It wasn't a coup attempt, it was a protest that became a riot.
All this talk of a coup is really quite silly - you can't just break into the Capitol and then start running the country, somehow.
If he did indeed incite a riot (and I personally think he likely did, to some extent), then that is a matter for the actual courts - not the kangaroo courts of the social media giants.
The wider principle here isn't even about Trump really, it's about how much the power of online censorship has become concentrated into a handful of mostly unaccountable companies.
If it was indeed illegal, then Trump should be taken to court for it. If convicted, the judge then has the opportunity to impose specific social media restrictions if, in their judgement, it is proportionate and warranted.
Surely this is fairer than the extrajudicial punishments from these social media giants?
(And this isn't a partisan opinion - I say this as a leftist who despises Trump and his politics.)
Problem not solved. The issue here is the huge amount of power to control online speech that these few companies have gained, with basically no oversight.
Suggesting that people who don't like it should just use something else, doesn't actually address this issue.
It's disgusting how Bush managed to have his reputation laundered since then. If there was any real justice in the world, he'd be on trial for war crimes.
But of course, there isn't. The best we can hope for is that Bush (and Blair) is somehow captured and beheaded by Islamists. It would be a fitting end, not to mention a rare case of terrorism hitting a legitimate and deserving target, rather than some unfortunate member of the public.
The extent to which people and organisations should be permitted private property 'rights' always needs to be weighed up against the public good, and this is no exception.
The point here is the risk of our social communications being concentrated via a few large companies, who have ended up with an enormous amount of power to control speech online globally.
I wonder which other world leaders and government entities will be suspended from Facebook, with the same reasoning.
For example, maybe Israel's leadership should be banned for their frequent propaganda there on why it's actually really great to kill Palestinian civilians because they're all secretly Hamas operatives, somehow.
Though, I expect Facebook singled Trump out as a special case. As awful as he was, there are world leaders out there saying and doing far worse. Perhaps it only counts if it's the USA?