The tweet part is a non-story. The article it refers to isn't.
"Ngo was part of an unaffiliated group of conservative news sites that unwittingly published editorials by people who don’t exist."
This happens because they don't have any journalistic standards. They don't verify shit as long as it furthers their cause. You know, the thing you do.
Portland footage is rarely fake or staged. It's is misleading. The provocation part is cut. The mass beatings by the right are cut. The planning of deliberate attacks by the right are cut. The Cider Riot incident underlines that last point.
1st amendment doesn't cover provocation. "Fighting words" i believe is the cutesy phrase.
Angy Ngo is an alt right agitator. Your defense of him seems a bit odd.