If the left-leaning subreddits were also promoting hate, misinformation and violence then they would be banned too. It's not favouritism, the "one side" that's being targeted is the side that's breaking the platform's rules.
There's plenty of hate and misinformation in those subreddits. None of them have been banned yet.
Here is a nice article on the whole situation:
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-mill...
>Totally different than something like "the election was rigged", which was tested and failed in court, but still gets shouted from the rooftops, leading to dangerous outcomes like what we saw in DC.
Yes, that was untrue, ridiculous, and in the end became dangerous. I'm pointing out the usual hypocrisy on both the left and the right when it comes to their own pet causes.
That Russia helped Trump is generally agreed upon. Was it the only factor in his win? Of course not.
But your whataboutism here doesn't hold water. Sure, there are subreddits that commonly exaggerated the truth about the Russia thing. Should they should get banned, since r/donaldtrump got banned for supporting violence? The two issues are so very different. I do not see hypocrisy in this case.
It is only agreed upon when you don't talk to people outside of your own echo chamber. In 2016, people were just shocked that so many people could vote for a loathsome person like Trump. Dems were unhappy and looked for someone to blame, except themselves for running such a weak candidate. 2020 was just as fair an election, and Trump got even more votes than 2016.
>Sure, there are subreddits that commonly exaggerated the truth about the Russia thing. Should they should get banned, since r/donaldtrump got banned for supporting violence?
What is the standard? Misinformation is OK? Anyway, I don't think an argument here will change anyone's views. People will eventually realize that the Dems have been conning their supporters for quite a while now.
You're telling me this whole entire article is fake?
> What is the standard? https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy
Here is my money quote from the report:
> If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.