Image 01 Image 03

Facebook Bans Trump for at Least Two Years

Facebook Bans Trump for at Least Two Years

They will reassess his “risk” on January 7, 2023, exactly two years after the social media giant kicked him off.

Facebook’s Oversight Board decided to uphold former President Donald Trump’s suspension for two years.

At that time, they will reassess his “risk” before they allow him on the platform.

Facebook kicked Trump off the platform in January after the Capitol Hill riots.

From Fox Business:

“Given the gravity of the circumstances that led to Mr. Trump’s suspension, we believe his actions constituted a severe violation of our rules which merit the highest penalty available under the new enforcement protocols. We are suspending his accounts for two years, effective from the date of the initial suspension on January 7 this year,” Facebook announced.

“At the end of this period, we will look to experts to assess whether the risk to public safety has receded.”

The oversight board had previously criticized the open-ended nature of Facebook’s suspension of the outgoing president as an “indeterminate and standardless penalty.” The board said at the end of the two-year suspension it would look to “instances of violence, restrictions on peaceful assembly and other markers of civil unrest” to determine if Trump’s accounts were still a threat to public safety. It said Trump would be subject to severe sanctions if he further violated Facebook’s rules.

In early May, the board upheld the ban, but said the platform cannot make it permanent. I guess if they ban Trump again after two years it does not count as permanent? They’d have to let him back on eventually, no?

Facebook thanked the Oversight Board, especially for agreeing that Trump should remain off the social media giant:

“We know today’s decision will be criticized by many people on opposing sides of the political divide,” Facebook said in its post on Friday, adding that “our job is to make a decision in as proportionate, fair and transparent a way as possible, in keeping with the instruction provided by the Oversight Board.”

Facebook created and funded the Oversight Board to independently rule on the company’s toughest content decisions, and the Trump suspension is by far its most high-profile case to date.

I envision many Congressional hearings with Facebook officials in the near future.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Juris Doctor | June 4, 2021 at 1:39 pm

The magic 2 year number was selected in coordination with the Democrat party to impair Trump’s ability to influence the midterm election.

Comanche Voter | June 4, 2021 at 1:44 pm

The gravity of Trump’s “offense” is that he told the world that the lefty poohbahs have no clothes. And such offenses against lefty lese majeste must be severely punished. Or else the plebes might discover that their exalted rulers have no knickers.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Comanche Voter. | June 4, 2021 at 1:59 pm

    What offense did he commit on facebook exactly? Speaking out against the leftist media machine that wants to shut down any debate or discussion about the unprecedented results and policy changes to the 2020 election?

    There are murderers and serial rapists with facebook accounts, but because they didn’t commit their atrocities on facebook, they aren’t banned. This is BS plain and simple.

      mark311 in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 4, 2021 at 3:49 pm

      His offence is spelt out by the oversight boards detailed analysis

      Facebook can’t ban people based on their actions outside of Facebook that’s not a breach of their terms of service. Posts within Facebook might be which is what has happened here.

        henrybowman in reply to mark311. | June 4, 2021 at 5:42 pm

        It’s all anti-American, ex-post-facto, bill-of-attainder bullshit, Facebook’s version of selective prosecution, and everybody here knows it.

        Absolutely no different from GoFundMe’s shutdown of a legal defense fund(!) for Kyle Rittenhouse, for contravening a totally subjective rule against “hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind.” Note carefull that they had absolutely no problem continuing to hold fundraisers for precisely the same convicted-criminal terrorists who are on videotape bullying Rittenhouse, including three ex-felons, one of whom tried to murder him with an illegally-possessed handgun; not to mention other terrorists, like Mattis and Rahman, the “Molotov lawyers” from Massachusetts; Kathryn Patterson, the sorority anarchist arsonist; and others.

        When GiveSendGo stuck to its guns and held to long-standing American principle that everyone, including Kyle Rittenhouse, is entitled to a vigorous legal defense, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram immediately banned all links to GiveSendGo.

        If Democrats couldn’t make up the rules as they go along, they’d need to do away with them entirely. Oh yeah, and don’t forget to Defund The Police.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to henrybowman. | June 5, 2021 at 12:14 am

          “When GiveSendGo stuck to its guns and held to long-standing American principle that everyone, including Kyle Rittenhouse, is entitled to a vigorous legal defense, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram immediately banned all links to GiveSendGo”

          Basically, these massive corporations are using their market dominance to crush competition in a cooperative and coordinated fashion. This is ripe for anti-trust action.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to mark311. | June 5, 2021 at 12:11 am

        You called that “detailed analysis”? Yikes. More like a bunch or arbitrary pabulum arbitrarily applied.

        Also, it carries blatant misstatement of facts, such as that 5 people died in violence on 6 January. In fact, only one person died from violence, and that was an unarmed protestor. killed by an out of control congressional police officer.

        The rest basically states president Trump is not allowed to assert an opinion that the election was stolen, calling the assertion “unfounded” for example.

        The ruling more or less asserts political leaders must express opinions Facebook agrees with to be allowed to be posted. OK, fair enough. Therefore, I guess, this means Facebook agrees with the sentiment expressed by the leader of Iran that Israel must be destroyed. If I tried, I could produce a rather lengthy list of odious things spouted by odious dictators and other political leaders Facebook therefore apparently agrees with.

        Cancel Facebook. You do not need it.

          mark311 in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | June 5, 2021 at 7:20 am

          Actually you are wrong it states that five people died, it didn’t make any assertion on how they died.

