Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 292 posts

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#251

Post by pqhwan »

Udik wrote: post #248
pqhwan wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s possible you’re underestimating the sheer practical and symbolic significance of the building they broke into (and the people who work there). Which, actually, is kind of the whole problem. Can you provide an example of an evidence that would make this a coup for you?

This is a good analysis of why it was not a coup: https://theconversation.com/was-it-a-coup-no-but-siege-on-us... In short, a coup is an organised action to seize power. For that, it's essential to have secured the support of at least part of the armed forces, and a plan to replace the top of the power hierarchy. Nothing like that was seen in the Capitol riots, which seemed disorganised and essentially demonstrative…

That actually is a pretty good argument. I have indeed been playing fast and loose with the terminology; yes, it wasn’t a military coup, but it is still an unprecedented attack on the federal government, a riot.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#252

Post by hmottestad »

ethbr0 wrote: post #142
DonHopkins wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 9/11 event was Trump being president during the Corona virus pandemic. His incompetence has been killing more people every day than the number of people killed on 9/11, for quite some time now.

The 9/11 takeaway is that we should be especially skeptic of making large policy decisions and/or restricting civil liberties after an emotional event, because it's usually an overcorrection that goes unredressed for the next two decades.

Which means that if we choose to ignore the Trump aspect of the corona virus and compare the US to other countries you get the following:

- no free healthcare means you initially had to pay to get tested

- underdeveloped healthcare system (initial wave saw NYC overwhelmed)

- lack of labor laws means that you have few rights: no sick days and can easily be fired with no grace period

- polarized political environment means that government help takes a lot of time and has to be executed in mammoth size packages

- very large country seen as one makes it an easy target for the press (x number of people died instead of x%)

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#253

Post by salawat »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #236
geomark wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Threatening to deplatform is a criminal offense? What a world we live in.

No, coercion of the POTUS is the criminal offense. > where Dorsey threatens a president to say or not say something

Out of curiosity, what do you think makes it illegal: the coercive aspect, or that it's aimed at POTUS?

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#254

Post by btmiller »

dang wrote: post #243
btmiller wrote: post #25

Frankly yes. A tolerant society does not tolerate intolerance.

Please don't post flamebait to HN. This cliché predictably made the flamewar hellishly worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25696026 .

Apologies, that wasn’t the intention but I take your point. It’s a difficult time in the US right now and it requires difficult decisions on the type of discussions that are useful.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#255

Post by pseudalopex »

Udik wrote: post #248
pqhwan wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s possible you’re underestimating the sheer practical and symbolic significance of the building they broke into (and the people who work there). Which, actually, is kind of the whole problem. Can you provide an example of an evidence that would make this a coup for you?

This is a good analysis of why it was not a coup: https://theconversation.com/was-it-a-coup-no-but-siege-on-us... In short, a coup is an organised action to seize power. For that, it's essential to have secured the support of at least part of the armed forces, and a plan to replace the top of the power hierarchy. Nothing like that was seen in the Capitol riots, which seemed disorganised and essentially demonstrative…

Some took selfies. Some proclaimed themselves in control of Congress. Some entered the Senate chamber with weapons and handcuffs.

The authors said a coup has 3 criteria.

> 3) Do the plotters use illegal and unconstitutional methods to seize executive power?

The authors said yes.

> 2) Is the target of the insurrection the chief executive of the government?

The authors said yes.

> 1) Are the perpetrators agents of the state, such as military officials or rogue governmental officials?

The authors said no because Trump can deny meaning to incite it. They're extremely charitable. And this isn't part of the common definition of a coup anyway.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#256

Post by kortilla »

mullingitover wrote: post #129
kortilla wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s going to be exhausting hearing people explain how censorship is cool because it’s not the government doing it.

You're entitled to free speech, you're not entitled to someone else's platform. Stormfront has been an openly racist community forum, spouting hate speech unimpeded for 24 years . Their one weird trick: they're not relying on someone else's platform to do it.

No shit. That doesn’t alter the discussion around how dangerous it is to have a censorship on a nationwide platform with more reach than any government forum.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#257

Post by mullingitover »

kortilla wrote: post #256
mullingitover wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're entitled to free speech, you're not entitled to someone else's platform. Stormfront has been an openly racist community forum, spouting hate speech unimpeded for 24 years . Their one weird trick: they're not relying on someone else's platform to do it.

No shit. That doesn’t alter the discussion around how dangerous it is to have a censorship on a nationwide platform with more reach than any government forum.

Stormfront has just as much reach as Facebook. They're on the internet, after all, so the whole world can see their forum. The only problem is you won't get as much of an audience if you post on Stormfront.

Except that's not a problem at all, let alone "dangerous." You're entitled to free speech, you're not entitled to 'reach' or any audience for that matter.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#258

Post by colejohnson66 »

cmroanirgo wrote: post #178
scrollaway wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying it's "not a coincidence"? Because of course it's not. The bigger companies (twitter, facebook) minimized risk of fallout by waiting until DT's time in power was up and there was a good opportunity to do what they wanted (Jan 6th events), and the other companies are just following in their footsteps while it makes good PR. It's kinda like when BLM was hot in the news and companies decided to paint the…

> DT's time in power was up Isn't his time up on Jan 20? It really looks like collusion to this Aussie (me), who has no stake in the game. > while it makes good PR. I'm sure there's quite a few million Trump voters who would disagree it's good PR. As mercurial as he's been, he is still the sitting president of the country which lauds itself as the greatest (personally I disagree with the latter assessment). So, what…

> Isn't his time up on Jan 20? It really looks like collusion to this Aussie (me), who has no stake in the game.

Jumping on a bandwagon isn’t collusion. Twitter started by fact checking him back in November. Other sites followed. Over time, Twitter got more aggressive about it before banning him. Now everyone else isn’t the first to ban, so it’s not as “scary” to do so.

It took as long as it did because no one wanted to take that “first step”.

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#259

Post by rvz »

zepto wrote: post #246
rvz wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don’t. Anyone can post anything on their own website. Anyone but Trump or the banned-wagon. If Trump hosts a website on GoDaddy or any other hosting service, it will be removed immediately. > In Trump’s case he can call a press conference. Depends where it can be streamed. Given he's just been de-platformed from most streaming services for the general folk. CSPAN perhaps? Sure the media will do it but they can…

This is complete bullshit. He’s been banned from a few social networks for terms of service violations. That’s all.

> This is complete bullshit.

Given that people are already calling for Godaddy to suspend donaldjtrump.com, I will look forward to the day that it is kicked off of Godaddy just like when they kicked Daily Stormer off for 'inciting violence' [0] and Gab [1] for promoting and encouraging violence against people.

> That’s all.

You honestly think it will stop there? That is just the start of it all.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/15/godaddy-ceo-we-booted-the-ne...

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/28/18036520/gab-down-godadd...

Re: Twitter suspends Trump's campaign account TeamTrump for violating its rules

#260

Post by Udik »

pseudalopex wrote: post #255
Udik wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good analysis of why it was not a coup: https://theconversation.com/was-it-a-coup-no-but-siege-on-us... In short, a coup is an organised action to seize power. For that, it's essential to have secured the support of at least part of the armed forces, and a plan to replace the top of the power hierarchy. Nothing like that was seen in the Capitol riots, which seemed disorganised and essentially demonstrative…

Some took selfies. Some proclaimed themselves in control of Congress. Some entered the Senate chamber with weapons and handcuffs. The authors said a coup has 3 criteria. > 3) Do the plotters use illegal and unconstitutional methods to seize executive power? The authors said yes. > 2) Is the target of the insurrection the chief executive of the government? The authors said yes. > 1) Are the perpetrators agents of the…

> Do the plotters use illegal and unconstitutional methods to seize executive power?

I have no clue why the author checks this. The rioters entered a building (which is by the way the seat of the legislative power) and that's it. Even if they had killed everyone inside, that wouldn't have put them an inch closer to seizing the power, as the power is simply not there. Power is alliances and a chain of command, not being in a room with shiny big buttons.

I do agree that Trump's position is ambiguous: one cannot deny that he was probably hoping for more. In that case he would be the only one to have imagined a coup, as the rioters were just a few... impressionables.

Post reply on HN