Patterico's Pontifications


Sen. Bernie Sanders Uneasy With Trump Being Barred From Twitter

Filed under: General — Dana @ 2:37 pm

[guest post by Dana]

The subject came up during an interview with Ezra Klein:

In the interview, Sanders was asked about criticisms from some conservatives that liberals had become “too censorious.” Sanders responded by saying Trump “is a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a pathological liar, an authoritarian, somebody who doesn’t believe in the rule of law.”

He added, “if you’re asking me, do I feel particularly comfortable that the president, the then-president of the United States, could not express his views on Twitter? I don’t feel comfortable about it.”

Sanders noted that social media sites shouldn’t allow “hate speech and conspiracy theories” to go “traveling all over” the U.S. or be “used for authoritarian purposes and insurrection.”

He said he wasn’t sure how to achieve that balance, but “it is an issue that we have got to be thinking about” because “yesterday it was Donald Trump who was banned, and tomorrow it could be somebody else who has a very different point of view.”

“I don’t like giving that much power to a handful of high tech people, but the devil is obviously in the details and it’s something we’re going to have to think long and hard on, and that is how you preserve First Amendment rights without moving this country into a big lie mentality and conspiracy theories.”

Just two days after the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Twitter kicked Trump off of its platform:

After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.

In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action. Our public interest framework exists to enable the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly. It is built on a principle that the people have a right to hold power to account in the open.

However, we made it clear going back years that these accounts are not above our rules entirely and cannot use Twitter to incite violence, among other things. We will continue to be transparent around our policies and their enforcement.

It’s a good thing that the former President still has any number of avenues to make his voice heard, maybe even launching his own social media platform.


18 Responses to “Sen. Bernie Sanders Uneasy With Trump Being Barred From Twitter”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (fd537d)

  2. Paster neomoller said it best when they finally came for me there was nobody left to protest!

    asset (f7f30c)

  3. The most devastating thing you can do to Trump is to redirect the limelight and ignore him.

    Unless your strategy is to keep up chatter about him as an ever present reminder, Bernard…

    ignore him.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  4. Get a gun, asset! A Glock AK-15 Uzi semi-automatic assault rifle with a .30-round banana clip and show those fascists what for.

    nk (1d9030)

  5. I’ve said all I care to on this issue. I’m happy with my Karma, but wonder why anyone else is happy with theirs.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  6. Oh, well, I lied. I do have bit more to say. I have never ever read Trump’s Twitter feed, and yet I constantly heard what he said. Whose fault is that?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  7. Also, how does he plan on launching that social media platform if Amazon, Google and/or Microsoft don’t want to host it? At some point we have to recognize that speech needs to be free, even if it means we don’t let corporations set the rules.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  8. Bernie blathering:

    “I don’t like giving that much power to a handful of high tech people,

    Who is giving whose power, and does he think the handful of high tech people applied for it like government job or something? But I guess that kind of socialist bilge works with a constituency which only needs to outsmart maple trees, because they keep electing him for forty years now.

    nk (1d9030)

  9. R.I.P. George Segal, 87

    Ain’t afraid of Virginia Woolf no more.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  10. Today:

    Donald Trump has been in talks with no-name app vendors as he contemplates partnering with an existing platform to create his own social media network, according to sources familiar with the private discussions.

    Driving the news: Among the social networking apps the former president and his digital adviser Dan Scavino have homed in on is a relatively unknown platform called FreeSpace, these sources told Axios.

    It’s unclear how this business relationship would work. Trump is famously averse to putting his own money into companies, preferring to license his name and use other people’s money to fund his ventures.

    It’s also by no means a done deal. A source briefed on the situation said Trump had not made a final decision on the social network. “It could be any of several companies, with more meetings this week,” the source said.

    It seems surprising that “FreeSpace” caught Trump’s attention. It employs touchy-feely positivity language that’s the polar opposite of the incendiary and divisive social media persona he cultivated before he was banned from Twitter and Facebook following the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

    Dana (fd537d)

  11. Twitter is a private business, not a government entity. Thus, it can censor or ban anyone for any reason at any time, because the 1rst Amendment does not apply.

    In a sense, it’s somewhat like the Real Estate Source, which is a free publication distributed to banks, businesses, stores, and restaurants, all around the county. Anyone can pick it up for free and read it at their leisure, if they are looking to buy a home. Think of it as primitive social media; it’s been around in print since the early 1970s and didn’t have a website until the early 1990s.

