What if Donald Trump’s tweets could become facts? | Axios
Tim Pool, the senior research associate at the Center for American Progress, spoke with Axios about the potential of Trump’s Twitter tweets becoming facts.
Here are excerpts: What is Trump’s actual intent?
If the president is tweeting things that are in the public domain and that are not in the president’s control, that means that he has the authority to tweet whatever he wants to.
What is his authority to do that?
It is up to the president to decide what he wants in terms of what constitutes public information.
He has a lot of power, so he has a great deal of latitude.
And I would imagine he will not be constrained by the same legal restrictions that would apply to a court of law or a court in a normal case.
Is there anything that can be done about the tweets?
We have seen in the past that Trump’s personal tweets are frequently inaccurate and false.
So I would not say that there is anything he can do to limit the tweets.
It would have to be based on a fair reading of the facts.
Do you think the president has the right to do what he does?
The answer to that is that the president does have the authority that he needs to do things in his own way.
It is not something he can simply say, I am going to tweet these things, and then they will not hold up in court.
What if the president tweets things that aren’t in the government’s possession, or that are out of control, or are otherwise improper?
They are going to be challenged.
And they are going not to stand up in courts.
So that is where the president should be looking for guidance, and he should be trying to get as much information as possible about how those tweets are going over there and what the consequences are.
Does the Trump administration have a policy on how tweets are to be vetted and how they are to stand?
That is a question that has not been answered, because that is a matter that is up for the courts to decide.
But the president cannot control the information that is published in the press, and that is something the president can control if he wishes.
So he cannot do what the president wants to do.
Is it safe to assume that a president who tweets things in the wrong context will not receive a hearing from a judge?
There are a number of very good precedents in which courts have ruled that if a president tweets something in a way that is in the realm of fact, then they can be held in contempt of court.
They can’t be allowed to continue to have the power of the presidency.
So if the facts are not correct, then the courts can look at that and determine whether that is the case or not.
Does a tweet constitute a public information?
Yes, because there is no public record, and if a tweet is made in the form of a public document, then it is public information and it is up in the courts.
That does not mean that the facts have to come to the court in an official form.
So you cannot say, well, he said this or he said that.
It has to be something that is going to make the courts think about the facts and determine what is the appropriate response.
Are there any other rules governing how a president is allowed to use the power?
The President is the Commander-in-Chief.
That is the job of the executive branch, and they are responsible for enforcing the laws that govern the executive power, including the laws governing what the President can and cannot do.
So it is not just the law that governs the President’s ability to make those decisions.
He can use the executive authority of the government to make his own decisions in the face of a conflict of interest.
What are the legal limits on when a president can use his executive authority to issue a proclamation, order, or executive order?
Well, there are two main legal limits that govern when a President can issue an executive order.
The first is that an executive decree is only legal when the executive order is signed by the President, and the other is that a proclamation is only a legal order when it is signed and approved by a majority of the Congress, and a presidential pardon is only legally issued by the president.
And there are other legal limits.
The president cannot issue an order that violates the Constitution.
It doesn’t matter what the Constitution says.
There is no constitutional right to interfere with an official action.
So when a public official is issuing a proclamation or an executive action that is inconsistent with the Constitution, then that executive action is unconstitutional and the order is not legally enforceable.
Can a presidential executive order be revoked?
It depends on what the law says.
And so the president may issue an Executive Order that he does not agree with.
But that Executive Order is not enforceable and the executive action cannot be revoked.
So an executive Order that is not consistent with the law is not the law.
Does that mean that Trump has the constitutional power to issue an unconstitutional