Trump’s tweets have no legal force

chuckpeterson · Jul 3, 2019

Trump’s tweets have no legal force

Our government must ignore Trump’s tweets; they are not a legal means for the President to make Presidential acts.

If a President wants to make a presidential act lawful he/she must present this act in righting with his/her signature at the bottom with a valid date. In some cases, a witness must be included with signature.

Otherwise; trump’s babbling mumbo jumbo is just that, crapola; and nothing more

Anyone here care to agree/disagree-?

Not David · Jul 3, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
Trump’s tweets have no legal force

Our government must ignore Trump’s tweets; they are not a legal means for the President to make Presidential acts.

If a President wants to make a presidential act lawful he/she must present this act in righting with his/her signature at the bottom with a valid date. In some cases, a witness must be included with signature.

Otherwise; trump’s babbling mumbo jumbo is just that, crapola; and nothing more

Anyone here care to agree/disagree-?

Agree, social media is not equivalent to laws.

FaithLife1 · Jul 3, 2019

Yes I agree, and I'm sure he has to and does so.

Hammster · Jul 3, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
Trump’s tweets have no legal force

Our government must ignore Trump’s tweets; they are not a legal means for the President to make Presidential acts.

If a President wants to make a presidential act lawful he/she must present this act in righting with his/her signature at the bottom with a valid date. In some cases, a witness must be included with signature.

Otherwise; trump’s babbling mumbo jumbo is just that, crapola; and nothing more

Anyone here care to agree/disagree-?

I agree, which I why I’ve said that he should be able to block whomever he wants.

dzheremi · Jul 3, 2019

I agree, but the problem is in getting him to see that and care about it, and restrain himself accordingly.

Ringo84 · Jul 3, 2019

Should be obvious to everyone. Even people here who support him agree with that.

Rare moment of bipartisanship. I think it's disturbing that Twit has been used as a political platform. Social media is one of the last things I can think of where I want political business to be transacted - from either side.
Ringo

gYx · Jul 4, 2019

Legal-wise is merely based on earthly/human perception

You have to understand there's only one law, the law of God that governs all laws in this universe

Trump is guided by a divine force because he's doing the right thing for this country and rest of the world

Arcangl86 · Jul 4, 2019

I'm not aware of anybody ever claiming that Trump's tweets had legal force.

Hammster · Jul 4, 2019

Arcangl86 said:
I'm not aware of anybody ever claiming that Trump's tweets had legal force.

There was a big stink from some who he blocked because they said his tweets were official in capacity, and they had know ability for redress.

Arcangl86 · Jul 4, 2019

Hammster said:
There was a big stink from some who he blocked because they said his tweets were official in capacity, and they had know ability for redress.

Oh, they are official. The White House has even said they are official communications. That is not the same thing as saying they have legal force. The President announcing something in a press conference has no legal force, but it is still an official communication.

chuckpeterson · Jul 5, 2019

gYx said:
Trump is guided by a divine force because he's doing the right thing for this country and rest of the world

Now gyx ---
Bow before me

I, master Trump has spoken

chuckpeterson · Jul 5, 2019

Arcangl86 said:
I'm not aware of anybody ever claiming that Trump's tweets had legal force.

21 of Trump's tweets were acted on my his administration calling his tweets "executive orders--
You need to take a step back and rethink what the OP is really all about.

We are not talking about a “tweet” by anyone who just may have an opinion; one way or another.

This is about the President of the USA who “tweets” something and his administration carries out this tweet as if it is an executive order enforceable by law.

A “tweet” is not an executive order.

In the United States, an executive order is a directive issued by the president of the United States that manages operations of the federal government and has the force of law.[1] The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple sources. Article Two of the United States Constitution gives the president broad executive and enforcement authority to use their discretion to determine how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).[2]
Executive order - Wikipedia

A tweet is just a fart in the wind; not a law & Trumps tweets stink like dog farts

Arcangl86 · Jul 5, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
21 of Trump's tweets were acted on my his administration calling his tweets "executive orders--
You need to take a step back and rethink what the OP is really all about.

We are not talking about a “tweet” by anyone who just may have an opinion; one way or another.

This is about the President of the USA who “tweets” something and his administration carries out this tweet as if it is an executive order enforceable by law.

A “tweet” is not an executive order.

