zlacker

As an elected official and part of a giant bureaucracy the US president has a right to make proclamations, and the media has the right to criticize, refute and contradict. Where this gets delicate is with a person who holds enormous power and is literally leading the administration. People want to hear what this leader has to say, and censoring/hiding/second guessing what this person says is arguably undemocratic. Trump is irrelevant here, it could be any elected official or administration leader. Pompeo or the US military could be considered to 'glorify violence' with their statements, does this give Twitter the right to hide their tweets? This is a free speech issue at the heart of democracy, and Twitter keep overstepping their S230 remit.

>>oliver+(OP)
But twitter is a private business or isn't it? Twitter users must agree to Twitter TOS isn't it?

Your freedom of speech is also Twitter's freedom of speech and if you don't like that someone uses their freedom to calls you on your bullshit - then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

POTUS has whitehouse.gov if he thinks that private business does not let him say what he want's to say.

>>trymas+Aq
Section 230 'hands off' service provision rather than editorializing is the issue here as well as rights to free speech whoever you are. The fact Trump enrages most people is a separate distraction. This is a downward slope to more censorship by large unelected global corporations and their political proclivities and goals.