Oh that’s hilarious. After tech companies stifling a sitting president, now they are going to straight faced claim this like it means a damn thing.
This is insulting to users’ intelligence.
Everything that president said and did was covered by the press around the world, an army of spokespeople and a million online sycophants. He isn't (and certainly wasn't) "stifled" by the banning of his social media accounts. Really, tech companies bent over backwards to accommodate him, gave him far more slack than they would give you or I. And even then he had to cross the line twice.
Hell, he's still the frontrunner for the Republicans in 2024, and the last anyone heard from him was that he was selling NFTs.
The narrative of Trump being silenced by big tech isn't working, find another one already.
Except virtually everyone I spoke to was unaware of what his final posts on social media on jan6 were, they were not covered, and they were lied about for years with no way for the public to see that in fact he called for people to go home peacefully on jan6.
You can say things like this, but they carry more weight when they're true.
https://www.oversightboard.com/news/226612455899839-oversigh...
The Board found that the two posts by Mr Trump on 6 January severely violated Facebook's Community Standards and Instagram's Community Guidelines. "We love you. You're very special" in the first post, and "great patriots" and "remember this day forever" in the second post violated Facebook's rules prohibiting praise or support of people engaged in violence.
This seems like a ridiculous stretch of "praise of support of people engaged in violence" when right before "We love you." is "We have to have peace. So go home."
It's pretty clear this was a post facto decision - Trump needed to be banned, so let's see if we can come up with something to ban him for.
1. Trump supporters have been made an example of by keeping a bunch of them in jail for years for the crime of walking through a building;
2. There are enough court cases and grand juries outstanding against Trump that one of them will eventually get him and he'll be banned from running again;
3. In any case, a plausible primary rival for Trump has emerged (DeSantis) who has enough flaws of his own (anti-vaxx, anti-woke) that we can use him as a punching bag for the next few years;
4. Trump was allowed back on Twitter but is still playing on his own platform;
Therefore:
We can safely win some PR points by pretending to give a crap about freedom of expression by letting Trump back on our platform.
https://www.oversightboard.com/news/226612455899839-oversigh...
They said his comment "We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You're very special." and "from great patriots who have been badly, unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love in peace. Remember this day forever!"
As "praising or supporting people committing violence".
He literally said "we have to have peace" and "go home" and that, to you, is "deserving being banned"?
If you got this wrong, consider if you got your medical knowledge wrong too. Try talking to your doctor for medical advice.
