Jump to content
Mike Honcho

Twitter permanently suspends Trump's account, citing risk of 'further incitement of violence' – live

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Patented Phil said:

😆 So, we have a problem where a bunch of people don’t trust the media, feel isolated and abandoned, and are started to devolve into violence and conspiracy theories. Hey - I got an idea!  Let’s censor them and make them even more extreme!

thats funny cause when BLM and Kaep said we got a police brutality problem the right said stfu.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

Do you think Twitter was equally consistent in banning BLM and Liberal activists for violating their terms last summer?

No, I don’t.  I think them being inconsistent is the biggest issue and not the fact that they banned Trump. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BufordT said:

Conservatives are flocking to a new 'free speech' social media app that has started banning liberal users

I only posted the article.  I don't necessarily agree with it.  But its nice to see there's a safe space for repub's and trumpers to go if they want.

They should be doing more of this.

I thought that is what Parler was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

thats funny cause when BLM and Kaep said we got a police brutality problem the right said stfu.  

This is the biggest problem in my opinion. Both sides can’t see that they’re guilty of the same things. It’s always the other side that is wrong and if they actually do admit they are wrong they justify it by saying the other side is worse. Zero accountability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news! No more riots on our nations capitol, his "proud boys"-thugs that act tough when there's a bunch of them-are gonna have to be "tough" somewhere else. But seriously, in the end don (1) cost republicans the Presidency, (2) the Senate, and (3) the House. He really DID make America great again!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, huskyhater75 said:

Great news! No more riots on our nations capitol, his "proud boys"-thugs that act tough when there's a bunch of them-are gonna have to be "tough" somewhere else. But seriously, in the end don (1) cost republicans the Presidency, (2) the Senate, and (3) the House. He really DID make America great again!

I agree. My business boomed under Trump. I can’t wait for 8 years of Biden!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

They didn’t ban him for being conservative though. They banned him for violating their terms. 

so the terms are ok for the Ayatollah to say we must destroy Israel

but not for Trump to say stop violence is not the answer

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, BufordT said:

Conservatives are flocking to a new 'free speech' social media app that has started banning liberal users

I only posted the article.  I don't necessarily agree with it.  But its nice to see there's a safe space for repub's and trumpers to go if they want.

They should be doing more of this.

we aren't focking going to a safe space, we will gladly go into a liberal den at anytime of the day and fight, problem is they aren't letting us

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

thats funny cause when BLM and Kaep said we got a police brutality problem the right said stfu.  

facts matter, and there is no widespread police brutality

Kaepernick didn't kneel til he got benched and wanted to make a scene

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, huskyhater75 said:

Great news! No more riots on our nations capitol, his "proud boys"-thugs that act tough when there's a bunch of them-are gonna have to be "tough" somewhere else. But seriously, in the end don (1) cost republicans the Presidency, (2) the Senate, and (3) the House. He really DID make America great again!

are you dilusional?  If Trump isnt there the R gets slaughtered in a landslide, you think people were gonna rush out to vote for Jeb or Marco?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

are you dilusional?  If Trump isnt there the R gets slaughtered in a landslide, you think people were gonna rush out to vote for Jeb or Marco?

 

He's such a hack-off that shows NO respect to anybody, he single-handedly lost the election and has damaged the image of the repubs for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, huskyhater75 said:

He's such a hack-off that shows NO respect to anybody, he single-handedly lost the election and has damaged the image of the repubs for a while.

right so you think any other republican would have won?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

facts matter, and there is no widespread police brutality

Kaepernick didn't kneel til he got benched and wanted to make a scene

 

Not to mention they were selling a false narrative. I also think the overwhelming majority of people didn’t say stfu. They said do your kneeling or protesting on your own time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

right so you think any other republican would have won?

I would have considered voting for anybody else but don. I claim no party, it's just that he's so despicable I would never ever consider voting for him-the name calling, his smart@$$ "performance" at the debates, etc...............NO class, acts like a spoiled little kid that didn't get his way.

