May 18, 2021


Is the delete function really the deciding factor in whether repeated calls to violence are considered acceptable or unacceptable by the tech giant? If this is the case, then what are we to make of Raja, whose pro-Holocaust tweets from 2014 were live until this weekend, or the Ayatollah, who hasn’t deleted any of his tweets calling for the destruction of Israel and its people?

Moreover, does Twitter really consider the actress who approvingly “quotes” Hitler less harmful than the president who announces he won’t attend an inauguration? And all because the actress eventually deleted her love note to Hitler?

This can’t be the deciding factor because, again, Twitter has taken no action against the Ayatollah.

Where does Twitter draw the line?

Even with all the possible caveats in place (Trump is more powerful, he has a larger platform, Malik and Raja eventually deleted their tweets, etc.), the broader question remains: If Twitter considers Trump’s post-election behavior grounds to ban him for life, then how does it explain the continued activity of verified users who frequently cheer genocide and Hitler? The Ayatollah, Malik, and Raja have repeatedly called for a second Holocaust, which is many times worse than anything Trump ever tweeted.

Yet, Trump is the one who has been permanently banned from Twitter.

Flashback: Is Jack Dorsey a Pathological Liar or Has He Simply Lost All Control Over Twitter? As Steve wrote at the time, “Embrace the healing power of ‘and.'”



InstaPundit is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to