I second this question, @dang. I would like some explanation of the moderation policy here to at least understand the reasoning.
With posts such as "Donald Trump is the president-elect of the U.S." and "Trump wins presidency for second time" being allowed (just to pick the top two Trump submissions), there is a clear precedent that big events in American politics are considered suitable for the front page.
I can see only two stances justifying removal here
(1) someone winning the presidency is considered an important event, but that same president then organizing a paramilitary force of lackeys to unlawfully execute protesters in "enemy states" without any repercussion is not considered as an important event but simply normal politics (which is not an apolitical position but rather a radical and controversial political opinion enforced by the moderation team)
(2) the topic is expected to cause anger, and only well-mannered and jovial discussions are suitable for the front page. This completely disregards that sometimes the rational and constructive response to these kinds of developments are anger, and a discussion about how to direct and act on such anger within the tech community should happen.
Everything is politics. And enforcing (or not correcting) mandatory silence on certain political topics is a political decision by the moderation team, colored by their priorities and their word view.
I also want to re-iterate and highlight the excellent summary made by lynndotpy:
> For anyone wondering why this is relevant to HackerNews:
> - There are tech companies and workers in companies outside California,
> - A government deploying a militarized police force to execute people in the streets is bad for the economy,
> - That government is the United States, and so this is bad for the world economy,
> - A lot of the people in our industry are immigrants from outside the United States,
> - If you're a HackerNews user in the United States, you can be shot and killed just like this.