free speech

Oh shit, well you'd better absolutely control everybody's speech to prevent 'misinformation' aka facts you don't like, fascist.

Wait, what?

Hard to tell if he's for it or against it.

It actually doesn't matter. It's an admission that attempts to stifle speech, ANY speech, is in violation of the first amendment.
That is a huge step up from the usual liberal claim that xyz speech isn't actually protected.

I'm about to make a whole lot of people mad here. We actually could legitimately usurp the protections in the bill of rights, BUT it would new constitutional amendments. Those are way more difficult to pass than simple laws, legislation, or presidential decree (I mean executive order).

So even if he is against free speech because it allows speech that "should be banned" he's indirectly advocating going through the proper, more difficult, procedures to do it.