Twitter hides Trump Tweet for glorifying violence!

And so it begins. They already aren't being consistent.

Twitter Censors Trump Tweet Denouncing Riots; Took No Action On Tweets Supporting Riots

the #whataboutism is real

Originally posted by Surtur
And so it begins. They already aren't being consistent.

Twitter Censors Trump Tweet Denouncing Riots; Took No Action On Tweets Supporting Riots

He's the president.

His words have a lot more reach over some nobody troll, and its not really a fair comparison to make.

Wow, I didn't realize Michael Moore was that racist.

Yeah, as if denouncing riots is actually a bad thing lol.

Originally posted by Surtur
And so it begins. They already aren't being consistent.

Twitter Censors Trump Tweet Denouncing Riots; Took No Action On Tweets Supporting Riots

Originally posted by cdtm
He's the president.

His words have a lot more reach over some nobody troll, and its not really a fair comparison to make.

Nah, apply the rules equally or not at all.

And there are a lot of blue check marks, including celebs. So this just doesn't fly at all. They aren't randos with 12 followers.

The false equivalency here is retarded.

How did his tweet glorify violence?

*caution! time waster troll trap ahead*

Yes, I'm aware or your tactics.

Yeah they do bust out the time waster stuff whenever they have no real argument.

It's funny.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
*caution! time waster troll trap ahead*

Originally posted by Silent Master
How did his tweet glorify violence?

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
😂 have you been reading the papers? It's explained in most, research, then come back to the thread being informed and able to post mate.

So, you can't explain how it's glorifying violence.

Thank you for being honest.

You just gotta read the "papers". That's not vague.

Since it's Whirly he probably means "Read The Guardian".

Originally posted by Silent Master
How did his tweet glorify violence?

I don't think it is glorifying violence.

I think it is inciting violence. In an already violent situation, telling the looters and rioters that they are thugs and will be shot for looting is a direct threat of violence and is not protected speech under the first amendment as it will likely make the situation worse or has a significant chance to make it worse especially because the news will make it a very big deal and blow it out of proportions (which is actually protected speech, of now).

My citation is the Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't think it is glorifying violence.

I think it is inciting violence. In an already violent situation, telling the looters and rioters that they are thugs and will be shot for looting is a direct threat of violence and is not protected speech under the first amendment as it will likely make the situation worse or has a significant chance to make it worse especially because the news will make it a very big deal and blow it out of proportions (which is actually protected speech, of now).

My citation is the Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio.

He's not saying that either he or government agents will be doing the shootings, sounds more like a warning, possibly a prediction

He's also right, as looters have already been shot. re: the looter shot by the Pawn Shop guy.

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's not saying that either he or government agents will be doing the shootings, sounds more like a warning, possibly a prediction

I covered this part with PVS, already.

Trump can assuage the concerns over the incitement to violence by clarifying that the looting causes reactions from the residents and police that could cause more shooting and violence. And that he wants it to stop so no more violence happens.

However, that would be a stretch from his original tweet...still...he could have done it to avoid the censoring.

Edit - This is how adults have a conversation. And it's done. No insults, no page after page bickering. No decade + grudges. No reason to get upset.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I covered this part with PVS, already.

Trump can assuage the concerns over the incitement to violence by clarifying that the looting causes reactions from the residents and police that could cause more shooting and violence. And that he wants it to stop so no more violence happens.

However, that would be a stretch from his original tweet...still...he could have done it to avoid the censoring.

Trump is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Look at this:

Don Lemon Rages Against Trump’s Concern About George Floyd Killing: ‘No One Wants to Hear from the Birther-in-Chief’

You know he'd whine like a little b*tch if Trump said nothing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I covered this part with PVS, already.

Trump can assuage the concerns over the incitement to violence by clarifying that the looting causes reactions from the residents and police that could cause more shooting and violence. And that he wants it to stop so no more violence happens.

However, that would be a stretch from his original tweet...still...he could have done it to avoid the censoring.

Guess I'm just smart enough to have understood the point without the need for clarification. 😮‍💨