In a video released by The Hill on Twitter, Pennsylvania Lieutenant
Governor John Fetterman said that “you do not have the right”
to question the legitimacy of the 2020 US election.
The Constitution does not protect you from expressing your
political opinion regarding the legitimacy of a US election,
according to Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman.
Fetterman also said that censorship of President Donald Trump at
the hands of Big Tech is “not deplatforming someone. It’s
deleting lies that are yelling fire in a crowded theater when there
is none.”
“That is not protected speech,” said Fetterman. “No one,
Republican, Democrat, whatever, has the right to say those kind of
incendiary lies”
Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John
Fetterman: “This idea that saying that Pennsylvania was ‘rigged’ or
that we were ‘trying to steal the election’ — that’s a lie. And
you do not have the right, that is not protected speech.” pic.twitter.com/2f2ERSSLXy— The Hill (@thehill)
January 15, 2021
Fetterman should know that the phrase “shouting fire in a
crowded theater” originates from Schenck v. US
(1919).
Schenck was overturned over 50 years ago in Brandenburg v. Ohio
(1969).
In Brandenburg, the Supreme Court ruled that speech may be
prohibited if it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent
lawless action” and is “likely to incite or produce such
action.” The Supreme Court essentially utilized a combination of
the “Clear and Present Danger Test” and the “Incitement
Test” in their Brandenburg decision.
Critics of President Trump such as Democrats, RINO’s, those in
the mainstream media, Big Tech, and the Deep State point to his
January 6 ‘Stop The Steal’ speech as an example of the
President using unprotected speech, inciting insurrection, and
encouraging violence. However, if you read the
full transcript, it is evident that such claims are
over-exaggerated and outright untrue.
“Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to
walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave
senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going
to be cheering so much for some of them.Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You
have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to
demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors
who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the
Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices
heard,” said President Trump.
President Trump was permanently banned of Twitter on January 8.
However, the Trump
Twitter Archive and Gab have saved all of his tweets. Upon
further analysis, it is clear that every tweet that the President
had posted since January 6 was not “directed at inciting or
producing imminent lawless action” at all, and quite frankly,
both speech and his tweets suggested the complete opposite.�
In one tweet, the President wrote:
“I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain
peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law &
Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue.
Thank you!†– President Trump, January 6, 2020, 3:13:26 PM
EST.
This made Twitter’s decision to remove President Trump’s
messages of peace that much more confusing,
as National File reported.
BREAKING: Twitter deletes
Trump’s video calling for peace pic.twitter.com/34rWBwbZVh— Jack Posobiec
(@JackPosobiec)
January 6, 2021
Twitter continues to be allowed to infringe on our freedom of
speech, courtesy of Section 230 and weak Senate Republicans.
However, government officials – including Fetterman, must still
abide by the Constitution despite their open objections.
Since Pennsylvanians are assuming that Fetterman will continue
to use his outdated “yelling fire in a crowded theaterâ€
reference to Schenck, as he works to diminish protections given to
Americans by the First Amendment, the American many acre curious to
know specifically how:
1) questioning the results of an election, where evidence of
fraud was paramount, is “directed at inciting or producing
imminent lawless action†and is “likely to incite or produce
such action.â€
2) the President’s January 6 speech and most recent tweets
were “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless
action†and were “likely to incite or produce such
action.â€
Many would say that deeming phrases such as “remain peaceful,
No violence!†or “the election was rigged†as unprotected
speech, highlights a very loose interpretation of the First
Amendment. As the Constitution stands, questioning the results or
legitimacy of the 2020 election is still classified as protected
speech.
Confidence in the legitimacy of US elections will not be
restored if the government, corporations, and the media punish
those who discuss such concerns. One could only imagine the public
outcry that would ensue if President Trump or Republicans legally
punished anyone for claiming that the Russia-hoax held any basis in
fact.
One thing is for certain, the fixers who oversaw election
operations for Tammany Hall in the 19th Century would undoubtedly
agree with Fetterman’s interpretation of the First Amendment.
