The First Amendment prevents the government from denying her the right to say what she wishes. But that does not relieve her of the responsibility for what she says. The Supreme Court has been asked to rule on this many times. The case which is most appropriate to MTG's current dilemma was Debs v US. Eugene Debs was a communist "agitator," who was convicted of interfering with conscription acts in 1919. Debs ran for President, so he was a politician, like MTG.
Debs appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was the author of the "Clear and Present Danger," test for determining if speech was free from prosecution. Holmes concluded Debs' intent and the general tendency of his words were together sufficient for a jury to convict him fairly. The Debs case is much like MTG's in other ways. I suggest that you read about this case as you educate yourself about what the First Amendment really means.
