This is parody. This isn't illegal.
Understand?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
Intentionally misquoting someone is unethical, though the legality can be a gray area where there's plausible deniability. Impersonating someone in order to harm their reputation is wrong, even if smart people can see through the ruse. Why do you think phishing and various scams work? Why do people pay pet 'psychics'? Just because smart people might catch the ruse doesn't change the fact that the ruse is unethical, and often illegal as well.
Is it wrong to make your newborn vegan even if it hurts their cognitive and motor development? Nope. Not illegal, but scientifically it WILL harm (or kill) the child. It's illegal in a few states, but that has no bearing on whether it's actually harmful given the overwhelming scientific consensus.
Is it illegal to be an anti-vaxxer? Depends on the area. Are you okay with this even if it's 'legal'? How about spreading anti-vaxx nonsense (a la Jenny McCarthy) and creating a viral (pun fully-intended) disinformation campaign?
Would you have supported miscegenation laws before the landmark Loving v. Virginia case in 1967? I hope not. The law often lags behind ethical standards, often dismally so. Slavery was legal at one time. Didn't make it ethical. Segregation used to be legal. Still unethical. Child-labor was legal at one time. Didn't make it ethical. Coca-Cola put friggin' Cocaine in their drinks early on. Didn't make it right because it was legal, and sometimes the fact that something is illegal doesn't make it wrong. Prohibition. Unfair anti-drug laws. Illegal marijuana, many restrictive morality laws, etc.
Prostitution is illegal in most places, but divorce ruins people much more thoroughly. At least prostitution is honest, but it's mostly illegal. Yet, if you buy a woman a cheap dinner and she gives herself to you for free, that's legal. George Carlin has a whole bit on this. Basically it boils down to, "Selling is legal. F*cking is legal. Why isn't selling f*cking legal?" He's got a point. Legality is a bad angle when you're trying to be so literal, but for speech it's a good starting point as well as whether that which is being said is actually true. Impersonating another user or company to cause mayhem/chaos/harm (wittingly or not) violates the 'Is it true?' test.
Don't forget that lots of people aren't smart or observant and some just want to confirm what they already think without nuance or fact-checking. Remember the dopey reporters who breathlessly reported on Ligma/Johnson losing their Twitter jobs?
Don't be one of those people who need to be PERSONALLY affected by bad actors to finally 'get it', like homophobic people who blasted out hate until someone in their family came up gay. Understand how impersonation can hurt you too, or people who think like you, or whether your candidate will win the presidency in 2024.
Isn't FUD dangerous because it's built on twisted nugget of truth, taken out of context or dishonestly amplified to be sufficiently believable and sensational for people who don't know better? There's a reason why it works, and it's not because the masses are so astute. Spreading FUD about people via impersonation is unethical, just like misquoting someone.
You are spreading FUD about someone spearheading Tesla, a company in which you are presumably invested, thinking you're scoring points of some kind. All you're doing is contributing to the firestorm of hate that's already out there for Elon and for what, to prevent a conservative from being too candid on the world's 'town square'? Remember, tolerance is a good thing, and that must include diversity of viewpoint, 'ZenRockGarden'.
The name unfortunately does not check out.
