05.29.2020 10:02 AM

Twitter‬⁩ gets a backbone

Didn’t see that coming.

42 Comments

  1. Mark D says:

    Twitter may have found the happy medium for which they were searching. Twitter has stated in the past that some of President Trump’s tweets violate their rules, however, they did not wish to censor him because they felt it was not in the public interest to do so.

    However, they also were not satisfied with the status quo and were looking for a better solution.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “Twitter may have found the happy medium for which they were searching.”

      Maybe. Now all they have to do is make sure they treat both left and right wing posters EXACTLY THE SAME. Good luck finding unbiased people to make those decisions, because it’s not like you will be given the actual choice of being fair or not (it it will just be forced on you if you don’t).

      • Ronald O'Dowd says:

        Good point.

        • Mark D says:

          Ronald:

          I think Twitter’s point here is that they cannot treat right and left exactly the same because Mr Trump is president of the world’s largest superpower, and thus it is in the public interest not to censor him for violating Twitter’s community standards as they would any other user of their social media platform.

          Equal treatment in this case means that instead of a warning that a tweet is in violation of community standards, President Trump’s offending tweets are removed from the platform and his account is suspended.

          Like the folks at Twitter, I hesitate whether or not this is in the public interest. I would sooner know what Mr Trump is thinking given that he is head of state of the country next to us, and our biggest trading partner.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Mark,

            The problem is that the United States is polarized to the point that another civil war could one day become an option. In a consensus-based society, you could tweet about a WuhanVirus and it would be minimally disruptive. But in a powder keg armed-to-the-teeth society, it’s not a good idea. Americans of Chinese descent have already been attacked. Fortunately, to my knowledge, none have been killed — but a POTUS should do absolutely nothing that would even remotely or indirectly stimulate racial attacks.

          • Mark D says:

            Ron:

            Looking at what we have seen this weekend, I think one could reasonably argue the U.S. is in the state of another civil war, albeit much more low level than its first civil war.

            You also need not convince me that Mr Trump should not be tweeting comments that can stir racially-motivated violence, or encourage racism of any kind. An example being the specific tweet under discussion in which Mr Trump quoted a segregationist police chief attempting to justify his crackdown on the Civil Rights Movement.

            That being said, Mr Trump is the President of the United States of America. He will command a media audience whether or not Twitter censors him from its platform. It’s a tough call, but if these are indeed his views upon which his administration is acting, I would rather they be out in the open.

  2. Robert White says:

    Too bad Trump won’t apply the same dictates to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors currently looting USA taxpayers via Wall Street’s REPO alphabet facilities.

    The Federal Reserve has looted approximately $9 trillion USD this year alone.

    Biden is looking stellar by the day compared to the burnt offering the Republicans are offering up for 2020 election.

    RW

    • Robert,

      The American oafs at The Fed, Treasury and in TheStupidHouseTM actually think that allowing The Fed to print countless trillions and then account for them only on their private-in-house balance sheet will be the charm.

      Trouble is, it didn’t prevent a recession in lesser amounts in 2008 and won’t prevent at least a recession today in infinite amounts.

      Then the StableGeniusTM will wonder why he ultimately lost re-election. That is, if Trump doesn’t come up with some bogus ruse or excuse to delay the election. Go figure.

      • It may not have prevented a recession in 2008, bit they didn’t expect it to. The question is, did it prevent a depression in 2008?

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:

          Darwin,

          Absolutely, that argument can be made with credibility. I think it has a lot of merit but in this 2020 environment, the United States has 50-60 million unemployed, 500,000 homeless people and a -34% GDP drop. The sheer order of magnitude of this economic crisis precludes heading off a Depression. QE to Infinity will not prevent Depression-era conditions IMHO. In fact, bogus federal counterfeiting will only make the crisis far worse by turning a deflating economy into one resolutely on the road to hyperinflation.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            LATEST STAT: -51% GDP…

          • Robert White says:

            Ronald,

            Our resident Economist & all round good guy Professor Ian Lee at the Sprott School of Business Carleton University disagrees with my assertion that we are going to see Weimar Republic level of hyperinflation. He is inferring that we will likely see a mere 20% drop over the next year, but NOT Weimar level hyperinflation.

            The numbers frighten me, but experienced veterans like Ian Lee are not as easily induced into fear by the same numbers.

            The best assessment of what is going on comes from Pam & Russ Martens at Wall Street on Parade.

            I fully believe we are heading towards Weimar.

            RW

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Robert,

            Sure, in the initial transition from deflation to inflation, Lee is theoretically right during the initial phase of the transition period. But I’m with you, the US will get to more than 50% inflation per month — and it will happen a lot faster than most people think. Ditto for a Ten-Year Treasury with negative yields. God help the United States.

            From Day One of his Administration, I expected Trump to end up as the next James Buchanan. He’s well on his way right now. But I digress.

  3. Mark D says:

    Oh my!

    A friend of mine who is a popular Southern Evangelical pastor in the U.S. just pointed me to the segregationist roots of the expression “When the looting starts, the shooting starts.”

