101–110 of 1001 posts
I said it yesterday and got downvotes, Twitter’s CEO decided to pick sides in the political battle so they should expect what’s coming to them.
Fact checking doesn't imply picking sides. Not fact checking does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The president is the most visible face of the government. Of all the ones you mentioned, it's the only one people actually vote for. What he says and does has the most impact. So I don't find it "interesting", I find it entirely reasonable.
Only if you think that there are only Americans in this world. Hint: there are non-Americans too. Downvotes? HN really thinks there are only Americans on this planet? Of dear.
Time for Trump to use Mastodon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like maybe you should take the hint. It's not "taking sides" to point out that you're glorifying violence if you as the president are threatening to deploy military force against protestors.
Sending police to stop violence is "glorifying violence"? How exactly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is using past violence as a threat of imminent violence while the other accounts you mentioned will generally reference violence indirectly or in the past tense. That is an important distinction.
That's a fair point. I'm not defending Trump's tweet, but it seems defining violence glorification is arbitrary. It would be funny if Twitter adds a rule that says you can be an organization whose whole purpose is to make devices that kill people as long as you don't glorify making devices that kill people.
'Trump's phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" is an unattributed quote of Walter Headley, Miami's police chief in 1967. It was a threat to citizens who were upset that police had terrorized a black teenager by holding him over a bridge.' ( https://twitter.com/mattsheffield/status/1266246092393336838 )
An unattributed quote?
I found the attribution of the quote very informative and am very surprised it is currently downvoted. My own summary of the tweets is also downvoted, not sure what I could/should add to it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347395
I tried to neutrally summarize the tweets, in case people wanted to know what they said without clicking.
I said it yesterday and got downvotes, Twitter’s CEO decided to pick sides in the political battle so they should expect what’s coming to them.
what's coming to them? Is it violence? That's how I often here the phrase "get what's coming to you" used.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fact checking doesn't imply picking sides. Not fact checking does.
it sort of does, WHO they use to check the facts can very def define what side they're on.
Bonaparte was a fan of the "whiff of grape" https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_royaliste_du_13_v... but we all know how that ended.
