By telling his followers “fight back or they will kill us” and “fight or die,” he issues a directive that, under Brandenburg, qualifies as incitement to imminent lawless action. Unlike cases where courts found no immediacy (Hess), Musk’s framing leaves no temporal gap. Unlike Claiborne Hardware, the likelihood of lawless action is amplified by his massive audience and the context of a political assassination. And like Planned Parenthood v. ACLA, his words brand an opposing group as mortal enemies, constituting a true threat.