6 ms·

I find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the

I find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th" Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement on his Twitter account? Would that not be calming the situation, if anything? [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/trump-transition-of-power-455721 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/trump-transition-of... EDIT: I misread Twitch for Twitter. Alternatively, I'm prescient and this was posted in the wrong thread.

belltaco 6y ago
He says the facts bear out his assertion that the election was stolen... how is that calming?
- incrudible 6y ago
  The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". Trumpers will forever believe that the election was stolen, but they can believe that from the comfort of their homes, they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it. If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
  - fredophile 6y ago
    If somebody said "your democracatically elected government has been taken away but you should just go home," would you? Would the Trump supporters that raided the capital yesterday? The reason they will forever believe that the election was stolen is because Trump continues to say that the election was stolen.
    - barbacoa 6y ago
      People spent years de-legitimatizing the 2016 election by claiming that Trump colluded with the Russian government. There were even stories published by mainstream media outlets that Russians hack election machines. The other side undermining the election results after they lost is not exactly new.
      - dmitriid 6y ago
        Hillary Clinton conceded she lost the very next day. There was an orderly transition process from Obama to Trump that started on the second day after the election. Compare that "undermining" to what the GOP and Trump are doing.
        zaroth 6y ago
        Hardy ordinary though, for the FBI to orchestrate false charges and spy on the incoming administration with fraudulent FISA warrants. They are both very wrong, in different ways.
        barbacoa 6y ago
        Or that time Obama had a sit down meeting with heads of the FBI and directed them to go after Trump's national security adviser in order to get Flynn "arrested or fired".
        dmitriid 6y ago
        --- start quote --- On December 9, 2019, Horowitz released his report on the findings of the DOJ OIG investigation. The OIG found no indication that the investigation of Trump and Russia was motivated by political bias, but did make 17 "basic and fundamental" errors and omissions in its warrant applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to surveil Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser on the Trump campaign.[160][5][161][162][163] The report found that the FBI's investigation had a factual basis and was initiated for an authorized purpose,[162] stating: "We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced" the agency's decision to open the investigation --- end quote --- What else? Ah, I also remember Obama calling for months that the election was stolen, inciting violence, calling for forceful removal of government officials and obstructing transition teams. I also remember Obama refusing to commit to a peaceful transition of power until after his supporters stormed the Capitol and his own party (just as complicit) turned against him and certified election results.
  - notriddle 6y ago
    > they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it Yeah, they do. The election is what defines the legitimate government; if it really had been falsified[1], then anyone who participated in the falsification would be a usurper, and the government instated by the falsified election would be fake. If something like this actually happened, then it would hardly be insane to consider it your patriotic duty to put a stop to it. The metaphor is overused as hell, but it is apt: Trump shouted "fire" in a crowded theatre, and now he's acting all surprised that a few people got trampled in the rush to get out. Anybody who believes him at this point obviously has brain worms, but being a notorious liar doesn't exempt you from libel and sedition laws. It is also irrelevant whether the mob sincerely believes the election was stolen, or whether they're using it as an excuse; slander is still slander. [1]: Using ad-tech to manipulate the way people vote, as the Cambridge Analytica conspiracy theory alleges, is not falsification.
    - incrudible 6y ago
      I disagree. The constitution says that state electors elect the president, not the people. They did just that. The election is now legally binding, whether there was widespread fraud or not. Yesterday, Trump still had an unlikely but legal way to prevent Biden from becoming president. Today he does not, so it makes no sense to push any further.
    - freeone3000 6y ago
      Being a notorious liar actually does excuse you from libel. From Tucker Carlson to Elon Musk, the defense is that nobody reasonable would take them seriously.
  - craftinator 6y ago
    > The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". This has been Trump, forever. He strings together contradictions in every sentence he can, and when he can't, he makes sure to contradict or make a random topic change within the next sentence. Why does he do this? It's a rhetorical trick. That means every time he speaks, most people find something in it that they want to hear. He makes sure not to say anything specific unless it's obvious that he's embellishing it; then if you don't like what he says, it sounds like it was a joke or off the cuff. This has been his whole platform. Say so many things, with so many interpretations, with so little factual basis, that most people can find something they like, and almost no one can pin him down for saying something awful. You just expect him to be grandiose and full of shit, and he is, so it's hard to be upset, as long as you find him charismatic.