    I had no idea.

    My friend is understandably horrified with this tweet.

  4. Walter says:

    I am not sure the Democrats have a winning strategy here.
    1st, it’s lock down the economies for 5 more months just so Trump can’t run on an economic record.
    Now it’s get Democratic Cities and States to act racist, and then allow rioting – just so Trump will appear to be behind the chaos.

    Interesting strategy.

    • Bill says:

      Conspiracy is your go to? How about the obvious white agitator breaking windows. Right wingers are hoping for riots.

      • Fred from BC says:

        “Conspiracy is your go to? How about the obvious white agitator breaking windows. Right wingers are hoping for riots.”

        Look again. Those aren’t “right-wingers”…they are ANTIFA.
        They’ve already been called out for it by the local black community. (try different news sources for a more accurate account of what is really going on). ANTIFA, in reality, are just thugs and anarchists disguised as concerned, caring activists. They are the new fascists. This is *fun* for them.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:

          Fred,

          I don’t put everyone in the ANTIFA category what with their anarchist agenda but sure maybe, maybe, 50% are there to do exactly that. But it’s all too convenient to put all apples in the same barrel. That’s where Trump is headed because it only too well serves his political purposes and agenda.

          • Fred from BC says:

            I watched some of the Seattle rioting today. Saw the burning cars, the looting, the tear gassing (in response to fireworks and other items thrown at them). The news reporters from KOMO4 interviewed a few of the ‘protesters’. It did not go well.

            Ezra Levant, for one, takes particular delight in exposing these people by asking them questions like “why are are here?” and “what do you think you will accomplish today?” and “what do you think the next step should be?” He knows that most of these people don’t have a clue, and are just there for the party atmosphere and maybe some light looting. The KOMO reporters weren’t as experienced, and seemed stunned at the answers they got ( particularly to the last question….no one had a clue…)

            The idiot mayor of Seattle then imposed a curfew which everyone ignored. Protesters were allowed to block the freeway as state police “dealt with them” (yeah: by ESCORTING them). She called in 200 national guards who were to be *unarmed* (oh, yeah…that’ll really show them who’s boss, right?).

            Portland got the same treatment from the rioters, which is hilarious given the fact that they *support* ANTIFA so openly. What is it with all these Democrat strongholds and their willingness to let their cities be destroyed? Shameful.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Fred,

            Rioters and looters need to be dealt with effectively by police. But we can both agree that lethal force should never be used unless the police are legitimately threatened with deadly force.

            And while I’m at it, where is police coordination with the media? Are they waiting for a journalist to be killed by police? Sure, enforcement actions can lead to accidental attacks by police on journalists but you can’t apply that possibility to cover all or even most of the attacks on reporters.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “Rioters and looters need to be dealt with effectively by police. But we can both agree that lethal force should never be used unless the police are legitimately threatened with deadly force. ”

            Absolutely, without question. And that’s the way it used to be before the inexplicable political need to put 110 lb women out there as police (and firefighters) changed everything.The police were once big, burly macho guys who didn’t *need* to use lethal force to get their point across…but not any more. Batons are now seen as too threatening for some reason, so Tasers were being pushed as the way to go until a couple of suspicious deaths occurred.

        • Bill says:

          I know what my eyes see pal. A bunch of white guys all wearing identical gas masks breaking windows and setting fires. Take off the blinders.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “I know what my eyes see pal. A bunch of white guys all wearing identical gas masks breaking windows and setting fires.”

            Yeah, almost like they were ORGANIZED, right? What are the odds?

            (and don’t forget them yelling “over here….there’s bricks!” to each other to guide themselves to the *pallet of bricks* that somehow showed up).

            They also had jugs of water and baking soda, which apparent comes in handy if you plan to be pepper-sprayed.

            Oh, and the mayor of St.Paul says that not one of the people arrested in his city was even from Minnesota, but I’m sure that’s just coincidence, right?

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Bill,

            You’re talking looters and rioters. I’m talking protesters. That’s why we’re like two ships passing in the night: not the same conversation.

            Trump wants to only talk about yours. No surprise there.

          • Mark D says:

            Bill and Fred:

            I am not trying to sound polemical here, but rather share a question that a friend of mine, who is a respected Evangelical pastor and historian, posed to me and other friends on social media this morning:

            Were participants in the Boston Tea party protesters? Or looters and rioters?

            To be clear, my friend’s intention was not to justify looting and rioting. In fact, he is a well-known apologist for the pacifist tradition within Envangelical Christianity.

            Rather he was trying to help other white evangelicals understand why rioting and looting innevitable arise when a group of people feel unjustly oppressed over a sustained period of time.

        • Mark D says:

          Fred:

          The reports I have read in the media, as well as received from friends of mine on the ground who live near where some of these riots are taking place and know the local politics, is that violence and looting is being perpetuated by political extremists on both sides.

          In fact, one of the concerns expressed by law enforcement and I believe the governor of Minnesota, that was reported in mainstream media, was that violent extremists on both the extreme left and the extreme right from outside the affected communities were in a certain sense coalescing.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “Were participants in the Boston Tea party protesters? Or looters and rioters?”

