[shrikant]

I wonder if you're being obtuse, but I'll try to explain anyway (I'm not parent commenter, but let's see if I can capture why they think this statement is spin.)

Gab claim they're being smeared for "defending free expression and individual liberty" AND "working with law enforcement".

People and organisations attempting to shut Gab down, and/or be critical of them, are assuredly not doing so because Gab are working with law enforcement.

That renders Gab's claim spin, as per parent commenter.

[Zuider]

Your argument is mistaken on both counts. The smear and de-platform campaign began when Gab reported the details and profile of the synagogue murderer to law enforcement, providing them with "concrete evidence for a motive that they can use in a case to seek justice against this awful monster."

As for the 'people and organizations attempting to shut Gab down, or and/or be critical of them', they are 'assuredly not doing so' on the grounds Gab hosted violent anti-Semitic and extremist material. Otherwise they would express equal outrage at the violent anti-Semitic tweets from Louis Farrakhan, one example among many, who uses the exact same rhetoric as the Pittsburgh shooter. The 'mail bomber' Cesar Sayoc Jr. also made numerous violent threats on twitter. In neither case are there calls to shut Twitter down.