Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://mastodon.online/users/spocko/statuses/113313192752970139">Spocko (spocko@mastodon.online)'s status on Thursday, 17-Oct-2024 06:21:01 JST</a><a href="https://mastodon.online/@spocko" title="spocko@mastodon.online"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/29096-48-20221209020649.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Spocko" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Spocko</a><div><a href="https://mastodon.online/@spocko/113312702346295577" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://mstdn.social/@DanaDee">@DanaDee</a> <br>"This country was founded not only on the premise of free &amp; fair elections, but also on the idea that public scrutiny of govmt authority is not only desirable, it is necessary. Debate on public issues should be robust &amp; may well include vehement, caustic, &amp; sometimes unpleasantly sharp criticism of government officials.<br> But death threats are not debate.<br>Death threats do not contribute to the marketplace of ideas.<br>Death threats are not 1st Amdt protected speech.<br><a href="https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&amp;t=489" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&amp;t=489</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/3837683#notice-7504654">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-10-17T06:21:01+09:00" title="Thursday, 17-Oct-2024 06:21:01 JST">about 4 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://mastodon.online/@spocko/113313192752970139" rel="external" title="Sent from mastodon.online via ActivityPub">mastodon.online</a></span></span><a href="https://mastodon.online/@spocko/113313192752970139">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/3315801"> John Dixon Keller, principal deputy chief, public integrity section, head of Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force This country was founded not only on the premise of free and fair elections, but also on the idea that public scrutiny of governmental authority is not only desirable, it is necessary.
Debate on public issues should be robust and may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp criticism of government officials. But death threats are not debate.
Death threats do not contribute to the marketplace of ideas. Death threats are not First Amendment protected speech.
Death threats, and any threats of violence are condemnable, criminal acts and they will be met with the full force of the Justice Department.
https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=Ef2OtWoVlnpbVPPs&amp;t=560 
https://www.justice.gov/opa/video/justice-department-officials-announce-developments-election-threats-cases-arizona   https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&amp;t=489</a></label><br><video poster="" controls="controls"><source src="https://files.mastodon.online/media_attachments/files/113/313/184/750/232/005/original/ea88a2c2d9f1658d.mp4" type="video/mp4"></source></video></li><li><article><header><img height="128" width="128" src="https://gnusocial.jp/thumbnail/3315802?w=128&amp;h=128"><h5><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&amp;t=489&amp;v=HWmyr4CmoLg&amp;feature=youtu.be">Justice Department Officials Announce Developments in Election Threats Cases in Arizona</a></h5><div> from <span>The Justice Department</span></div></header><div>This case is part of the Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force. Announced by Attorney General Garland and launched by Deputy Attorney General Lisa...</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Spocko (spocko@mastodon.online)'s status on Thursday, 17-Oct-2024 06:21:01 JSTSpocko
in reply to
- AmFem101
@DanaDee
"This country was founded not only on the premise of free & fair elections, but also on the idea that public scrutiny of govmt authority is not only desirable, it is necessary. Debate on public issues should be robust & may well include vehement, caustic, & sometimes unpleasantly sharp criticism of government officials.
But death threats are not debate.
Death threats do not contribute to the marketplace of ideas.
Death threats are not 1st Amdt protected speech.
https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&t=489
In conversationabout 4 months ago from mastodon.onlinepermalink
Attachments
1. John Dixon Keller, principal deputy chief, public integrity section, head of Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force This country was founded not only on the premise of free and fair elections, but also on the idea that public scrutiny of governmental authority is not only desirable, it is necessary. Debate on public issues should be robust and may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp criticism of government officials. But death threats are not debate. Death threats do not contribute to the marketplace of ideas. Death threats are not First Amendment protected speech. Death threats, and any threats of violence are condemnable, criminal acts and they will be met with the full force of the Justice Department. https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=Ef2OtWoVlnpbVPPs&t=560 https://www.justice.gov/opa/video/justice-department-officials-announce-developments-election-threats-cases-arizona https://youtu.be/HWmyr4CmoLg?si=WHxbjgdbJ8al39Ig&t=489
2. Justice Department Officials Announce Developments in Election Threats Cases in Arizona
  from The Justice Department
  This case is part of the Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force. Announced by Attorney General Garland and launched by Deputy Attorney General Lisa...

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice