Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

Link to @realDonaldTrump tweet: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12662311007807447...

tweet text:

> ....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

Disclaimer text:

> This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible. Learn more

"Learn more" links to this page about "public-interest exceptions"

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/public-intere...

edit: here's the official thread from @TwitterComms about it: https://twitter.com/TwitterComms/status/1266267446979129345

Completely agree with trump here honestly. Looting private business is not a form of protest against the police or the state for that matter.

You should investigate the racial history of the phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” and also consider whether property crime deserves loss of life.

> property crime deserves loss of life.

This is not an isolated incidence of property crime. This is utter destruction more akin to waging a total war against a particular district of Minneapolis. It's a form of terrorism.

Property -- in the form of business and services -- is essential to life. There is no absolute distinction between the two, despite what some pretend. These people are breaking property in their own community and then expect investors or the very government they're protesting to step back in and rebuild.

> Property -- in the form of business and services -- is essential to life.

While that can be true in a literal sense at times, I don't believe shop lifting electronics from Target would have that effect. Even the destruction of local businesses, while indeed terrorizing, is not lethal.

Violent rioting would be something that might require a lethal response, but stealing, looting, robbing, plundering -- no.

> These people are breaking property in their own community and then expect investors or the very government they're protesting to step back in and rebuild.

So you believe that what is right, instead of investing and rebuilding, is that these people should be killed?

> Even the destruction of local businesses, while indeed terrorizing, is not lethal.

Tell that to the poor immigrant family whose business, and thus livelihood in this country, was destroyed. This is how we get roof koreans.

Why don't these rioters go stand with guns outside the state capitol or city hall or police dept? Instead of disrespecting the memory of George Floyd. I hope his death isn't used to defend people's 'right' to steal TVs without getting caught. That would be really really really sad.

You don't have the moral high ground here. Terrorizing and instilling fear in your local community is wrong, whether it comes from the state through the police or your fellow countrymen through riots. Just as an appropriate response to the officer who killed Mr Floyd would have been violence, so is violence towards the rioters. We can't honestly say that just because the police are thugs, thus we ought to also let others be thugs. Both can be wrong.