Trump’s tweets have no legal force

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-?

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

I agree, but this is not to say they are of no consequence.

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

What is more important? Actions or words?

Folks who defend Trump usually point to his actions, not his words. Not happy with a lot of his actions either but I think his words are what most have against him.

Is someone claiming you can legislate by tweet?

What's next voting by YouTube!

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

I find it amusing anti-Trumpers are surprised a president's Tweets have no legal force.

OK, that would be news to AOC.

They are recorded as official statement from the president and the White House.
DOJ: Donald Trump’s tweets are ‘official statements of the President’

Regardless of the means by which Don-the-Con made it to a position of power, his words are considered by many of his followers as facts and/or strong suggestions by the man in power.

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

Agree as twitter is not part of law nor the Constitution. Trump uses it to bypass press media as he can say what he wants about whatever he wants.

Daemon Sophic said:

They are recorded as official statement from the president and the White House.
DOJ: Donald Trump’s tweets are ‘official statements of the President’

Regardless of the means by which Don-the-Con made it to a position of power, his words are considered by many of his followers as facts and/or strong suggestions by the man in power.

Click to expand...

Only those statement in the case. Read the case file.

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

Why would anyone think a tweet has legal force to begin with?

If it is, then I think Houston has a problem.

SugarOcean said:

I find it amusing anti-Trumpers are surprised a president's Tweets have no legal force.

Click to expand...

I find it amusing that a Trump minion underestimates the force that the President's tweets do have.

Terry Sampson said:

I find it amusing that a Trump minion underestimates the force that the President's tweets do have.

Click to expand...

Influence is not the same as force of law.

When The Great Orange Sultan tweets the less attuned react, the rest of us laugh at those who do. They hate him and secretly love him, they can't ignore him if they tried.
Trump 2020!

Shad said:

Influence is not the same as force of law.

Click to expand...

You're an attorney lawfully authorized to practice in the U.S., I presume?

Stanyon said:

They hate him and secretly love him, they can't ignore him if they tried.

Click to expand...

Much like the Trumpian obsession with the Maid of NY, AOC, eh?

Terry Sampson said:

Much like the Trumpian obsession with the Maid of NY, AOC, eh?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it an obsession, more of an amusing sideshow every once in a while.

Terry Sampson said:

I find it amusing that a Trump minion underestimates the force that the President's tweets do have.

Click to expand...

I'd rather support my duly elected President than boast as a Seditionist.

Trump's Tweets don't have the power of law. Trump knows that. It only appears to be news to anti-Trumpeters.

Nowhere Man said:

Why would anyone think a tweet has legal force to begin with?

If it is, then I think Houston has a problem.

Click to expand...

It's the new line of assault against Trump. That's all.
Trump took over Obama's Twitter account when he became president.
You know they're desperate , the haters, when they now turn toward the bought and paid for, by HRC, Steele dossier.
When Trump leaves office in 2024 he should have it published in full as the work of fiction it is.
The Bibliography listing every single culprit behind its manufacturer. Right down to the traitors who swore an oath before the FISA court so as to obtain the fraudulently issue wire tap warrant so that Obama could spy on Trump's campaign.
That was desperation at a new low right there. There's multi-felon HRC, a creature BHO claimed was the most qualified candidate to run for the highest office since (the slave owner) Thomas Jefferson.
What an idiot. Jefferson didn't have the criminal history HRC has and yet she's his equal?

But BHO likely figured when gullible Democrats bought that he was a Christian they'd believe anything.
Now, BHO, HRC, and the whole roster of corrupt Democrats who thought they were backing their gravy train candidate and a shoe-in for the office are really ticked off they didn't get their monies worth when she lost.
And they're now out to get their pound of flesh. Because Hillary doesn't give refund$.

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.
And last but not least, Trump's tweets stink like dog sheeeet
just my opinion
-

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

-

james dixon 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-?

Click to expand...

The military already told him so two years ago.

Pentagon takes no steps to enforce Trump's transgender ban
The Pentagon's position underscored how the military, like legal experts, does not consider the president's social media pronouncements to be policy.