    - craftinator 6y ago
      If you've ever read Seveneves by Neal Stephenson, it's very similar to JBF's rhetorical style (scary similar). Big ideas, many ideas, full of contradictions, and fluidly swapping between possible interpretations to convince as many as possible, and demonizing anyone who figures out what your doing. It's nasty.
    - incrudible 6y ago
      Of course I want to hear that there will be an orderly transition. I do not necessarily disagree with your general analysis, but what are you implying here? That he is still hedging a plot for a coup? Doubtful. The fact of the matter is that until yesterday, it made complete sense for Trump to cause a huge scene to scare the electors into tossing the election. Today it does not, the election is over, there is no recourse. Trump has nothing to gain from any further unrest.
      - craftinator 6y ago
        Late getting back to this response, but I think it's still relevant. > but what are you implying here? That he is still hedging a plot for a coup? Doubtful. I think that you are giving him credit he's not due. He's not someone who creates and executes long term, complex plans. He acts on emotion; whatever he's feeling right then, and takes actions that will coerce people into feeling the same way. He's angry that Biden won and that the certification of the vote is going to happen. Thus the certification is bad, and anyone going along with it is bad, so he says whatever will make the crowd think it's bad. > The fact of the matter is that until yesterday, it made complete sense for Trump to cause a huge scene to scare the electors into tossing the election. No, that's not a fact. This was never going to happen. The electors were never going to get scared and overturn the will of the voters. He's a simpleton; he didn't like that he was losing, so he demonized everyone involved with that bad thing that he doesn't like. This is something he's been doing his entire life, and it's effective as long as he has the money, influence, and smart people on the payroll to shape his vitriol and gusto into reality.
  - dimal 6y ago
    It's one thing to say there will be an orderly transition of power, but the events of yesterday already made that statement false, and those events were incited by him. So saying something calming out of one side of his mouth doesn't excuse what he's saying out the other side.
    - ghthor 6y ago
      They were not incited by him.
      - craftinator 6y ago
        Sweet argument bro. Also, the earth is flat.
puszczyk 6y ago
This post is about Twitch, not Twitter.
- incrudible 6y ago
  I guess I'll need a new prescription.
  - weavie 6y ago
    You are not the only one. I had to scroll down this far before I realised too.
colinmhayes 6y ago
The president told the protestors to go to the poorly defended capital, never disavowed them, refuses to apologize.
darkarmani 6y ago
I think when someone strikes out 100 times, you are finally allowed to call them out. Cherry picking one sentence of a post that is "calming" is what is disingenuous.
- specialist 6y ago
  The genius of Trump's tactic of saying everything (continuously contradicting himself) is allowing everyone to cherry pick useful bits to support (or oppose) any given narrative.
  - lostlogin 6y ago
    > The genius of Trump's tactic of saying everything (continuously contradicting himself) I’ve always found this to make his statements incoherent.
    - upbeat_general 6y ago
      Absolutely. Evidently his supporters didn’t believe that coherent statements and any semblance of consistency were important though.
dmitriid 6y ago
> nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th The transition starts way before January 20th. It starts immediately follwing presidential election. Educate yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_tra... Trump didn't even acknowledge he would agree to a peaceful transition of power until today when he lost all avenues (however imaginary) of staying in power. Quotes: --- start quote --- The General Services Administration Administrator, Emily Murphy, initially refused to issue the "ascertainment" letter declaring Biden the "apparent winner", on the basis that the election result was disputed. The declaration would mark the official start of the transition. Withholding it denied the Biden transition team full funds, secure office space, and access to agencies Biden had also been denied daily classified national security briefings. Further, the State Department denied access to communications from foreign leaders, leaving the Biden team to communicate through other unofficial channels. -- end quote --- Ah, how nevertheless an orderly transition this is, indeed.
newacct583 6y ago
> Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement Sorry, but that framing is disingenuous. Trump was suspended when he incited a mob to march to the capitol and "fight" to "stop" a joint session of congress, who then invaded and sacked the seat of government of the United States. Later, after all this, he posted (for the very first time ever!) that he'd accept the results of the election. So... that's good. But it's not why he was banned.

