A strange hill to die on.

So the big news today is President Trump vs. Twitter. It all started when President Trump tweeted about mail in voter fraud and Twitter fact checked the tweet as false. It centers around CDA 230 which basically defines the difference between a provider and publisher in regards to "interactive internet platforms" or some legalese along those lines. In layman's terms, it says a platform can't be sued for defamation, slander, or libel because they are providing a service and not responsible for the content on their site. (This link explains defamation, slander, and libel.) President Trump has taken the position that Twitter is now a publisher and does not enjoy the same immunity as platforms.

Okay, there is the boring background with some links, now the fun part. Why didn't someone in the West Wing step up and say "Excuse me, Mr. President, this is not a hill worth dieing on." This is not a fight he is going to win. The hard and middle left will oppose him just because orange man bad. Conservatives, libertarians, and anarchists will oppose him because it's more government control and infringes freedom of speech.  The independents will oppose it because it stinks of communism and China like control of the internet. There is no win here unless his goal is to unite the internet.

Second, which idiot in charge at Twitter gave this the okay? I mean this is not a hill that Twitter should be dieing on either. Any statement made on mail in voting cannot be absolutely defined as true or false because it has never been done before. If CNN says that mail in voting is absolutely tamper and fraud proof you can't call it a lie because there are no facts to back it up. If Trump says mail in voting will result in fraud and a rigged election you can't definitively state that it's a lie because there is no historical data to back that claim. And even if Twitter decided this is a hill worth dieing on? Don't put this guy in charge. He is a real winner. A great example of his fair and unbiased viewpoints are presented in the linked article. My favorite? “I’m just saying, we fly over those states that voted for a racist tangerine for a reason.” If you want to go after Trump you need someone bulletproof as head of fact checking. Be smarter Twitter. Also? Don't cite a CNN article as proof. If you want to fact check you need academic studies or, at a bare minimum, an organization that pretends to be unbiased not the voice of the left. It's the equivalent of Facebook calling Hillary Clinton a liar and citing Tucker Carlson as proof. Be better. 

Now I'm sure people smarter than me amd deeper in the swamp can explain the long game from both sides of the aisle but, to me at least, this seems like a giant ado about nothing where no side wins so why are they fighting?