Promoting Political Violence Through Social Media: 'When the Looting Starts, the Shooting Starts' and the Pattern of Violent Rhetoric on Digital Platforms
Tier 3Documented2017-01-20 to 2024-11-05
Factual Summary
Throughout his presidency and political career, Donald Trump used social media platforms to promote, endorse, or appear to celebrate political violence. The most significant single incident occurred on May 29, 2020, when Trump posted a tweet about protests following the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. Twitter took the unprecedented step of flagging the tweet for "glorifying violence," the first time the platform had applied that label to a post by a sitting head of state. The incident was part of a broader pattern of violent rhetoric on social media that led to Trump's permanent suspension from Twitter in January 2021 and temporary restrictions on other platforms.
On May 29, 2020, as protests and civil unrest spread across American cities following George Floyd's death, Trump tweeted: "These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won't let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts!" The White House official account reposted the identical language.
Twitter placed a public interest notice on the tweet, stating that it violated the platform's rules about glorifying violence but would remain visible because of its public significance. The label stated: "This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence." Twitter also disabled engagement features on the tweet, preventing users from liking, replying to, or retweeting it without adding their own commentary.
The phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" had a specific historical origin. It was used by Miami Police Chief Walter Headley in December 1967, when he promised violent crackdowns on Black neighborhoods during a period of civil rights activism. Civil rights leaders immediately identified the reference and denounced Trump's use of the phrase.
Internal documents from Facebook, which were later made public through the "Facebook Papers" disclosures, revealed that Facebook's own automated violence classifier was approximately 90 percent certain that Trump's identical post on that platform violated Facebook's policies against glorifying violence. Despite this internal assessment, Facebook chose not to remove or restrict Trump's post. An internal Facebook employee memo from June 2, 2020, noted that the platform experienced a spike in reports of hate speech and violence following Trump's looting post.
The May 2020 tweet was not an isolated instance. ABC News compiled a catalog of Trump statements perceived as inciting or encouraging violence, including his comments at rallies encouraging supporters to "knock the crap out of" protesters and offering to pay legal fees for those who did, his characterization of journalists as "enemies of the people," and multiple statements that critics interpreted as encouraging vigilante action.
On January 8, 2021, following the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, Twitter permanently suspended Trump's account, citing the "risk of further incitement of violence." Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and other platforms imposed temporary or indefinite suspensions. Twitter stated that two of Trump's final tweets, read in the context of the Capitol breach, constituted glorification of violence and raised the risk of inspiring further violent action.
Primary Sources
1. Trump tweet, May 29, 2020, archived and documented in Twitter's public interest notice
2. Twitter public interest notice and policy statement regarding the tweet, May 29, 2020
3. Twitter permanent suspension statement, January 8, 2021
4. Facebook internal documents ("Facebook Papers"), including violence classifier assessment and employee memos, 2020
5. White House official account repost of the identical language, May 29, 2020
Corroborating Sources
1. MSNBC/The ReidOut: "Trump spewed violent rhetoric after George Floyd murder. Facebook shrugged."
2. ABC News: "A look back at Trump comments perceived by some as inciting violence"
3. The New York Times: "Twitter Adds Warning to Trump Tweet, Saying It Glorifies Violence," May 29, 2020
4. NPR: "Twitter Hides Trump Tweet For 'Glorifying Violence,'" May 29, 2020
5. The Washington Post: "Twitter labels Trump's tweet about Minneapolis protests as 'glorifying violence,'" May 29, 2020
Counterarguments and Context
Trump and his supporters argued that the May 2020 tweet was a factual warning about the consequences of looting, not an endorsement of shooting protesters. They contended that Trump was expressing concern about public safety and the destruction of property, and that the tweet should be read as a description of what would happen if order was not restored, not as a presidential order to shoot looters. Trump later stated that the phrase was meant as a warning. Regarding the broader pattern of social media restrictions, Trump and his allies argued that Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms engaged in politically motivated censorship of a sitting president and that the permanent suspension from Twitter was an act of partisan suppression of political speech. They noted that other political figures posted inflammatory content without receiving similar treatment. The First Amendment argument holds that the president's speech is protected and that private platforms should not serve as arbiters of political discourse. However, Twitter's own policies defined the standard it applied, and the platform concluded that the tweet met its threshold for glorifying violence. The historical provenance of the phrase, its use by a police chief promising violent crackdowns in Black neighborhoods, makes the claim of innocent intent more difficult to sustain. Facebook's own internal systems flagged the content at a 90 percent confidence level, and the platform's decision not to act was a departure from its stated policies, not a vindication of the post's content.
Author's Note
This entry is classified as Tier 3 because the evidence consists of the tweet itself, the platform's official determination that it violated rules against glorifying violence, internal Facebook documents confirming the same assessment, and the documented historical origin of the phrase. These are primary sources. The classification does not depend on a legal determination that the speech constituted incitement in the criminal sense; it documents the use of language that the platforms hosting it determined promoted or glorified violence. The permanent suspension from Twitter in January 2021 is addressed in other entries related to the events of January 6.