[jampekka]

I didn't agree with the Trump ban and a lot of other "content moderation" (which affected the left wing too).

But in the case of Trump he was banned due to the incitement of violence/revolt in the Capitol Hill incident and the attempts to overturn election results.

[cbeach]

Look at Clinton and Pelosi’s tweets when Trump won the first term. They also challenged the result and claimed it was a manipulated election.

May 16th 2017 Nancy Pelosi tweeted to her massive following “ Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts.”

Does that mean she was removed from social media for “inciting revolt”? No, of course not.

Trump’s tweets on the day of the Capitol riot were to demand people behave peacefully and respect the rule of law.

Yet he was banned without appeal.

[shigawire]

Consider that the differing results in each situation led to different actions taken.

In only one case was there an insurrection supported (as evidenced by pardons) by the tweeter.

[snowfarthing]

First off, it's now clear from the evidence that the "insurrection" was the FBI working hard to entrap all the people they could, after everything was done to limit security on the day of the protest.

Secondly, the riots in Washington DC on Trump's first inauguration are rather pretty, the way the fires of businesses glowed in the night.

I'm really tired of pretending that somehow the Republicans are the "uncivil" ones, while the Democrats are perfectly innocent, and wouldn't harm a fly.

[jampekka]

Pelosi didn't question the election results or call for their overturning. It was about the claims about foreign influence, which was later used to build the narrative for impeachment.