Edited by huskyhater75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so the terms are ok for the Ayatollah to say we must destroy Israel

but not for Trump to say stop violence is not the answer

 

If you read my other responses you’d already know the answer to this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

thats funny cause when BLM and Kaep said we got a police brutality problem the right said stfu.  

1. They are wrong

2. Yeah we said STFU, but you know what we didn't do? Take away their rights to that speach.

No surprise you can't see the difference here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

1. They are wrong

2. Yeah we said STFU, but you know what we didn't do? Take away their rights to that speach.

No surprise you can't see the difference here.

Trump wanted them all fired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

Trump wanted them all fired.

So? That's not the discussion here. Did Kap get suspended from the public square? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

1. They are wrong

2. Yeah we said STFU, but you know what we didn't do? Take away their rights to that speach.

No surprise you can't see the difference here.

You don’t have a right to say whatever you want on social media. Of all people, I expect conservatives to have a good understanding of this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You don’t have a right to say whatever you want on social media. Of all people, I expect conservatives to have a good understanding of this. 

That's very opened ended of you. Bottom line is I do have the right so long as I don't break the law.

The problem is social media PLATFORMS are acting as publishers. That's why people are calling for the repeal of section 230. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, huskyhater75 said:

I would have considered voting for anybody else but don. I claim no party, it's just that he's so despicable I would never ever consider voting for him-the name calling, his smart@$$ "performance" at the debates, etc...............NO class, acts like a spoiled little kid that didn't get his way.

But you can justify voting for joe?  Guess what I 100% would have voted for Tusli. When that didn’t happen there was no option I had to vote for POLICY. That’s what I care about I don’t care about feelings 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cdub100 said:

That's very opened ended of you. Bottom line is I do have the right so long as I don't break the law.

The problem is social media PLATFORMS are acting as publishers. That's why people are calling for the repeal of section 230. 

Even if you violate the terms that you agreed to when you signed up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Even if you violate the terms that you agreed to when you signed up?

1)  I would bet $100 you've never read Twitter's TOS. 

2)  They freely admit they change their policies and TOS constantly.  And they don't document them or inform you of those changes.  Basically, they find a tweet they don't like or that their Lib partners have asked them to remove, and then they miraculously find a "policy" it violates.  And, for some reason, it almost always ONLY happens to tweets by conservatives. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hawkeye21 said:

Even if you violate the terms that you agreed to when you signed up?

The terms are not black and white. I'm sure Twitter has something about hate speech. But the SCOTUS has said there is no such thing as hate speech.

Twitter uses the protection of section 230 to act as a publisher. This allows them to serve as the public square without being responsible for what gets posted there. Now the government has asked for some moderation like no CP. These social network "platforms" have taken the next step into becoming publishers. As a publisher, they decide what is and isn't allowed in their public square. 

Clearly, they have the technology to moderate what gets posted to their site. And since they want to decide what information is allowed. They are no longer a platform and should be treated as a publisher. And punished like a publisher when illegal activity occurs on their site.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

So? That's not the discussion here. Did Kap get suspended from the public square? 

He got blackballed and wasn’t able to kneel again. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  I would bet $100 you've never read Twitter's TOS. 

2)  They freely admit they change their policies and TOS constantly.  And they don't document them or inform you of those changes.  Basically, they find a tweet they don't like or that their Lib partners have asked them to remove, and then they miraculously find a "policy" it violates.  And, for some reason, it almost always ONLY happens to tweets by conservatives. 

As far as number 2 goes if get worse. They retroactively enforce those TOS changes. Like with the NY Post article. They changed the TOS and told the NY post to remove the article if they wanted to be unbanned..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

He got blackballed and wasn’t able to kneel again. :lol:

He could kneel all he wanted and documents showed teams attempted to sign him but he refused. :dunno:

His employers at the time didn't want him to kneel during the national anthem while on company time. Just like I'm not allowed to use my government position for political gain. 

