3 ms·

Can you prove incitement? Because Twitter certainly did not list out any convincing evidence in their blog post about the ban (https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/to

Can you prove incitement? Because Twitter certainly did not list out any convincing evidence in their blog post about the ban (https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...), instead sheepishly offering up Trump's absence at the inauguration as evidence. It's hard to blame Trump for the Jan 6th riots when 10000 people showed up at his rally that day and only a couple hundred at most went past the capitol barricades. But simply breaching the barriers is not really a big deal - leftist activists have raided the capitol several times in the last decade as part of their own political activism. So let's focus on those who didn't just trespass but committed other crimes like theft, vandalism, and assault. I bet that number is less than 50. So to summarize, Trump delivers a speech, he explicitly calls for a peaceful protest (visible in transcripts), and a very very small number of people break the law. That doesn't sound like incitement - it sounds to me like a few individuals made bad decisions and hold personal responsibility for their own actions and should be held accountable. But no court has found Trump guilty of incitement, and I bet none ever will - the evidence is simply not there. As for Twitter - their power and influence is larger than most governments, and they should not be making unilateral decisions judging incitement and instituting bans of public figures. They operate the new public town square - and they need to be regulated like a public entity. or just nationalized like a utility and required to uphold the first amendment. And other leaders like Macron (https://www.axios.com/macron-social-media-bans-trump-twitter-facebook-bf8640d0-57d0-4747-affb-e91835f9fb84.html https://www.axios.com/macron-social-media-bans-trump-twitter...) and Merkel (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/germanys-merkel-hits-out-at-twitter-over-problematic-trump-ban.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/germanys-merkel-hits-out-at-...) are absolutely correct to be alarmed at the reckless actions and immense power of American tech giants, who are ideologically very biased.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
Whew, that has to be the most snarky, insecure corporate press release I’ve ever seen. Bizarre.
mrzimmerman 6y ago
He also explicitly told everyone to "fight like hell". I mean, if he's using double speak I can't help that but one part of what he said triggered a percentage of the people to try to find and kill US Congress people, steal computer equipment and other office supplies, and kill police officers. You're asking everyone who watched the capitol riots to ignore what they saw with their own eyes.
- cobraetor 6y ago
  > "fight like hell". I think taking quotes out of context does not present things as they actually happened or provide a fair analysis. We have to be careful of cherry-picking. Here's the full context: “fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” ... “We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we’ve been forced to believe over the past several weeks.” Per legal scholars, like Jonathan Turley,[1], "those words could be equally consistent with calling for a protest, not violence, as many groups routinely do at state and federal capitals." which explains why the legal system has not been able to convict Trump. People seem to have varying opinions on this topic, but at the end of the day if you look at the facts, it becomes much simpler to understand. [1] https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/11/reckless-rhetoric-is-a-reckless-standard-for-an-impeachment-trial/comment-page-2/ https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/11/reckless-rhetoric-is-a...
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  I don't think what he said triggered anyone to find and kill US Congress people. You're making that claim and connection, but there is no evidence to prove that causality and I am simply not convinced. If someone takes his rhetoric (which I find disagreeable) and thinks it means they should go commit such an act, I feel like almost the entirety of the responsibility is on them as individuals. Also, consider that Democrats frequently use the same rhetoric when they are talking to their own audiences as well. The Trump defense team showed a 9 minute clip of Democrats using the word "fight" in the recent impeachment proceedings (https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-defense-team-shows-134739231.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-defense-team-sh...).
- mc32 6y ago

ceilingcorner 6y ago

Whew, that has to be the most snarky, insecure corporate press release I’ve ever seen. Bizarre.

mrzimmerman 6y ago

He also explicitly told everyone to "fight like hell". I mean, if he's using double speak I can't help that but one part of what he said triggered a percentage of the people to try to find and kill US Congress people, steal computer equipment and other office supplies, and kill police officers. You're asking everyone who watched the capitol riots to ignore what they saw with their own eyes.

cobraetor 6y ago
> "fight like hell". I think taking quotes out of context does not present things as they actually happened or provide a fair analysis. We have to be careful of cherry-picking. Here's the full context: “fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” ... “We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we’ve been forced to believe over the past several weeks.” Per legal scholars, like Jonathan Turley,[1], "those words could be equally consistent with calling for a protest, not violence, as many groups routinely do at state and federal capitals." which explains why the legal system has not been able to convict Trump. People seem to have varying opinions on this topic, but at the end of the day if you look at the facts, it becomes much simpler to understand. [1] https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/11/reckless-rhetoric-is-a-reckless-standard-for-an-impeachment-trial/comment-page-2/ https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/11/reckless-rhetoric-is-a...
throwawaysea 6y ago
I don't think what he said triggered anyone to find and kill US Congress people. You're making that claim and connection, but there is no evidence to prove that causality and I am simply not convinced. If someone takes his rhetoric (which I find disagreeable) and thinks it means they should go commit such an act, I feel like almost the entirety of the responsibility is on them as individuals. Also, consider that Democrats frequently use the same rhetoric when they are talking to their own audiences as well. The Trump defense team showed a 9 minute clip of Democrats using the word "fight" in the recent impeachment proceedings (https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-defense-team-shows-134739231.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-defense-team-sh...).
mc32 6y ago