Senior Member
I heard a good discussion on this on NPR yesterday. On the one hand the Presidents use of twitter one could argue is like a town hall meeting where 1st amendment rights should be enforced. On the other some argue that its his personal twitter account and he should be able to block anyone he wants. This could get interesting in terms of the SCOTUS and the use of social media by Pols in the context of 1st amendment issues.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...jTM/story.html
One can be sure that he who says he knows knows nothing
DGUtley (11-08-2017)
Senior Member
Why would SCOTUS be involve?. If it's his personal account he decides. If it's a government account he can't block.Originally Posted by ripmeister
Awards:
tPF Moderator
What if he is making "presidential statements" on said personal account? Capt, I don't know the answer, but it's an interesting issue.
Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes
Senior Member
As DG said what questions are raised when POTUS uses his personal account to make political statements as Trump has done. I simply mentioned SCOTUS because of the possibility this could go that far. If you read the article it raises these questions not only in terms of Trump but politicians and there use of social media.
One can be sure that he who says he knows knows nothing
Advisor
If a politician, including the POTUS, makes a statement in social media, is it official? I suspect that it is, because despite being members of a party or otherwise using official methods of conveying information, each politician's words, no matter where stated are representations of their official positions as an elected representative unless they include a disclaimer. So even if they completely misrepresent an issue because they lack sufficient information, those statements stand and those politicians who have the temerity to simply shoot from the lip without taking the time to ensure that they are not making unfounded statements deserve every bit of criticism that they receive. Were Trump to even imply a state of war with another nation over Twitter, that nation would have every right to take the comment as official.
In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.
"The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
Mahatma Gandhi
Senior Member
Unsigned documents carry no weight. He can verbally order a Secretary to do something but a tweet is not anything official. Remember the ban on transgenders. It can't happen without a direct order or a signed order. I've never heard anyone say differently but maybe they are being quiet until it becomes an issue.
Senior Member
You're wrong in every way. Nice backdoor attack though.
Senior Member
As President trump is in a class different than the average citizen. In his tweets there is a potential for the revelation of secret data and very sensitive issues. I think he should have to route all his tweets through the FBI before they are posted or abandon the practice entirely.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I digress....
nic34 (11-09-2017)
Senior Member
I believe you are making statements that are potentially erroneous. Dave Utley is an attorney and he doesn't know the answer. I'll go with that.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I digress....
Banned
You do know the answer. If that were Obama you'd be calling it "our twitter account."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote