We explore real-life reformation here in this informed, online community.
The Supreme Court will be answering this question before long in Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh and Gonzalez v. Google LLC –
Background summary by the guys at Not the Bee:
Three decades ago, lawmakers protected internet companies by passing Section 230, a provision that exempts them from liability if someone says or does something illegal on their site. The argument is that a website like Facebook is not a publisher that condones or controls what is being written on the site; therefore, it should not be liable for lawsuits. But as we've seen from exposés like The Twitter Files, these websites ARE acting like publishers by choosing what content is allowed based on their ideological preferences. If Facebook bans sites like ours for posting stories that refer to men in wigs as men, then the argument goes that they should be liable to all the legal bindings of a formal publisher. If Section 230 is repealed, it would drastically change free speech on the internet... but not in all good ways...
Charlie was a hard-working and very talented man, but he worked hard at what? He was a campus evangelist and a podcaster. He had thrown himself into the mission of talking about doctrine and comprehensive worldview with nineteen-year-olds. Doing that, he became such a cultural force that he was shot and killed by the darkness we are up against. And at the memorial service for this campus evangelist, you had the president’s cabinet sitting in the front row, the secretary of state declaring the gospel, the vice-president of the United States walking us through the Nicene Creed, numerous faithful Christians pointing the way to Jesus Christ, the president himself present and speaking, a beautiful widow speaking her beautiful words, and with thousands upon thousands in the stadium, and a hundred million people watching around the globe.
-- Doug Wilson
The two weapons were the Covid virus and the Covid vaccine.
A bombshell new peer-reviewed study has dropped a hammer on the official Covid narrative, concluding that both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the mRNA “vaccines” share “deliberately engineered” features consistent with gain-of-function biological weapons research. The researchers behind the study warn that the mRNA injections have caused “unprecedented levels of morbidity and mortality.” The study’s paper was authored by 11 scientific and legal experts. It was published in the prestigious Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. You can access the study here:
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.jpands.org/vol30no3/zywiec.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Yes. 18 U.S. Code § 373: specifically criminalizes the solicitation of a crime of violence.
The law covers actions that "solicit, command, induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade" someone to commit a felony, with the intent that the other person will use physical force against property or another person.
From the State Department on the 27th:
"Earlier today, Colombian president @petrogustavo stood on a NYC street and urged U.S. soldiers to disobey orders and incite violence.
We will revoke Petro’s visa due to his reckless and incendiary actions."
— Department of State (@StateDept) September 27, 2025
