The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

We’ve seen Democrats and media throwing all kinds of tantrums over Tucker Carlson’s Jan. 6 video footage coverage. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said he released the footage to aid transparency, that he worked with the Capitol Police to ensure there weren’t any security issues that could be revealed with any of the footage–something that the Jan. 6 Committee didn’t do with the footage they used.

So, why would anyone object to greater transparency? Why would Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) want to suppress that speech and create a constitutional problem by threatening Carlson and Fox?

If you think he’s lying or wrong, simply counter what he has said with your evidence. Carlson invited Schumer on his show to do that. Yet, Schumer refused to go on. That says it all right there. It’s about the panic in D.C., that the narrative that they’ve been peddling for so long is being questioned and may be slipping from their grasp.

We see that with the reaction to Twitter as well. Since Elon Musk has taken over, it may not be perfect. There are still issues, for example, with people getting wrongly suspended, like Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT). But what you do have is someone who is responding to the concerns, is rectifying things, and seems to truly care about freedom of speech. People are now free to talk about things that would have gotten them wrongly banned and suppressed for going against whatever the dominant liberal narrative was in the past on issues from COVID to Jan. 6.

Musk has also instituted a fascinating thing over the past few months — Community Notes, which allows people to weigh in to help fact-check and/or add more context to tweets. Joe Biden, through this method, was finally getting truly fact-checked on some of his more egregious lies. It even added context to a Musk tweet. Musk didn’t get upset; he praised the function, saying it was adding more and helping everyone.

So, just like with Tucker Carlson, who could truly object to more context? Progressive journalist Judd Legum, for one, and his tantrum is pretty funny. He thinks Community Notes is being “weaponized” against him somehow by anonymous people.

1. Anonymous Twitter users have weaponized @CommunityNotes and are using the feature to try to discredit COMPLETELY ACCURATE INFORMATION

The people writing these "Community Notes" are remarkably uninformed about the topics they weigh in on

It happened to me yesterday

🧵

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023

Is weaponizing anything like “pouncing”? Adding more context to explain a tweet isn’t “weaponizing” — it isn’t even necessarily attacking the tweet. It’s helping people to understand what’s being said in full context. But imagine getting upset about this.

2. I tweeted that “Violent crime in DC is actually at historic lows. And it went down 7% in 2022 and is already down another 7% in 2023.”

THIS IS A 100% ACCURATE TWEET

And yet, it was targeted with a Community Note pic.twitter.com/YldTA6GvMg

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023

He also didn’t seem to understand why they were providing “context” — because he was changing the parameters of what was being talked about. He was responding to a comment by Ashley Parker about “crime” being out of control. His response was “violent crime” had gone down, according to the stats he was citing. So, the Community Notes accurately pointed out that he changed the parameters and that she wasn’t just talking about “violent crime.” That’s exactly the purpose of the Community Notes, and they worked very well there.

What was even funnier was that they put a Community Note on his complaint about Community Notes to explain their purpose to him, since he didn’t seem to get it.

He started going down a rabbit hole trying to defend himself, although how he’s defining robbery is correct. But he just keeps missing the point that he was changing the parameters of the original statement – which was on “crime.”

3. The “Community Note” suggests my tweet is misleading because “The ‘down 7%’ figure for violent crime is dependent on whether larceny crimes are classified as robbery, burglary, or theft.”

THIS IS REMARKABLY DUMB pic.twitter.com/LkYvvWSPv2

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023

4. The DEFINITION of robbery is a theft that also involves violence or the threat of violence.

So of course robbery will be counted as a violent crime and burglary and theft will not.

And when you add it all together violent crime is down 7% since last year!

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023

However, he got into the weeds when he had to admit that homicides had gone up.

5. Homicides are up. And even one homicide is a tragedy. But other forms of violent crime are down and that is why violent crime overall is down.

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023

Indeed, homicides have gone up 31 percent, which is a huge amount, so trying to deflect around that isn’t going to go over.

Lucy Ricardo may have said it best.

5. Homicides are up. And even one homicide is a tragedy. But other forms of violent crime are down and that is why violent crime overall is down.

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 8, 2023