1. I reported that Trump will be driven off social media if he is successful in killing Section 230. Here is a Forbes article from May that agreed:

What Is Section 230—And Why Does Trump Want To Change It? via @forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/05/28/what-is-section-230-and-why-does-trump-want-to-change-it/

2. The article concluded: “Ironically, this could hurt Trump, who has come to rely on social media to spread his ideas, many of which are either partially or wholly untrue or inaccurate.

In the end, Trump forcing Twitter to change and get tougher on content could lead the

3. platform to impose greater restrictions on the president’s tweets than the ones he complained about in the first place.

‘Donald Trump is a big beneficiary of Section 230. If platforms were not immune under the law, then they would not risk the legal liability that could come

4. l with hosting Donald Trump’s lies, defamation and threats,’ says Kate Ruane, the ACLU’s senior legislative counsel.”

I know @RealDonaldTrump is a nitwit, but why would he tee up the social media industry having an easier means to boot him from their platforms and have

5. a reason to do it to avoid lawsuits? My conclusion is this act is meant to destroy social media and is directed by Trump’s bosses in the Kremlin working in concert with the the Koch eco system that needs to kill the free expression that @Twitter permits forcing anyone seeking

6. to be heard in a large forum into a media industry that the KochMachine and Kremlin can control and sensor. Trump has almost served his useful purpose. Killing a robust free speech infrastructure will be his parting act for his masters who will trade us $2,000 to be bound

7. and gagged. And what convinced me this is a viable theory is the fact that my posts that identified Trump’s strategy was against his personal best interest were promptly met with a fairly robust Russian troll response. If I’m right, they have given

8. @senatemajldr McConnell his marching orders. @FBIWFO @NSAGov @CISAgov