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

The “free speech” debate is no more or less than a debate between those who believe in free speech as it’s been understood for 230 years and those—on the left, right, or would-be libertarians like Best—who want to explode that usage in favor of their own ignorant, uneducated one. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

A site like Substack acknowledges the complexities of free speech (whatever Chris Best says to Joe Rogan) by technically putting moderation on slander (in podcast), libel (in blog), harassment that may constitute a criminal act, threats that likewise could be criminal, and so on. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

In the Constitution, we find a basic belief in freedom of movement in the implied right to travel and the explicit right to bodily integrity—to be free from unreasonable seizures of our person (or even searches) by government agents. But some *statutes* do restrict our movements. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Can I start driving my car if I’m intoxicated? No. Can I trespass on private property? No. Can I put my hand down someone’s throat without permission? No. Do all these restrictions means we *don’t* have freedom of movement in America? *No*. Freedom of movement is a term of art. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

As a lawyer I know it’s best to think of “freedom of speech” as you would “freedom of movement.” If you ask, “Do I have freedom of movement in America?” I’d say, “Well—yes and no.” Can I move into your house at will? No. Can I swing my arms and hit folks without consequence? No. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

I recently saw an interview with Chris Best in which he told Joe Rogan that he was a champion of free speech at a time when most people don’t believe in it. Mind you, the guy says this without having *ever* even *read* about free speech. He uses the term mindlessly—like a child. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Anyone who pretends “free speech” is a lay term—a jamming together of the adjective “free” and noun “speech”—is a moron. An uneducated rube. “Free speech” is a legal concept with a 200+-year history in America. Some folks should avoid the phrase until they have a clue about it. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

America has *always* put limits on speech—*always*. Some are what are called “time, place, and manner” restrictions. Some are public safety restrictions. Some have to do with libel and slander. Some relate to “fighting words.” And many are non-governmental (private) restrictions. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If someone says they’re a champion of “free speech” in 2022—whether it’s Elon Musk, the CEO of Substack, or Ron DeSantis—the odds that they have a *clue* about how the First Amendment works approach zero. MSNBC offers us this excerpt from a recent federal ruling against DeSantis: https://t.co/0XXRQTIsBX — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If someone says they’re a champion of “free speech” in 2022—whether it’s Elon Musk, the CEO of Substack, or Ron DeSantis—the odds that they have a *clue* about how the First Amendment works approach zero. MSNBC offers us this excerpt from a recent federal ruling against DeSantis: https://t.co/XDvg0tvRRb — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

@greg4mtgs You find me a Democrat doing this and I will publicly call them an a****** And by the way, I say that knowing full well that there are Democrats doing this You have never caught me saying that only Republican politicians are ever jerks — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Needless to say, Donald Trump called for the execution of his enemies before and during his presidency. But when—not if—he starts doing so again, echoing the public words of his friends and confidants who know where all this is headed, it really could get a lot of people killed. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

We *have* to see the trend here. Trump friend Carl Paladino—running for Congress in Trump’s old home state—calls for the execution of the Attorney General. Now Martin Hyde—running for Congress in Trump’s new home state and endorsed by his pals—invokes the killing of FBI agents. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

It just keeps getting better and better. This guy is endorsed by both Michael Flynn and Roger Stone. https://t.co/V7M9nEx5qy — PolitiTweet.org