Update (0710ET): Trump has responded to Twitter’s latest tag, accusing the company of “doing nothing” to censure Chinese officials and members of the radical left – which is why, Trump insisted, Section 230 should no longer apply to the company.
Twitter is doing nothing about all of the lies & propaganda being put out by China or the Radical Left Democrat Party. They have targeted Republicans, Conservatives & the President of the United States. Section 230 should be revoked by Congress. Until then, it will be regulated!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020
As we wait for the first of the inevitable flood of lawsuits challenging Trump’s latest executive order, Twitter has continued with its new policy of affixing ‘warning labels’ on certain tweets from the president that violate the company’s “community standards”. Just this morning, Twitter affixed a “glorifying violence” warning to a Trump tweet decrying the outburst of violence in Minneapolis in retaliation for the brutal slaying of George Floyd.
We have placed a public interest notice on this Tweet from @realdonaldtrump. https://t.co/6RHX56G2zt
— Twitter Comms (@TwitterComms) May 29, 2020
The tweet was part of a thread published late Thursday evening by the president where he accused the “weak” mayor of Minneapolis of not doing enough to quell the riots. Trump threatened to send in the National Guard – in our view, a completely reasonable response, though some hysterical leftists might decry the decision as part of some genocidal plot or whatever other hysterical nonsense they’re spewing to try and justify the riots – to stop the “THUGS who are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen.”
….These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020
Twitter, of course, continues to deny allegations of partisan bias, even though the political dynamics at play here are blindingly obvious. The media clearly isn’t comfortable with President Trump’s “new approach” to police killings, and has chosen, seemingly with one voice, to sympathize with the rioters, as if their actions will somehow alleviate the pain and suffering endured by the victim’s family, or will somehow correct the widespread racial injustice they have fingered as the animus behind Floyd’s murder.
Of course, the media has found a racist connection to the language used by Trump.
According to Buzzfeed, the phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” has a not-so-secret racist history. In 1967, Miami Police Chief Walter Headley used it to describe how his department handled looting in black neighborhoods.
“When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” is a threat coined by Miami Police Chief Walter Headley, who promised violent reprisals on black protesters in 1967. He also said: “We don’t mind being accused of police brutality. They haven’t seen anything yet.” https://t.co/inm7T4N804 pic.twitter.com/yfYY59Xfel
— Todd Zwillich (@toddzwillich) May 29, 2020
It all ties together nicely: All the clues the public needs to see that the sympathy Trump has expressed for Floyd and his family is really just an act during an extremely precarious time – politically speaking – for the president, and that he is, essentially still the same president who described the “literal Nazis” at Charlottesville as “very fine people”.
Earlier this week, Twitter labeled a Trump tweet about mail-in ballots as misleading, infuriating the White House and directly provoking the executive order signed last night. In a statement about the label, Twitter said that while the tweet will remain up, users won’t be able to like, reply or retweet it – though they will be allowed to retweet it with comment.
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” the company said.
Also, CEO Jack Dorsey had a direct hand in crafting the company’s response to the tweet, according to Twitter PR.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
All this hand-wringing over a staged event?
Gay lovers?
Money for some new Jordans/something to feel good about.
Reeks of crisis-actor fake crying.
Reeks to high heaven of crisis actors.
I concur with .22, this is pure theater, to change to focus away from: Obamagate
It’s about time Trump moved to attack the liability shield protecting social media companies. Whether his executive order has any teeth is the question. By continuing to taunt Trump, Twitter obviously thinks it has nothing to fear. Trump waited too long–till they went after him personally–to make his move. Now the matter will likely be tied up in court till after the election, so the social media companies can continue their crusade against him to try to ensure he loses.
You’re ignoring the elephant Bob. Remember you have a neck too. How long until some jackboot kneels on it?
He’s waited too long to do everything. That’s endangered his electability more than any other line item. I think you hit the nail on the head though. He’s willing to act when it affects him, not Candace Owens or anyone else. Lost my vote!
