So threats of violence are protected in this case

[montana]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sup...lence-decision"The mere advocacy of political or social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic embrace of violent tactics does not constitute domestic violent extremism or illegal activity and is constitutionally protected," the memo reportedly reads. (UNLESS IT INVOLVES THE JAN.6 TYPE OF POLITICAL ACTIVISM)

[Tahuyaman]

So threats of violence are protected in this case

Yeah, but this is different.

[Chris]

"Additionally, a memo dated May 13 from DHS reveals that the Biden administration is investigating threats to the Supreme Court building and to justices in the weeks since the leak. The memo first reported by Axios details ongoing investigations into threats to "burn down or storm" the Supreme Court building. "

And DHS defends it as free speech.

[RMNIXON]

Another reason this so-called Disinformation Office was a political crock of $#@! where a known Progressive hack gets to pick and choose what thoughts or behaviors constitute domestic terrorism and/or threat of violence.

Then pass them onto Deep State players of course like DHS, FBI, ect.....all.