←back to thread

Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

(techcrunch.com)
707 points patd | 6 comments | 27 May 20 12:21 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
VBprogrammer ◴[27 May 20 13:33 UTC] No.23322903[source]▶
Can this even be considered a free speech issue? They aren't deleting his tweet, only displaying it alongside a fact check. Of course you can try to call into question the impartiality of the fact check but that is a long way from not deciding not to show the content.
replies(6): >>23323205 #>>23327484 #>>23327571 #>>23328045 #>>23329677 #>>23329719 #
m-p-3 ◴[27 May 20 18:52 UTC] No.23328045[source]▶
And if he decided to "close" Twitter, it would actually be a clear case of censorship from the government and a violation of free speech.

Twitter is merely labelling a tweet as being factually incorrect, it's not hiding the content.

replies(4): >>23328387 #>>23329001 #>>23329224 #>>23329390 #
rsynnott ◴[27 May 20 19:13 UTC] No.23328387[source]▶
Well, it wouldn't be, because he _couldn't do it_. He's not a dictator, despite apparent aspirations.
replies(1): >>23328509 #
three_seagrass ◴[27 May 20 19:21 UTC] No.23328509[source]▶
Real question: As the head of the Federal executive branch, who would stop him?
replies(2): >>23328611 #>>23328846 #
dlp211 ◴[27 May 20 19:28 UTC] No.23328611[source]▶
Judges in every district, appeals court, and the SCOTUS. An injunction would be put in place not more than an hour after such a deceleration by the POTUS was made.
replies(3): >>23328810 #>>23329311 #>>23329728 #
colejohnson66 ◴[27 May 20 19:39 UTC] No.23328810[source]▶
Genuine question: What would happen if there was a massive conspiracy to just plow through with the plan despite the injunction? Sure, Congress could impeach him again and “convict” him, but what if the people with the power to literally remove him refused to cooperate?

I know this is a very massive hypothetical, but it’s one I’ve wondered for a while. Basically, as the head of one of the branches, he could have subordinates forcefully removed, but who’ll forcefully remove him in this case?

replies(9): >>23329075 #>>23329161 #>>23329163 #>>23329328 #>>23329399 #>>23329511 #>>23329584 #>>23329771 #>>23330626 #
1. Consultant32452 ◴[27 May 20 20:01 UTC] No.23329161[source]▶
>What would happen if there was a massive conspiracy to just plow through with the plan despite the injunction?

In real terms, what are you imagining here? Trump having the NSA execute a DDOS against Twitter? I feel like you have to get to some pretty fantastical action-movie type plots to make this happen.

replies(3): >>23329560 #>>23329647 #>>23330407 #
2. kevin_thibedeau ◴[27 May 20 20:32 UTC] No.23329560[source]▶
Remove their DNS records.
replies(1): >>23330284 #
3. baddox ◴[27 May 20 20:38 UTC] No.23329647[source]▶
DDOS? It would be much simpler: a few people with guns.
replies(1): >>23329734 #
4. Consultant32452 ◴[27 May 20 20:46 UTC] No.23329734[source]▶
Trump sending armed federal/military agents to all the Twitter buildings on US soil in order to shut them down is even more Hollywood than NSA DDOS.
5. AnimalMuppet ◴[27 May 20 21:30 UTC] No.23330284[source]▶
Again, how? Cyberattack, court order, or people with guns?
6. evan_ ◴[27 May 20 21:40 UTC] No.23330407[source]▶
Doesn't have to be that complicated. The DOJ announces an investigation into Twitter advertising practices. They get a friendly judge to issue some kind of injunction against showing ads for the duration of the investigation. No more revenue. Whether they actually find anything is irrelevant.

That probably won't happen though, this is really just about stirring up a frenzy of right-wingers so Twitter will have to bow down to them and give them more and more concessions in hopes that somehow, someday they'll stop accusing everything of being biased against them.