            I’d call them protesters, since they dumped the tea in the ocean and *did not profit* from it, unlike the people rendered so mentally overwhelmed and emotionally distraught by the death of someone on the other side of the country that only a big screen TV or brand new high-end stereo can sooth their shattered psyche.

            (in my opinion, anyway…others may differ…)

          • Fred from BC says:

            ” and know the local politics, is that violence and looting is being perpetuated by political extremists on both sides. ”

            That could well be. Or they could be using that as an excuse to deflect responsibility from ANTIFA, BLM and the like. We won’t know for sure until they start arresting more of them.

            ” violent extremists on both the extreme left and the extreme right from outside the affected communities were in a certain sense coalescing.”

            Well, that would be a first. The ‘extreme right’ would be primarily white power types, wouldn’t it? Obviously they wouldn’t be there protesting against the death of George Floyd, but rather trying to inflame the situation and start the race war they have been longing for all these years.

          • Mark D says:

            Fred:

            Ah, I see you’re going with the sanitized version of the story found in highschool history books.

            That is not what is recorded in more serious history books, or eyewitnesses to the event.

    • The Doctor says:

      I see. So the police officer who killed Mr. Floyd is a secret Deep State DNC operative? That’s your theory here?

  5. Mark D says:

    “Now all they have to do is make sure they treat both left and right wing posters EXACTLY THE SAME.”

    Twitter is already treating President Trump different by attaching a warning to his tweets. Remember that if anyone else had written that, Twitter would have taken down the tweet (and likely suspended the account) for violation of its anti-violence policies.

    However, Twitter has opted to leave Mr Trump’s tweet up, despite it being in violation of their policies, because they feel it is in the public interest to do so. The warning is simply Twitter’s acknowledgement to the public that the President’s tweet was in violation of their policies and that it would have been removed if he were not president of the world’s largest nuclear power.

    What I find interesting is that Facebook had previously critiqued Twitter for taking this stand. Facebook stated that had Mr Trump posted something in violation of Facebook policy his posting would be removed, regardless of the political office he holds. Until Mr Trump posted this exact same comment on his Facebook page.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      Mark,

      This President has decided to bully social media. Impossible! LOL.

      FB and Twitter know the Trump MO only too well. It’s not in their survival interest to push the Trump envelope.

      The highly predictable Trump will move heaven, hell and earth to take them down if they remove a single post or tweet.

      • Mark D says:

        Ron:

        Let me first state that I believe we are in agreement on the bigger point: Nobody should be posting racism, or incitements to violence. Especially not a POTUS.

        Beyond that, I am not really disputing what you are saying about Facebook and Twitter being in business survival mode. I am simply stating I prefer Twitter being honest about what is going on.

        That is, “This presidential tweet violates our community standards against inciting violence. However, because of current events and the fact he is POTUS, we are leaving it accessible.”

        Whereas FaceBook began with virtue signalling “We wouldn’t attach a warning like other social media. We would take it down.” Then when confronted with an actual instance they simply re-defined their community standards so as not to cover the offending content. To me, this is the bigger danger.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “Until Mr Trump posted this exact same comment on his Facebook page.”

      (sigh…)

      I had hoped that after his election he would lay off the social media and stop blurting out his every waking thought verbatim. Someone should have stepped up and told him to stop, but apparently his ego is even bigger than previously thought, and he really doesn’t listen to anyone else; I have never watched his TV show but always figured that most of his public persona was contrived and mostly for the cameras. I was wrong about that, clearly.

      As for Twitter (or was it Facebook?), they have apparently appointed someone to oversee future censorship efforts who exhibits a confirmed and documented left-wing bias. Not a smart move at all, and one that can only make things worse.

      • If he didn’t post on Twitter then it would be easier to pretend he wasn’t a terrible person because you could blame the media or his handlers for all the incredibly petty and stupid things he says.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:

          Darwin,

          Pop quiz for all readers: if Trump strenuously advocated that the Earth is actually flat, how much of his base would enthusiastically believe him without questioning it?

          Yes, it really has got this bad under Trump.

  6. Walter says:

    My mother told me that if you go out with a bunch of friends, and things start to get out of hand – leave.
    Their actions will be your actions if you hang around.

    At some point – the protesters decided to condone the violence.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      Walter,

      No one gets to condone violence. It happens, provoked by thugs and anarchists, etc. But I will go with you on the following points: was there a reasonable expectation of violence? Absolutely. Should the rest of the protestors have left once violence and looting started? Again, obviously. But if they foolishly did not, it in no way has them putting the Good Housekeeping seal of approval on the violent acts occurring there. That’s a logical bridge-too-far conclusion.

  7. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Incredible. That stupid fuck in the White House says he’s an ally of peaceful protesters only to have military police tear gas and stun grenade them right in from of the White House.

    Biden is looking better and better compared to this certified imbecile.

Leave a Reply to Bill Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*