Elon Musk Proves Twitter’s Trump Ban Was Corrupt: ‘Not Seeing Clear or Coded Incitement in DJT Tweet’

Elon Musk has just released “The Twitter Files Part Five: The Removal of Trump from Twitter.”

The latest bombshell release of Twitter’s internal files shows the corrupt efforts by the company’s former executives to ban the sitting President of the United States.

Most believed Twitter had a system to make such a historic decision and Trump would have had to clearly violate the rules to get the boot.

However, Musk has proved that executives knew that Trump did not violate the rules but twisted his comments and suggested there were coded messages in his posts when they knew there weren’t.

According to the “Twitter Files,” employees and leadership had to twist the rules to infer what Trump may have been talking about to ban him.

Executives appear to desperately suggest hidden meanings to Trump’s tweets, that clearly didn’t exist, to support their own biases.

At one point, Twitter’s former censorship chief Vijaya Gadde claimed that Trump’s use of the phrase “American Patriots” was “being used as coded incitement to further violence.”

She then used her theory to allege that Trump has violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy.

Journalist Bari Weiss reported Part 5.

She said:

“On the morning of January 8, President Donald Trump, with one remaining strike before being at risk of permanent suspension from Twitter, tweets twice.

“6:46 am: ‘The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!.’

“7:44 am: ‘To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.’

Slay the latest News for free!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

“For years, Twitter had resisted calls both internal and external to ban Trump on the grounds that blocking a world leader from the platform or removing their controversial tweets would hide important information that people should be able to see and debate.

“’Our mission is to provide a forum that enables people to be informed and to engage their leaders directly,’ the company wrote in 2019.

“Twitter’s aim was to ‘protect the public’s right to hear from their leaders and to hold them to account.’

“But after January 6, as @mtaibbi and @shellenbergermd have documented, pressure grew, both inside and outside of Twitter, to ban Trump.

“There were dissenters inside Twitter. ‘Maybe because I am from China,’ said one employee on January 7, ‘I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation.’

“But voices like that one appear to have been a distinct minority within the company.

“Across Slack channels, many Twitter employees were upset that Trump hadn’t been banned earlier.

“After January 6, Twitter employees organized to demand their employer ban Trump.

“’There is a lot of employee advocacy happening,’ said one Twitter employee.

“’We have to do the right thing and ban this account,’ said one staffer.

“It’s ‘pretty obvious he’s going to try to thread the needle of incitement without violating the rules,’ said another.

“In the early afternoon of January 8, The Washington Post published an open letter signed by over 300 Twitter employees to CEO Jack Dorsey demanding Trump’s ban.

“’We must examine Twitter’s complicity in what President-Elect Biden has rightly termed insurrection.’

“But the Twitter staff assigned to evaluate tweets quickly concluded that Trump had *not* violated Twitter’s policies.

“’I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement,’ wrote one staffer. ‘It’s pretty clear he’s saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?) from Wednesday.’

“Another staffer agreed: ‘Don’t see the incitement angle here.’

“‘I also am not seeing clear or coded incitement in the DJT tweet,’ wrote Anika Navaroli, a Twitter policy official. ‘I’ll respond in the elections channel and say that our team has assessed and found no vios—or violations—for the DJT one.’

“She does just that: ‘as an fyi, Safety has assessed the DJT Tweet above and determined that there is no violation of our policies at this time.’

“Next, Twitter’s safety team decides that Trump’s 7:44 am ET tweet is also not in violation.

“They are unequivocal: ‘it’s a clear no vio. It’s just to say he’s not attending the inauguration.’

“But Twitter executives did ban Trump, even though key staffers said that Trump had not incited violence—not even in a ‘coded’ way.

“Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be ‘coded incitement to further violence.’

“Gadde said: ‘The biggest question is whether a tweet like the one this morning from Trump, which isn’t a rule violation on its face, is being used as coded incitement to further violence.’

“A few minutes later, Twitter employees on the ‘scaled enforcement team’ suggest that Trump’s tweet may have violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy—if you interpreted the phrase ‘American Patriots’ to refer to the rioters.

“Things escalate from there.

“Members of that team came to ‘view him as the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.’

“Two hours later, Twitter executives host a 30-minute all-staff meeting.

“Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde answer staff questions as to why Trump wasn’t banned yet.

“But they make some employees angrier.

“’Multiple tweeps [Twitter employees] have quoted the Banality of Evil suggesting that people implementing our policies are like Nazis following orders,’ relays Yoel Roth to a colleague.

“Dorsey requested simpler language to explain Trump’s suspension.

“Roth wrote, ‘god help us [this] makes me think he wants to share it publicly.’

“One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension ‘due to the risk of further incitement of violence.’

“But Twitter’s COO Parag Agrawal—who would later succeed Dorsey as CEO—told Head of Security Mudge Zatko: ‘I think a few of us should brainstorm the ripple effects’ of Trump’s ban.

“Agrawal added: ‘centralized content moderation IMO has reached a breaking point now.’

join telegram


Who is the best president?

By completing this poll, you gain access to our free newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.

By David Hawkins

David Hawkins is a writer who specializes in political commentary and world affairs. He's been writing professionally since 2014.

Notify of


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x