          The statements make clear what was against the terms of service of facebook and Trump’s words created at atmosphere legitimising the actions of those involved in the capitol riots. It’s pretty clear given the context what Trump did was wrong and against the rules of the platform. If you don’t like Facebook rules use a different platform it’s simple.

          Expressing an opinion as president has power as noted in the decision. Asserting that the election was stolen without evidence means that he has to own the consequences.

          JusticeDelivered in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | June 5, 2021 at 5:26 pm

          Facebook and Twitter, both overt lies and lies of omission

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 4, 2021 at 11:57 pm

      “What offense did he commit on Facebook exactly?”

      What’s Facebook?

At the same time – world dictators and despots have an open platform.

This reeks of political agenda.

And they’ll ban him for another 2 years and another as long as he’s a threat to the globalist agenda. It’s kabuki theater for the uninformed masses and leftists.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to c0cac0la. | June 5, 2021 at 7:35 am

    He needs to win, and now that he has a much better understanding of the swamp, not trust the majority of the shysters in the beltway.

    After 2 decades + of working 2-3 months a year there, I thought I knew how bad it was, turns out I did not fully understand.

Remind me again, why would anyone suck Zuckerberg’s dick by using his Commie platform?

Tell me Facebook users, does that dick taste good?

Antifundamentalist | June 4, 2021 at 2:31 pm

What is it the left keep saying? – “Silence is violence” Silencing Trump is violence against him in today’s vernacular.

Who cares about Facebook anyway?

That’s OK. I’ve banned Facebook permanently.

I left facebook over this crap. At this point we should just pull an FDR and when we’re in power find something Zucks did to violate tax law and strip him of everything and throw him in jail.

Only when both sides play by the same rules will theirs have any appreciation for the norms they so readily abandon when in power. Gloves off.

    CommoChief in reply to JDmyrm. | June 4, 2021 at 3:33 pm

    An easier path, in red States and Counties, is to simply use another platform for official social media. Parlour instead of Twitter ECT.

    Much of the network effects that these social media giants enjoy is due to government accounts. Imagine if Florida simply stopped posting on FB and instead transferred that content to another platform. The new platform would instantly become needed by however many actual users/subscribers it’s predecessor had.

    That creates subscriber growth and a transfer of the network effects to the new platform. This then allows that platform to charge more for ads because more eyeballs are viewing. This growth feeds upon itself as content providers see a minimum threshold number of users and begin transferring content.

    It wouldn’t be overnight but it would occur. The missing key, IMO, is red States leveraging their choice of social media.

These dupes are simply afraid of the big bad bogeyman. They know the only way they can win is to silence his voice. They would rather be misled about Covid, masks, and a myriad of other issues where they get to hear what suits them, even if it’s false. Way to go, dupes!

    henrybowman in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | June 5, 2021 at 4:56 pm

    The older I get, the less “democracy” appeals to me. The words of Jefferson and Madison are moral and stirring; unfortunately, the words of Barnum and Mencken are probative and supersessive.

Trump needs to back every conservative candidate for office in the state Florida. I mean down to the school board, county clerk, and dog catcher.

Then watch the fines roll in as they censor their FB / Twitter feeds. FB will literally bankroll the entire 2022 budget for the state of Florida.

Dusty Pitts | June 4, 2021 at 3:48 pm

By January 7, 2023, may Facebook already have disappeared.

Zimri Zuke deserves the Pinchas tratment for being the traitor he is

Someone here please explain this to me

“Facebook Stock Gains Amid Trump Ban; “

So he is back for the election and will be putting his foot into his mouth at 2 am on Facebook which he will patiently wait 2 years for rather than dignify alt tech with acknowledgement of their existence and after the election whoever wins he gets banned again.

Expect twitter to also restore his posting rights in time for the presidential election and ban him as soon as the election is over.

    I’m still kind of bemused by this sense that Trump tweeted out horrific things. I don’t recall a single tweet of his that I found horrific. I did, very often, find the leftist spin and insistence of “dog whistles” (that, oddly, they could hear very well), but I don’t recall anything particularly awful (i.e. untrue/unfounded. Fake News is fake news, the media has certainly become the enemy of the people, the election was definitely fishy, and etc.).

    Anyway, I think Trump should never ever go back to Twitter, FB, etc. Hopefully, by whenever they deign to permit him to return, he’ll already be on a different social media venue with tens of millions of followers, either one of his own making or on an existing one (as long as it is immune to the vagaries of Big Tech, including Amazon).

      Sorry I didn’t reply earlier when I tried I got a computer error.

      Neither of us got alienated by Trump’s tweets we both voted for him and if he wins nomination I (correct me if I’m wrong) think there is a 100% chance we will both vote for him again.

      The problem isn’t one single tweet says something exceptionally bad it is the sum of all of them was bad perceptions of him. The tweets ranged from being botched attempts at saying something (i.e. his attempt to say fix your own districts before you try to fix the country ending up sounding like he was telling people go back where you come from) to his trolling Joe Scarborough (a man who deserves to be trolled, but it isn’t worth losing the presidency by having our side look petty and weak) to when he stopped a feud between Nancy Pelosi and AOC etc.

      His tweets never helped him and did together help give off a negative impression of himself towards voters who aren’t on his side but could be convinced to vote for him. He isn’t racist and I don’t think any of his tweets were racist. Stupid on the other hand is a good description.

      I agree he should reward alt tech instead of big tech.