Good grief, do better yourself. I have read the case; studied it in a Constitutional Law course.
Read the entire statement in question.
“Off to the gallows with him” is imperative statement - a command. Seems pretty inciting of imminent action, as commands aren’t generally meant to be ignored.
As I said - marginally borderline protected speech, at best.
I did read the entire statement. It’s not a close call given the circumstances being reported.
So we’ll not agree on this.
Good luck.
I see that our thread Karen “Fury” is furiously jackassin’, as is his wont.