Yup Trump waited too long and as result will probably lose in election.. something that will for those on right in short term be bad for conservative/populist brand. It might end up being a good thing for Right but it will still be a shitty 4 years moving forward. In the meantime those red pilled are gonna have to put up with the likes of Mayor Frey. They will be spurning virtue to the mob and urging the creative destruction that the Postmodernist so desperately want. The reaction from the normies of all creeds and colours, as seen thru historical lens will then be entirely predictable. Once folks will tire of the anarchy they will then reflexively reach to authority for a Strongman to re-exert control.
The only question still up in air is whether it will be a Stalin, a Hitler or a Mao.
I’m praying for a Caesar or a Washington or even a Lafayette.
Put the bong down.
Isn’t Twitter a private company? I don’t think the government has the right to tell them how to run their company. HOWEVER, we have the right not to read or use Twitter, Facebook or any of these other entities that are trying to destroy our freedom.
It seems to me we have lost the big picture in our attachment to the teams of politics.
They are now functioning as a public utility. Following Adam Smith’s logic – which I do – it is at best quasi-public, meaning it is too ripe for abuse/monopoly and it is more in furtherance of the common weal outside of completely private hands. His philosophy on lighthouses can aptly be applied to power lines, water lines, sewer, and in this day and age, digital comms.
Wealth of Nations is a beautiful balance between free marketeering, mercantilism, and authoritarianism. Pure classical liberalism, even if Americans don’t understand that public-private partnerships are not what we’re talking about here.
Keep in mind that I am also setting aside the “source” of their source code. They don’t have a leg to stand on in terms of that. We built most of them, again whether or not Americans know it.
I agree with your statement. But how did Twitter become a public utility? Didn’t most people volunteer? Wonder what would happen if all those who disagreed with Twitter left?
We could have all those nut jobs singing to their own choir. Apparently you have a more thorough understanding of how Twitter has gained the power that they possess than I do. I studied Adam Smith decades ago, but guess I have forgotten more than I learned.
I appreciate that you did not us an ad hominid argument. Is that spelled right? Civil conversations are extinct in most circles. Thank God TBP doesn’t censor or I would be so gone.
How did the Internet become the new rail lines? It just happens, with a little poking and prodding along the way by special interests and government. Man is always looking to work smarter, not harder. Not terribly different from a lighthouse. It beats having a company of blue light Federalists all waving lanterns on the shore, right?
TBP should ban you for being a moron. If you got close enough to ad hominem (hominid), you could have Googled THAT and it would ask you if the correct spelling is what you wanted. Duhhh…
I wonder if all those thumbs down voters would have done that if Obama had made the same decision.
Ignore the thumbs. Think of them as a red badge of courage.
“All” = 3.
A might sensitive aren’t we.
They have a public charter and public owners in their stock. The ‘public/private’ line of argument is misdirection that unfortunately fools most … including judges. Use of that argument is done to attempt to get people to think about them and their private property … which is far far removed from the actual situation.
Agreed, all these social media companies are hiding behind this shield of private company, yet the product is your personal information, harvested without your consent, and sold to the highest bidder.
they are only profitable by way of deception.
they are worse than the 4th estate, which has to beg for revenue via subscription/advertisement.
At the very least, they should be taxed on every transaction, like any other company.
publish a tweet, pay a tax, watch how quickly they go out of business.
Another implicit argument in favor of the public utility. If it is so difficult to generate revenue yet has become so important to the common weal, then all the more reason. And they have no business with our private data unless we sold it to them.
There is another tangent I have heard recently: the Fairness Doctrine. Not sure how I feel about that, but it is something to consider. Ironic that the maroons like Rush Limbaugh fought against its reinstatement for decades and those same pundits are now the ones getting owned by its absence.
It just goes to show you that there may be a lot intelligent people out there like, arguably, Rush Limbaugh, but they’re not engineers. They’re not logical, pattern-recognizing critical thinkers. They never stop to become a student of history and ask if we’ve been here before, and if so, what was done to solve the problem?