The Stuff removed / changed / pulled relating to Trump

[Dwarvenhobble]

Ok as this popped up an another thread I thought it might be worth having a thread just to list the stuff and add more as more happens or discuss the stuff.

His main Twitter


Tweets from the POTUS account

Twitter 'permanently suspends' Trump's account

The social media giant bans the US president "due to the risk of further incitement of violence".

www.bbc.com

Email

Shopify Store


Payment Processing service for his campiagn


Facebook

Youtube

Twitch

Instagram

TikTok

All the platforms that have banned or restricted Trump so far

Platforms are rapidly removing Trump’s account or those affiliated with pro-Trump violence and conspiracies.

www.axios.com

Associated accounts or linked to Trump via some connection or other or Trump supporters

Steve Bannons Podcast banned from youtube

YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel hours after Rudy Giuliani appeared on an episode and blamed the Capitol siege on Democrats

Steve Bannon's "War Room" podcast was removed from YouTube. Just hours before, Rudy Giuliani had appeared as a guest on an episode.

www.businessinsider.com

The Donald Trump subreddit

Reddit bans forum dedicated to supporting Trump, and Twitter permanently suspends his allies who spread conspiracy theories. (Published 2021)

www.nytimes.com

Parler from the Google Play store for alleged failure to moderate adequately

Parler, right-wing social media app, is removed from the Google Play store

Parler, the alternative social media platform popular with conservatives, has been banned from the Google Play Store, Google told CNN Business Friday evening.

edition.cnn.com

Parler removed from Apple store after 24 hours for refusal to moderate to the standard Apple wanted

Apple removes Parler from the App Store

You can’t download it anymore.

www.theverge.com

Parler Removed from Amazon's hosting service

Parler: Amazon to remove site from web hosting service

If Parler fails to find a new web hosting service by Sunday, the entire network will go offline.

www.bbc.co.uk

Parler's legal team


Donald Trump discord server / servers

Pintrest

 

[Silvanus]

I don't give much of a toss about him getting cut off from these services, or the services suspending accounts that spread conspiracy theory bollocks. That stuff has pretty dire real-world consequences (not least of which is exacerbating the pandemic).

But... it's really noticeable that they're only doing it now. After he's lost the election and will already be gone in a couple of weeks. What, the attack on the Capitol made them suddenly realise the guy was bad news? No, this stuff only happens after years of fomenting, and it was blindingly obvious that all the conspiracy-peddling and grievance-farming and lying was dangerous years ago.

They're only doing something about it now, when it's safe for their fucking bottom line, so that they can pretend they're part of the solution. They were part of the problem.

 

[Revnak]

Social media made this movement and now they’re banning it. At least this time they’ve taken action before genocides occur. It’s a new leaf for big tech.

 

[Chimpzy]

I was wondering what the delightful 80's sci fi horror flick The Stuff had to do with Trump, let alone warrant removal. Fortunately, that worry was premature.

 

[Agema]

I don't give much of a toss about him getting cut off from these services, or the services suspending accounts that spread conspiracy theory bollocks. That stuff has pretty dire real-world consequences (not least of which is exacerbating the pandemic).

But... it's really noticeable that they're only doing it now. After he's lost the election and will already be gone in a couple of weeks.

Yep. If Trump were anyone except the president of the USA, they'd have pulled the plug on his accounts long ago. This is not unfair victimisation of Trump, this is finally removing the advantageous exceptions they've given him for years and putting him on the same level playing field as other users.

They most certainly are getting rid of him now only because he's finished in politics - the Capitol riot just gave them the ability to do it slightly earlier than they were planning.

 

[bluegate]

Aside from Parler getting removed by their hosting company, apparently hackers were able to get a data dump from Parler's servers, including posts, images and videos.

If this is true, I'm assuming we can add a lot of jobs of Americans dumb enough to put their personal information on Parler to this list.

 

[Burnhardt]

They most certainly are getting rid of him now only because he's finished in politics - the Capitol riot just gave them the ability to do it slightly earlier than they were planning.

I very much doubt it.

The fact that his administration are reportedly opposed to invoking the 25th Amnendment, and that Republican Congressional members are unlikely to vote for impeachment (despite some calling for him to resign), means he will likely win the nomination again in 2024.

After all, as far as his supporters are concerned, he never lost in the first place, and has been robbed of his second term.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

Hah. While far too late to be anything other than typical weasely corporate ass covering, it still provides a cheap warm and fuzzy feeling seeing that b1tch baby and co getting proper sandbagged while technically in office. Would prefer criminal charges, but whatevs. Give it time.
There's also some hint of progress in a similar vein elsewhere;.

Facebook shuts down accounts of Ugandan officials ahead of elections

Facebook has shut a slew of accounts belonging to Ugandan government officials accused of seeking to manipulate public debate ahead of elections Thursday, the internet giant told AFP on Monday.

www.france24.com

Only some. A little. Better than none?