belltaco 6y ago

He says the facts bear out his assertion that the election was stolen... how is that calming?

incrudible 6y ago
The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". Trumpers will forever believe that the election was stolen, but they can believe that from the comfort of their homes, they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it. If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
- fredophile 6y ago
  If somebody said "your democracatically elected government has been taken away but you should just go home," would you? Would the Trump supporters that raided the capital yesterday? The reason they will forever believe that the election was stolen is because Trump continues to say that the election was stolen.
  - barbacoa 6y ago
    People spent years de-legitimatizing the 2016 election by claiming that Trump colluded with the Russian government. There were even stories published by mainstream media outlets that Russians hack election machines. The other side undermining the election results after they lost is not exactly new.
    - dmitriid 6y ago
      Hillary Clinton conceded she lost the very next day. There was an orderly transition process from Obama to Trump that started on the second day after the election. Compare that "undermining" to what the GOP and Trump are doing.
      - zaroth 6y ago
        Hardy ordinary though, for the FBI to orchestrate false charges and spy on the incoming administration with fraudulent FISA warrants. They are both very wrong, in different ways.
        barbacoa 6y ago
        Or that time Obama had a sit down meeting with heads of the FBI and directed them to go after Trump's national security adviser in order to get Flynn "arrested or fired".
        dmitriid 6y ago
        --- start quote --- On December 9, 2019, Horowitz released his report on the findings of the DOJ OIG investigation. The OIG found no indication that the investigation of Trump and Russia was motivated by political bias, but did make 17 "basic and fundamental" errors and omissions in its warrant applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to surveil Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser on the Trump campaign.[160][5][161][162][163] The report found that the FBI's investigation had a factual basis and was initiated for an authorized purpose,[162] stating: "We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced" the agency's decision to open the investigation --- end quote --- What else? Ah, I also remember Obama calling for months that the election was stolen, inciting violence, calling for forceful removal of government officials and obstructing transition teams. I also remember Obama refusing to commit to a peaceful transition of power until after his supporters stormed the Capitol and his own party (just as complicit) turned against him and certified election results.
- notriddle 6y ago
  > they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it Yeah, they do. The election is what defines the legitimate government; if it really had been falsified[1], then anyone who participated in the falsification would be a usurper, and the government instated by the falsified election would be fake. If something like this actually happened, then it would hardly be insane to consider it your patriotic duty to put a stop to it. The metaphor is overused as hell, but it is apt: Trump shouted "fire" in a crowded theatre, and now he's acting all surprised that a few people got trampled in the rush to get out. Anybody who believes him at this point obviously has brain worms, but being a notorious liar doesn't exempt you from libel and sedition laws. It is also irrelevant whether the mob sincerely believes the election was stolen, or whether they're using it as an excuse; slander is still slander. [1]: Using ad-tech to manipulate the way people vote, as the Cambridge Analytica conspiracy theory alleges, is not falsification.
  - incrudible 6y ago
    I disagree. The constitution says that state electors elect the president, not the people. They did just that. The election is now legally binding, whether there was widespread fraud or not. Yesterday, Trump still had an unlikely but legal way to prevent Biden from becoming president. Today he does not, so it makes no sense to push any further.
  - freeone3000 6y ago
    Being a notorious liar actually does excuse you from libel. From Tucker Carlson to Elon Musk, the defense is that nobody reasonable would take them seriously.
- craftinator 6y ago
  > The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". This has been Trump, forever. He strings together contradictions in every sentence he can, and when he can't, he makes sure to contradict or make a random topic change within the next sentence. Why does he do this? It's a rhetorical trick. That means every time he speaks, most people find something in it that they want to hear. He makes sure not to say anything specific unless it's obvious that he's embellishing it; then if you don't like what he says, it sounds like it was a joke or off the cuff. This has been his whole platform. Say so many things, with so many interpretations, with so little factual basis, that most people can find something they like, and almost no one can pin him down for saying something awful. You just expect him to be grandiose and full of shit, and he is, so it's hard to be upset, as long as you find him charismatic.
  - craftinator 6y ago
    If you've ever read Seveneves by Neal Stephenson, it's very similar to JBF's rhetorical style (scary similar). Big ideas, many ideas, full of contradictions, and fluidly swapping between possible interpretations to convince as many as possible, and demonizing anyone who figures out what your doing. It's nasty.
  - incrudible 6y ago
    Of course I want to hear that there will be an orderly transition. I do not necessarily disagree with your general analysis, but what are you implying here? That he is still hedging a plot for a coup? Doubtful. The fact of the matter is that until yesterday, it made complete sense for Trump to cause a huge scene to scare the electors into tossing the election. Today it does not, the election is over, there is no recourse. Trump has nothing to gain from any further unrest.
    - craftinator 6y ago
      Late getting back to this response, but I think it's still relevant. > but what are you implying here? That he is still hedging a plot for a coup? Doubtful. I think that you are giving him credit he's not due. He's not someone who creates and executes long term, complex plans. He acts on emotion; whatever he's feeling right then, and takes actions that will coerce people into feeling the same way. He's angry that Biden won and that the certification of the vote is going to happen. Thus the certification is bad, and anyone going along with it is bad, so he says whatever will make the crowd think it's bad. > The fact of the matter is that until yesterday, it made complete sense for Trump to cause a huge scene to scare the electors into tossing the election. No, that's not a fact. This was never going to happen. The electors were never going to get scared and overturn the will of the voters. He's a simpleton; he didn't like that he was losing, so he demonized everyone involved with that bad thing that he doesn't like. This is something he's been doing his entire life, and it's effective as long as he has the money, influence, and smart people on the payroll to shape his vitriol and gusto into reality.
- dimal 6y ago
  It's one thing to say there will be an orderly transition of power, but the events of yesterday already made that statement false, and those events were incited by him. So saying something calming out of one side of his mouth doesn't excuse what he's saying out the other side.
  - ghthor 6y ago
    They were not incited by him.
    - craftinator 6y ago
      Sweet argument bro. Also, the earth is flat.

