What he is saying is against the terms of service. Anyone else would be banned. If anything he is getting special treatment.

And I'm talking about the people that ask for the bans of Trump (not he) but doesn't for other groups/person with equally damaging speech but since it aligns with their beliefs/political orientation they even praise it. It's quite common on Brazilian facebook accounts and movements speaches.

Sure anyone breaching ToS could/should be banned but that is also the freedom of the platform holder to do or not.

Anyway I'm more for letting people speak and show how imbecile they are instead of silencing them.

I think there is a large question of exposure. I personally would support Twitter's decision to fully enforce the rules that they created (which it seems they will not do). However, it should not be expected to see some obscure member of a social group get the same exposure as the President of the United States. Trump has millions upon millions of subscribers and his tweets regularly get featured on major news sites. I couldn't name a single account which breaks the rules in the same manner off the top of my head. Do they exist? I'm sure they do, but it is hard for me to criticize something that I have no experience with...

World Leader. I get it and feel that while it is kind of wrong to allow him to get away with a lot more than other people, a World Leader has earned the right to get away with more than other people.

While I dislike Trump (it is no secret), I do agree with his right to speech on this or any chosen platform. And I would defend his right more than other people's because of his importance to the world.

I think this case isn't one of getting away with more than other guys (although on facebook checked profiles have more tolerance against moderation calls), but that since he is the leader of USA what he says (no matter if harmfull, false or whatever) have enough relevance to the world that all should see for themselves and be informed (it also can become the strongest evidence against a re-election).

Any other hate speech and threats of violence should also be banned.  However, it is natural that people are more concerned with the President of the United states than random people on Facebook.

And if they were tweeting their threats then they should be banned from Twitter too. You could've placed my response there on your own. 

Jeez that really shouldn't have surprised me but it did.. 

But again you're not actually reading what I'm saying. I said that I see hate speech all the time on Facebook without anything being done about it. Not that it doesn't happen. 

Sorry man, but the cases seem over here isn't of the importance of the person but the speach.

We have had people like Boulos and another two that are president of the Landless Workers, National Unions and Homeless Worker saying they middle class should be killed or that if Lula is jailed they will shoot down capitalists or throw brazil on fire, etc... they didn't get any flack on facebook. We have had famous singer saying police should be killed also not be moderated. While we have people saying "I don't like gay people" getting banned in less than 1h after the comment was made.

So the social medias aren't really complying with their ToS at all.

I didn't place your response because my point wasn't about your opinion on all deserving a ban (which is what their ToS would say) against my opinion that all should be allowed to say what they want and if they break a law they should be jailed, I was pointing out that the movements that usually push for the bands of people like Trump would condone Bernie saying something equivalent. But since you didn't agree or disagree with it there was no point putting your response.

What type of hate speech you have been seem not being taken care of at all?

ugh. He wasn't promoting violence. He was trolling Kim and the left. ;-D They can't censor someone that prominent. Sorry.