If nothing else, your posts make a good argument against adding LSD to one's oatmeal every morning.

You just conflated two things there.

Unfiltered speech has absolutely no guarantee that it will be thereby closer to "the truth" than news from a network or publisher with editors and journalists spanning the globe. Take a look at NPR, which the Right pans as a liberal mouthpiece- it was NPR who broke the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and who scrupulously state when the subject of a story is also a contributor to their network.

"Free speech" in the form of some gonzo with a website has nobody fact-checking it, nobody telling it to go talk to another source and verify the story before going to press, no accountability. And it has a veneer of credibility, like Breitbart or Alex Jones, because "they" wouldn't let people put it on the internet unless it was true, would "they"? When in fact there is no "They" in charge of anything, and in fact there really needs to be. Anything claiming to be news should have to go through the Washington Post Fact Checker or Snopes before being released. (Man, would those people have to do some hiring!)

There's only one reality. I'm just not so sure you're connected with it.

While I do support telling lies knowingly should be a felony, "Deported" to where? Australia ain't taking our chaff.....