 

[ObsidianJones]

'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media

Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.

www.usatoday.com

Probing Question: Are there limits to freedom of speech? | Penn State University

"The categories of speech that fall outside of its protection are obscenity, child pornography, defamation, incitement to violence and true threats of violence," he explains. "Even in those categories, there are tests that have to be met in order for the speech to be illegal. Beyond that, we are free to speak."

 

[Agema]

I very much doubt it.

The fact that his administration are reportedly opposed to invoking the 25th Amnendment, and that Republican Congressional members are unlikely to vote for impeachment (despite some calling for him to resign), means he will likely win the nomination again in 2024.

After all, as far as his supporters are concerned, he never lost in the first place, and has been robbed of his second term.

As the saying goes, a week is a long time in politics. Four years is an era. I think "Trumpism" will continue, but Trump himself is finished in politics. He might well be able to keep active in media. Honestly, he's better suited to it anyway, as the grandiose, preening blowhard that he is.

1) As president, he's someone for Republicans to rally round. Once he's gone, he's just one of numerous condenders vying for airtime.
2) Some of these contenders will occupy Trump's positions and tactics, and he will no longer have unique territory
3) There will be gradual reappraisal with more emotional distance once he's not president - I do not think this change in perception will be kind
4) He lost, even from incumbency, and losing always damages reputation
5) He has made a lot of enemies; resistance to him even from within the Republicans themselves would be spectacular.
6) He's already 74, another four years and he'll be even less capable
7) He's facing potential major challenges - loan repayments and fraud cases - that might further damage him

 

[BrawlMan]

Took you cowardly corporate assholes long enough. This is why you don't let a biatch-in-a-boxstand in charge.

 

[BrawlMan]

Take it away, Jim. Glad he's calling out YouTube on its bullcrap as well. None of these fuckwads have the high ground.

​

 

[tippy2k2]

Whoopsy

 

[Topaz]

It's almost like actions have consequences.

 

[BrawlMan]

Whoopsy

The fools created their own destruction to despair. Oh sweet and bitter irony.

 

[Houseman]

I think it sets a bad precedent. It's censorship, plain and simple.
It's only going to get worse. It's going to be a "first they came for..." situation.

And no, you can't just "make your own", look what happened to Parler, they attacked it from every angle.
It's the big tech monopolies, google, facebook, twitter, amazon, or nothing. They have the reach, and can therefore manipulate, like 90% of the internet's population.





But yeah, the President should probably have an alternate way to communicate with the people without depending on third-parties to carry or host the message.

 

[Silvanus]

But yeah, the President should probably have an alternate way to communicate with the people without depending on third-parties to carry or host the message.

That's kind of the function of the press conferences-- but Trump started excluding outlets he had political disagreements with.

 

[Dreiko]

I just hope that when a smart trump mk2 takes power and does this to people he has political disagreements with we can then agree that private corporations should not be able to cancel you out of existence like this.

No matter who this is done to, doing it to anyone is wrong. This is like a light version of the chinese social credit system, only more free-form and open to arbitrary punishment since each company is doing whatever the hell they want to maintain virtue points and there's not one centralized governmental point system.

 

[Houseman]

That's kind of the function of the press conferences-- but Trump started excluding outlets he had political disagreements with.

Even the media outlets can decide just to not broadcast the President's message. There's nothing forcing them to do so, is there?
For example, I've heard that they cut away from him during his own speeches at rallies and such.

I just hope that when a smart trump mk2 takes power and does this to people he has political disagreements with we can then agree that private corporations should not be able to cancel you out of existence like this.

I wonder if the President can just unilaterally declare something to be "wrong", like through an executive order or something. Maybe declare a certain movement as a terrorist organization or something. Or perhaps it would be done more subtly. I think such a President would need the media on their side in order to do such a thing.

Lemme slip into the mindset of an evil genius for a second and theorize how such a thing might be done:
1) Stage an attack and make it seem like it was done in the name of your target's movement/ideology
1a) Alternately, just have the FBI or DoJ or whoever under the President's thumb to merely claim that an attack was carried out by the target movement
2) Use that to justify attacking it/censoring, and everyone sympathetic to it, from every angle.

 

[Silvanus]

Even the media outlets can decide just to not broadcast the President's message. There's nothing forcing them to do so, is there?

Nothing official as far as I'm aware, which does seem a bit flawed. Here in the UK, the PM's direct messages (such as the ones on coronavirus) go out on the BBC, which is of course a state broadcaster-- it's part of their remit.

Unofficially, US news outlets are pretty much always willing to cover White House press briefings, because refusing would be giving competitors a free advantage in coverage.

For example, I've heard that they cut away from him during his own speeches at rallies and such.

Quite a few outlets (incl. CBS, NBC, & Fox) did cut away from Trump & Kayleigh McEnany when they claimed during press briefings that the Democrats had rigged the election. That's a pretty exceptional step to take, because of the potentially explosive nature of the claim.