Issues with free speech

Before even starting this post - to put "inverted commas" around "free speech" in the heading or not?  Why?  Well ... when enemies of free speech are breathing down one's neck, threatening to wreck one's webpage, one does look at it a bit more closely than the average web surfer.

All right, look at this series of screenshots below.

Question ... can that be substantiated?  Answer is one of two things ... ask for substantiation of the claim, or else just ban the above at your site in order to protect Gettr and keep behaviour "ethical".  We saw tweets on what Gettr did when DJT first started with it.  Also - is he "the Donald", "Donald", "DJT", "Trump" or "Drumpf"?  The choice brands the writer.

Question ... is Gettr scared of being shut down, therefore another free speech outlet is snuffed out ... or are they "censoring" in the bad sense of the word to us?  All right:

That's one of the Frank Quotes.  My view as a website admin is that it's easily substantiated or debunked from other sources.  What of this one?

Which five?  Not named.  Is that playing safe re litigation or is it unsubstantiated assertion?  It needs at least a source link or two.

Does that not lay the onus on Dr. Malone to substantiate?  Ah, not so fast.  Under EU law, the blog writer or admin is also liable.  So is the commenter below.  But we're not in the EU.  You think so?  The law has not changed.  There was no Brexit, only WA3.  Obviously, this site believes Dr. Malone ... for now ... his bona fides are good with us.  Not with the cabal and apologists though.

That was on Gab.  Clearly an opinion, not a libel or slander of person[s].  Ah, but it's an opinion which those quoting "community guidelines" want removed.

What of humour?  The in-joke?  You'd need to know the photoshopped FBI reference to get the humour.  Were I not to use that acronym just now, would that make the joke more acceptable?

On Twitter, I reposted a lady, Emerald Robinson, without giving my own opinion, and she said she believed Chauvin, not Floyd.  I was banned for reposting her.  Who's right or wrong there?

All right, Gab is the closest to a free speech platform going just now [IMHO].  There are some people flooding the timeline just now and the word "jew" appears often.  There's another where the word "muslim" appears often.  We all attack "the Woke" and quote examples.

Should Gab come down?  This post will go up at N.O. and OoL ... watch the quite different treatments of comments.

When all these issues are resolved, then the blog has a firm policy.  Does it even need one?