My problem with twitter is they have double protection and it's not right. Either they are a publisher or a platform. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Member when Dirtbag Don said the owners should fire NFL players who kneel for the anthem? 

Muh freeze peach! :cry: :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

As far as number 2 goes if get worse. They retroactively enforce those TOS changes. Like with the NY Post article. They changed the TOS and told the NY post to remove the article if they wanted to be unbanned..

Was the NY Post banned?  Or just the article?  I feel like that situation was a worse issue of censoring than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herbivore said:

thats funny cause when BLM and Kaep said we got a police brutality problem the right said stfu.  

And the right censored them how?

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

This is the biggest problem in my opinion. Both sides can’t see that they’re guilty of the same things. It’s always the other side that is wrong and if they actually do admit they are wrong they justify it by saying the other side is worse. Zero accountability. 

They are not in the same galaxy, those two things are so far apart.

42 minutes ago, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

Trump wanted them all fired.

Well there you have it, same thing.  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Was the NY Post banned?  Or just the article?  I feel like that situation was a worse issue of censoring than this.

The NY Post account was suspended unless they retracted the article they posted. This was after Twitter changed the TOS and use that to suspend them. The new terms said people can't post stolen data. Of course, they had no problem with people posting Trump's stolen tax returns and other stolen material. The fact that the NT Post was one of the few MSM reporting on the Hunter Biden scandal lead to the banning. 

Worse the data wasn't stolen. Yt because the property of the business repairman when hunter failed to pay. Twitter didn't care.

This is a great example of Twitter acting as a publisher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should scare everyone is three rich dudes can decide to remove any person they do not like from the internet up to and including the US President.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

What should scare everyone is three rich dudes can decide to remove any person they do not like from the internet up to and including the US President.

Probably true.   Zuckerberg, Dorsey, who's the third?  Tom from myspace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cloudflare is the one who could really silence most of the right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TimHauck said:

Probably true.   Zuckerberg, Dorsey, who's the third?  Tom from myspace?

Google

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

What should scare everyone is three rich dudes can decide to remove any person they do not like from the internet up to and including the US President.

I agree to an extent.

I think this may serve as an opportunity for another platform to be developed. Lefties can keep Twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gladiators said:

I agree to an extent.

I think this may serve as an opportunity for another platform to be developed. Lefties can keep Twitter.

Why do you think everyone is banning Parler?   They want to try to stop that from happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gladiators said:

I agree to an extent.

I think this may serve as an opportunity for another platform to be developed. Lefties can keep Twitter.

Conservatives have tried that. Go make your own facebook they said. So conservatives made Gab. Liberal just went up to the next level and Cloudflare (I believe) refused to host the site. In addition, they were denied service by many payment platforms.

It's interesting in order to have a website a person has to not only build the site, but a hosting agency AND a banking system to support it.

This has been a problem since 2017 and it's only getting worse.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cdub100 said:

Conservatives have tried that. Go make your own facebook they said. So conservatives made Gab. Liberal just went up to the next level and Cloudflare (I believe) refused to host the site. In addition, they were denied service by many payment platforms.

It's interesting in order to have a website a person has to not only build the site, but a hosting agency AND a banking system to support it.

This has been a problem since 2017 and it's only getting worse.

 

 

I didn’t know there were so many barriers. There has to be a way around them, but I assume it would be extremely expensive. I appreciate the info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

He could kneel all he wanted and documents showed teams attempted to sign him but he refused. :dunno:

His employers at the time didn't want him to kneel during the national anthem while on company time. Just like I'm not allowed to use my government position for political gain. 

My problem with twitter is they have double protection and it's not right. Either they are a publisher or a platform. 

Well, Kaepernick did get a chunk of money from the NFL, so I don’t think he was offered jobs and refused them.

Yet Trump was tweeting on our dime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×