I believe it was Chomsky who defined what we mean by freedom of speech would be more appropriately defined as freedom of opinion. Harassment, calls to violence, inciting panic and defamation are not opinions.
I think I can agree with that. Although defamation is probably a grey area. If I say, “the vice president is corrupt and unintelligent”, should I not be allowed to speak that opinion?
That’s an opinion though. Defamation has a very specific definition, often with a high bar. This would be like “the Vice President accepted a bribe of ten thousand dollars to inject a support of terrorism in their past speech on January 5, and I have film evidence to prove it” explicitly knowing this is false and saying it anyways just to hurt the Vice President.
