Kerby Anderson

The editors of the Wall Street Journal asked an insightful question. “Where would President Trump be if his critics didn’t so often help him?” What they are talking about was the decision by Twitter to fact-check the president for the first time.

The president wrote that mail-in voting in places like California would be “substantially fraudulent” because the governor is sending ballots out to anyone living in the state. Twitter reminded everyone that the ballots are sent only to registered voters, but then falsely stated that “there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud.”

In previous commentaries I’ve talked about problems with mail-in ballots. The Heritage Foundation database currently lists over 1,285 proven instances of voter fraud, with nearly half involving absentee ballots and mail-in ballots. There is no chain of custody between the voter and the ballot box. Fraud and abuse can take place without any oversight. It is also worth mentioning that a congressional election in North Carolina was overturned because of clear evidence of abuse.

Why did Twitter pick this Trump tweet to fact check? Over the last few years, he has posted a number of tweets that probably deserved to be evaluated by Twitter more than this one.

Twitter handed to the president more evidence that the Big Tech companies are out to get him and his followers. They could have let the president’s critics counter his comments. But Twitter decided to put on a striped shirt and play umpire.

That’s why President Trump signed an executive order that allows the government to evaluate the legal protections in the Communications Decency Act. The order will be challenged in court and isn’t even supported by some of the president’s conservative followers. But it has raised the stakes in the debate about the influence of Big Tech.