They are only pro speech when it comes to misinformation and fake news that their side falls victim too, much more than the left.
If no one was defending the takedowns, then that means people generally weren't in favor of them
I'll readily agree that we often argue about principles when it's our own content or people involved, and I see hypocrisy on both the left and the right.
But I have to give it to libertarians when it comes to consistent application of principles, even and especially when the specifics of a situation make them unpopular among the left or right. Conservatives find offense in the libertarian position on drug policy and media censorship of sex and violence. Leftists find offense in the libertarian position on economic policy, welfare, and immigration. Both sides find things to be offended about in their views on foreign policy. You know you're doing something right when you offend both ends of the political spectrum at the same time.
Regardless, if you read the GP's post, they're saying 'words' should never be banned. So I don't see the making an exception for even the kind of violent speech that you stated. Where were these free speech absolutists back then when their personal misinformation and racist speech wasn't being affected, but others' was?
Makes me doubt their principles.