    The Source generates its revenue by selling advertising space to local real estate companies, brokers and realtors. My mother bought into it when it first came out, purchased the back cover and the center fold. That cost her (the company) over $700/month, but it is prime advertising space. That’s one of the reasons why she was able to sell so many properties over the decades–she owned the prime advertising space in a free publication. Anyone who picked up a copy of the Source had easy access to her office and listings.

    Now, the Texas Real Estate Commission has very strict guidelines for marketing and advertising. A realtor cannot misrepresent a property on the market, not in any way. False advertising is a serious no-no, subject to license suspension or revocation, fines, and treble damages if a buyer or seller sues in court. That would be three times the contract sales price, which could run into hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. So realtors have to be very careful about what they put in print.

    As a side note, the No. 1 reason realtors get sued is for false advertising on square footage. That’s why we don’t advertise square footage. If asked, all we can legally say is, according to the county records the square footage of this property is ####. An appraiser may come up with another number. The only way to know for sure is to measure the property yourself. (But even you might get it wrong.)

    So, we don’t advertise square footage. Not because we want to avoid being sued, but because no one really knows what the exact square footage actually is. Measurements vary by individual–not even the developer who built the home can give you an exact number for square footage. Thus, it’s best to avoid the subject altogether and simply say, according to . . ., or you’d have to measure it yourself.

    Now, is that a violation of free speech? I mean, a realtor has the absolute right under the 1rst Amendment to say the square footage is whatever he or she says it is, right? Not exactly. There are laws and guidances involved, the ignorance or violation of which could result in serious consequences.

    It’s not the same in politics. Politicians, and their supporters, can say whatever they want, without consequence except at the voting booth. Freedom of speech!

    “You can’t cry fire in a crowded theater,” is the common response. Um, you can if there really is a fire in the theater. It’s all about making truthful statements. There is nothing else. The 1rst Amendment does not protect outright lies, conspiracy theories, or sedition against the government. It does allow for contrary views and opinions in an open exchange of ideas, a debate at it were, but it does not allow for lies, conspiracies and fraudulent accusations. That is not within the arena of the theater of ideas.

    I for one am glad that Twitter banned Trump indefinitely; it is their total right, just as the Source has to absolute right to censor or ban any realtor, broker or company from its publication, print or online. They have susceptible liability as well, and treble damages on any property is a real bitch.

    I wouldn’t count on Trump launching his own social media platform. He’s gone and done with, just another relic from the long lost fake makeup and gilded gold age of the 1980s.

    He’s a fraud. Always has been, always will be. There is no profit in investing in his name.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  12. He’s gone and done with, just another relic from the long lost fake makeup and gilded gold age of the 1980s.


    (Sorry. I couldn’t resist.)

    norcal (01e272)

  13. He’s a fraud. Always has been, always will be.

    90% of everyone you’ve ever heard of is a fraud.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  14. Yeah, I’m bit uncomfortable. Twitter should treading lightly with it’s responsibility on who to ban, but it’s their choice. But I have to say, it’s been just so nice not having to either read his tweets or have the media cover his tweets. That’s a win.

    tla (34ebeb)

  15. #14

    Sums up my thoughts well. I am queasy that they did it, I am queasy that they could do it, I’m queasy they could do it in the future, but I am sure glad they did do it.

    Sounds like the end of a lot of Westerns when the white hat has knocked off the black hat, and is riding off looking grim and the townspeople are all standing around wiping sweat off their brow, sure glad their town tamer is going now the bad guy is dead.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  16. Who is giving whose power, and does he think the handful of high tech people applied for it like government job or something? But I guess that kind of socialist bilge works with a constituency which only needs to outsmart maple trees,

    It might work on some Trumpers too. I’ve seen some of them say things like: the old GOP (baaaad) “supported the creation of tech monopolies” that got way too rich and powerful.
    IOW, if you don’t actively prevent a startup from growing very popular and bigger than all the competitors, or forcibly break it up when it does, then you’ve “supported the creation” of a sinister monopoly.

    Radegunda (f4d5c0)

  17. 14. Trump’s going to come out with a new independent website or platform in a month or two. But it may not get as much attention, at least at first, as his Twitter account did.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  18. I see – he’s trying to join something that already exists.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0865 secs.