puszczyk 6y ago

This post is about Twitch, not Twitter.

incrudible 6y ago
I guess I'll need a new prescription.
- weavie 6y ago
  You are not the only one. I had to scroll down this far before I realised too.

colinmhayes 6y ago

The president told the protestors to go to the poorly defended capital, never disavowed them, refuses to apologize.

darkarmani 6y ago

I think when someone strikes out 100 times, you are finally allowed to call them out. Cherry picking one sentence of a post that is "calming" is what is disingenuous.

specialist 6y ago
The genius of Trump's tactic of saying everything (continuously contradicting himself) is allowing everyone to cherry pick useful bits to support (or oppose) any given narrative.
- lostlogin 6y ago
  > The genius of Trump's tactic of saying everything (continuously contradicting himself) I’ve always found this to make his statements incoherent.
  - upbeat_general 6y ago
    Absolutely. Evidently his supporters didn’t believe that coherent statements and any semblance of consistency were important though.

dmitriid 6y ago

> nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th The transition starts way before January 20th. It starts immediately follwing presidential election. Educate yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_tra... Trump didn't even acknowledge he would agree to a peaceful transition of power until today when he lost all avenues (however imaginary) of staying in power. Quotes: --- start quote --- The General Services Administration Administrator, Emily Murphy, initially refused to issue the "ascertainment" letter declaring Biden the "apparent winner", on the basis that the election result was disputed. The declaration would mark the official start of the transition. Withholding it denied the Biden transition team full funds, secure office space, and access to agencies Biden had also been denied daily classified national security briefings. Further, the State Department denied access to communications from foreign leaders, leaving the Biden team to communicate through other unofficial channels. -- end quote --- Ah, how nevertheless an orderly transition this is, indeed.

newacct583 6y ago

> Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement Sorry, but that framing is disingenuous. Trump was suspended when he incited a mob to march to the capitol and "fight" to "stop" a joint session of congress, who then invaded and sacked the seat of government of the United States. Later, after all this, he posted (for the very first time ever!) that he'd accept the results of the election. So... that's good. But it's not why he was banned.