Is Musk playing the stock market again? You can bet someone is making a pretty penny out of a drop like that!
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
No, the Antifa accounts were not involved with the riots at all. Nor was the BLM-supporting legal non-profit.
Yes, a lot of people made dumb excuses for the violence once it was happening, and didn't get banned for this. But I am pretty sure they were not people who had spent weeks telling everyone to riot. And of course, none of them were the president of the US.
Musk has stated on Twitter that he is committed to the purchase. However, that purchase is currently locked into a price of $44 billion. He cannot change the price now, even if he wanted to. So his options are to buy at $44 billion, or to withdraw.
To date he has raised $7 billion.
Ah well, if he doesn't complete on time I'm sure he won't miss the billion the contract he signed requires him to pay.
I mean in terms of manipulating the current value of shares, he knew full well when he put out that tweet twitter shares would fall dramatically and low and behold they did. He has been heavily censored for this sort of thing with Tesla prices in the past….
How would you know the Antifa accounts weren’t involved in the riots?
I don’t think Trump spent weeks telling people to riot either.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
He spent weeks telling them their votes and country were being stolen. What else do you think would happen when you whip supporters up into a storm that culminates at the Capitol building on the day Congress meets to count the electoral votes? It happened exactly as Trump hoped it would which is why he didn't do a thing for several hours even though members of Congress, his own family members and Fox news hosts were begging him to make it stop.
I don't think protesting at Capitol Hill is against the law, I don't think Trump wanted people to enter the Capitol Building and he didn't encourage that based on what he said, individuals were responsible for that and should be punished accordingly. Trump was found not guilty by the Senate because he didn't tell people to go break the law as much as the media have decided he did, he told people he thought the election was rigged - I don't believe it was but he's entitled to that opinion if he believes it.
The media spent the years prior telling people the election was hacked by Russia, literally years of non stop fake news about Russia "hacking" the election.
Last edited:
This. It is immensely naive to think otherwise/not to see Trump's true intentions.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
could have just stopped there tbh
Because they were run by well known hardcore anarchist groups who were only ever linked to riots against Trump and Biden, not riots supporting BLM. In fact, it seems I got the timeline wrong. They lost their accounts after organising riots against Biden in 2021, not during Trump's term while the BLM riots were raging.
I didn't say he did. But he sure as hell spent weeks convincing them that they had good reason to do so.
So what? Voicing his opinion on votes being stolen, as deranged as it was has got little to do with breaking twitter rules.
That isn't a good reason to suspend him and again, see the same sort of stuff with politicians supporting BLM and Antifa, blowing grievances there well out of proportion; it works both ways...
It's not, and if that's all they'd done, there would be no problem. But they rioted and cause millions of dollars worth of damaged while invading the Capitol building and threatening violence against lawmakers.
Hilarious nonsense. The only reason he escaped conviction in the Senate is because senators voted along party lines and the Democrats didn't have the numbers to win. His acquittal was a foregone conclusion that had nothing to do with evidence.
But he's not entitled to related that opinion constantly to the American public with the aim of inciting his base. Particularly when it's a demonstrable lie.
Well it was certainly interfered with, that can't be denied. Russia spent millions of dollars on her social media blitz alone, and American authorities identified the people responsible. Russia also hacked the DNC to gain emails and other data. That's not fake news at all.
Notice also that Hillary did not rile up her supporters over this, and Democrats did not riot.
Why not? It was a breach of Twitter's ToS, that's the only justification they need.
I agree that any pro-BLM politician who did what Trump did, should be suspended. Do you know of any?
Stating the election was stolen? Nope.
On what grounds should they be suspended? Why can't they focus loads of attention on some police killing or voice an opinion that outrage is justified etc..?
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
The Republican controlled Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian Interference said Russia interfered to help Trump in 2016 and there was contact between his campaign and Russian agents.
A Collusion Reading Diary: What Did the Senate Intelligence Committee Find?
Our summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s final report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
So its nothing like Trump spending weeks and arguably years (he said in 2016 he could only lose if there was fraud and said he lost the popular vote because of fraud, there was no fraud) telling his supporters that the election was rigged and fraudulent.
When the citizens of a country no longer believe their vote counts it is going to end in violence. You are pretty much excusing what happened on Jan 6th because of the Russian interference story and that it was publicised in the press. For the last time it wasn't fake news Roar, it happened.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
When it ends in a violent insurrection it is. Would there have been a violent insurrection if Trump had spouted his deranged lies? No there wouldn't. Why would Twitter want to be associated in any way with such an act as Twitter was his main way of communicating with fans.
I think they should let him back on Twitter. People should be reminded of just how deranged and dangerous to society he is.
So again, you could say the same thing about BLM riots etc.. Or indeed anyone prominent who apparently believes something or gets angry about something and speaks about it then later there is some rioting.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
Where have I said that people who encouraged violence and looting shouldn't have had their accounts suspended? It isn't the same though, any person who might have been doing that with BLM riots wasn't the elected POTUS and in a position of incredible power and influence. They weren't undermining the democratic process either for their own selfish personal attempt to hang on to power. You are comparing apples with oranges.
No, I'm making a straight comparison between the issue you highlighted in that post. Now you're adding in some additional comment about him being POTUS.
Surely the principle is the same regardless...
- Status