I actually agree that context can matter depending on what people are saying. There is no acceptable context for overtly stating a desire to wipe out all Jews. But a saying like from "the river to the sea" does depend on context. For some, that statement can mean genocide of Jews. Others may use it to mean fair treatment of Palestinians. It can also mean Palestinians gain the rights to the lands occupied by the Jews, without a need for genocide. Finally, it can mean freedom for Palestinians wherever they may reside. So this statement can be a call for genocide but it does not have to be a call for genocide. I do not know what percentage of those who use it have genocidal intentions but that percentage is not zero. But there is a percentage where this statement is merely a political agenda that someone may or may not support.
What is troubling about the presidents is their unwillingness to apply such context in ways that offend their sensibilities. For example, the statement trans women are not women has been said to be used to commit genocide against trans women. I take it that this is due to the idea that those who utter such a statement want to pressure people to not be trans or to outlaw surgery for even adults. While the percentage using this statement for that reason is not likely to be zero there are a lot of other ideas attached to that statement. It can be used to mean that trans women should not compete against women in athletic events. It can be used to mean that trans women should not share locker rooms with women for the sake of women's dignity. It can mean that trans women should not be sent to women's prisons for the safety of women. It can mean that people should not be forced to use pronouns the trans women want to use since they do not believe they are real women. A person is free to agree or disagree with any of these ideas, but the latter ideas are not genocidal.
If in the past these presidents had been brave in defending the rights of those who make statements such as trans women are not real women, then I would probably defend them right now because I am a big believer in free speech. I acknowledge that we need to think about the boundaries of that speech on a college campus since this is not government restriction but I lean towards more, instead of less freedom in academic settings. But despite that leaning, I will not defend free speech for only certain people. The worst thing about an environment with insufficient free speech is one where only those with the "approved" ideas get free speech. The hypocrisy of the presidents due to their past actions makes me unsympathetic to them if they lose their jobs. I hope this is a moment where people across the political landscape take back our free speech rights. However, to get to this point we had to have progressives feel the sting of losing their speech rights to a similar degree that conservatives have felt over the last few decades.