In the United States, an executive order is a directive issued by the president of the United States that manages operations of the federal government and has the force of law.[1] The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple sources. Article Two of the United States Constitution gives the president broad executive and enforcement authority to use their discretion to determine how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).[2]
Executive order - Wikipedia

A tweet is just a fart in the wind; not a law & Trumps tweets stink like dog farts

Uh, the President doesn't need to issue an Executive Order for his staff to take action. He just needs to issue it for it to have binding effect on entitites outside his office.

chuckpeterson · Jul 7, 2019

Sooner or later someone is going to hack the computer tweeting process and fake a “trump” tweet & that tweet will inflame the public. Over 50% will believe it came from trump. Then a second tweet and a third and before you know it; we are heading blindly into world war three.

Just an opinion

-

Stormy · Jul 8, 2019

Trumps tweets were never intended to be actual policy put into action.

Trumps tweets are messages to the people! Truth to take down fake news. But also messages of policy that will be enacted!

Do not take his tweets lightly!

Mountainmanbob · Jul 9, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
Trump’s tweets have no legal force

Our government must ignore Trump’s tweets; they are not a legal means for the President to make Presidential acts.

If a President wants to make a presidential act lawful he/she must present this act in righting with his/her signature at the bottom with a valid date. In some cases, a witness must be included with signature.

Otherwise; trump’s babbling mumbo jumbo is just that, crapola; and nothing more

Anyone here care to agree/disagree-?

Nope no legal force but, they sure do seem to carry some weight?
M-Bob

Stormy · Jul 10, 2019

I follow President Trump. I get his tweets as soon as he hits send.
In a world full of fake media it is good to hear directly from my President!

Do they hate it? Sure they do! Will he stop? Never!
So you talk about legal force?
No, they are not legal... But they are lethal!
With a tweet Trump gets his message across!

We have never had a president that is this close to his people!

Thank God for President Trump!

Mountainmanbob · Jul 10, 2019

Stormy said:
In a world full of fake media it is good to hear directly from my President!
Will he stop? Never!
No, they are not legal... But they are lethal!
We have never had a president that is this close to his people!
Thank God for President Trump!

Couldn't agree more.
M-Bob

chuckpeterson · Jul 10, 2019

“When you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump says in the recording, which was obtained by the Washington Post and released on Friday. “You can do anything.”

Trump, in a 2005 conversation with a television host that was caught on a live microphone, describes a failed seduction, saying: “I did try and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] her, she was married,” and says that when he meets beautiful women he feels able to “grab them by the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]”.

“You can do anything,” he tells Billy Bush, the TV host who is a cousin of George W and Jeb Bush.

On Friday night, amid a storm of condemnation and disavowals by other Republicans, Trump released a video statement in which he made an almost unprecedented apology.

“I said it. I am wrong. I apologize”.

'You can do anything': Trump brags on tape about using fame to get women

This is our President of the USA and some here love him
sick

The Barbarian · Jul 10, 2019

The President has had some bad news from the courts, again...

Trump Can’t Block Critics From His Twitter Account, Appeals Court Rules
The decision may have broader implications for how the First Amendment applies to officials’ accounts in the social-media era.

WASHINGTON — President Trump has been violating the Constitution by blocking people from following his Twitter account because they criticized or mocked him, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday. The ruling could have broader implications for how the First Amendment applies to the social-media era.

Because Mr. Trump uses Twitter to conduct government business, he cannot exclude some Americans from reading his posts — and engaging in conversations in the replies to them — because he does not like their views, a three-judge panel on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York, ruled unanimously.

The ruling was one of the highest-profile court decisions yet in a growing constellation of cases addressing what the First Amendment means in a time when political expression increasingly takes place online. It is also a time, Judge Barrington D. Parker wrote, when government conduct is subject to a “wide-open, robust debate” that “generates a level of passion and intensity the likes of which have rarely been seen.”

The First Amendment prohibits an official who uses a social media account for government purposes from excluding people from an “otherwise open online dialogue” because they say things that the official finds objectionable, Judge Parker wrote.

“This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing,” the judge wrote. “In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less.”
Trump Can’t Block Critics From His Twitter Account, Appeals Court Rules

Trump’s tweets have no legal force

Well-Known Member

I'm back!

Active Member

Psalm 144:1

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Separation of Church and State expert

Member

Newbie

Psalm 144:1

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

Goat Whisperer

Senior Contributor

Goat Whisperer

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Similar threads