Are Buttigieg’s Latest Airline Rules Going to Get People Killed?
These Ugly, Little Schmucks Need to Face Consequences
Top Biden Aides Didn't Have Anything Nice to Say About Karine Jean-Pierre: Report
The Terrorists Are Running the Asylum
Biden Responds to Trump's Challenge to Debate Before November
KJP Avoids Being DOA Due to DEI
Senior Sounds Off After USC Cancels Its Main Graduation Ceremony
NYPD Chief Has a Message for 'Entitled Hateful Students:' 'You’re Fired'
Blinken Warns About China's Influence on the Presidential Election
Trump's Attorneys Find Holes In Witnesses' 'Catch-and-Kill' Testimony
Southern California Official Makes Stunning Admission About the Border Crisis
Another State Will Not Comply With Biden's Rewrite of Title IX
'Lack of Clarity and Moral Leadership': NY Senate GOP Leader Calls Out Democratic...
Liberals Freak Out As Another So-Called 'Don't Say Gay Bill' Pops Up
Here’s Why One University Postponed a Pro-Hamas Protest
Tipsheet

CNN Host: Do Trump's 'Threatening' North Korea Tweets Violate Twitter's Terms of Service?

It's one thing to criticize President Trump for conducting foreign policy via impulsive, half-cocked tweeting, often while watching cable news.  Scrambling the official US posture toward nuclear-armed Pakistan may be defensible on the merits, for instance, but only if it's properly thought-out and implemented strategically.  Tauntingly tweeting at a rogue dictator about whose nuclear "button" is bigger may also be defensible on the merits -- but, uh, probably not.  In any case, the president's social media habits are among his most self-destructive vices and contribute significantly to the widely-held view that he lacks the temperament for the job.  This is an entirely legitimate vein of presidential criticism; one that I've engaged in myself.  But then there's absurdity in response to absurdity.  Over to you, Brian:

Advertisement

After a round of speculation about Trump's mental health, we're informed that Twitter management had not yet replied to inquiries about whether tweets like this are ban-worthy under the platform's rules because they 'threaten violence,' or something:


Ill-advised?  Yes.  Worrisome?  To many, sure.  A breach of Twitter's policy against violent threats?  C'mon.  It's a duly-elected president saber-rattling in response to an evil regime's threats and illicit acts; in other words, it's Trump engaging in his own special brand of foreign relations.  Hand-wringing about whether such messages might justify some form of suspension or sanction is looks silly and feels petty.  It immediately reminded me of this tweet from a New York Times reporter, who ridiculously likened the oppressive, authoritarian Iranian government shutting down social media platforms in an effort to squelch a popular uprising to...Donald Trump blocking individual people on Twitter:

Advertisement


The president blocking specific users he determines to be trolls -- which does not boot those users off of the medium, nor does it actually prevent them from viewing his tweets though other means -- may be thin-skinned and juvenile.  It is also not remotely comparable to a brutal theocratic regime censoring the internet in order to protect its illegitimate grasp on power. The media does itself a disservice with this sort of hyperventilation and false equivalency.  By the way, some Twitter users have sued Trump over Twitter blocking, on First Amendment grounds.  It doesn't seem like their case is especially strong, from my layperson's perspective.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement