Fogbow

Suranis wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 5:05 am They were not on the official POTUS twitter account. So fuck him.

White House: Trump’s tweets are ‘official statements’

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Tuesday President Donald Trump’s tweets are indeed official statements.

“The President is the President of the United States, so they’re considered official statements by the President of the United States,” Spicer said, when asked during his daily briefing how they should be characterized. Spicer did not indicate whether that included both of the President’s Twitter handles: @realDonaldTrump and @POTUS.

Spicer, who fields a lot of questions about the meaning of the President’s tweets, was asked if Trump undermines his own agenda-setting when he tweets. On Monday, for example, rather than focusing on his administration’s planned roll out of a week focused on infrastructure, Trump knocked his Justice Department’s handing of his travel ban in the wake of a terrorist attack in London.

“The President is the most effective messenger on his agenda,” Spicer said. He then touted Trump’s 110 million followers across social media platforms.

“And the same people critiquing his use of it now critiqued it during the election and it turned out pretty well for him,” Spicer said.

After his aides rolled out a week on infrastructure rebuilding, the President has undercut their messages and briefings, taking to social media to admonish the “MSM” (mainstream media) and call forcefully for a travel ban from certain countries.

In a follow-up question, another reporter asked about the ACLU’s tweet that they will use the President’s tweets in building a case in the Supreme Court: “Yes, we may incorporate @realDonaldTrump’s tweets about the ban into our Supreme Court argument.”

“We’ve made it clear that the danger is real the law is clear, and there is no question that we should prevail,” Spicer said.

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 3:49 am Since when were tweets out of the WH to solve a pre-presidency problem suddenly to become an "official act"

Trump's lawyers say "official-acts evidence" was used to fill "glaring holes."

Former President Donald Trump has asked a New York judge to dismiss his criminal hush money case and vacate his conviction on 34 felony counts by arguing the trial was "tainted" by evidence and testimony that the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on presidential immunity now makes off-limits.

In a 52-page filing made public on the same day the former president was originally scheduled to be sentenced, Trump's lawyers argued that prosecutors violated the Supreme Court's immunity doctrine by using evidence related to official acts -- including testimony from former White House aides-- to fill "glaring holes in their case."

"Because of the implications for the institution of the Presidency, the use of official-acts evidence was a structural error under the federal Constitution that tainted [the District Attorney's] grand jury proceedings as well as the trial," defense lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote.

* * *

The Manhattan district attorney's office, which was given until July 24 to respond in writing, has not commented on the filing.

Defense attorneys emphasized the importance of former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks' testimony, including her recounting of interactions with Trump in 2018 when reporting about an alleged hush-money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels broke, to demonstrate Trump's knowledge of the payment and preference the story came out after the election.

Trump's lawyers argued that Hicks' testimony was "categorically inadmissible" because she was advising Trump on his official communications, and the Supreme Court's ruling placed limits on the use of testimony from presidential advisors related to official acts.

"This testimony concerned efforts by President Trump to work with Hicks to use the 'long-recognized aspect of Presidential power' known as the 'bully pulpit' to 'persuade Americans, including by speaking forcefully or critically, in ways that the President believes would advance the public interest,'" the filing said.

Defense lawyers used a similar argument to argue that tweets from Trump -- which prosecutors used to demonstrate an alleged "pressure campaign" to prevent former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen from cooperating with authorities in 2018 -- were official communications protected by immunity because the posts "fall well within the core authority of the Nation's Chief Executive."

Trump's lawyers also argued that the Manhattan district attorney's case theory required jurors to assess Trump's motive to actions while serving as president -- an inquiry that the Supreme Court prohibited in their ruling.

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2024 9:13 pm Oh, for fucks sake, when did paying off a porn star to keep her from telling her (Really Disgusting) story to the press become an official presidential act?

bob wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2024 9:20 pm I expect the judge to rule "even assuming the first point is true, the second point isn't." DENNIED.

TheNewSaint wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 5:12 pm

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 3:49 am Since when were tweets out of the WH to solve a pre-presidency problem suddenly to become an "official act"

Since July 1, 2024.

RVInit wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2024 8:54 am I would argue that the White House and POTUS have an actual official account to use for official business. Trump used his personal Twitter account, which seems to suggest that he wasn't intended any of those tweets to be taken as official presidential spewings.

June 6, 2017 5:56 PM EDT President Donald Trump considers his tweets to be official White House statements, according to Press Secretary Sean Spicer.

When asked at a press briefing whether Trump’s tweets qualify as official statements on behalf of the White House, Spicer said that he “is the President of the United States, so they’re considered official statements by the President of the United States.”

The reporter then inquired if Trump is concerned that his tweets could be used against him in matters like the proposed travel ban. On Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said on Twitter that it might include Trump’s tweets about the ban in their Supreme Court argument. The ACLU was referencing a series of tweets from the president on Saturday in which he reiterated his definition of the executive order as a “ban,” rather than the “vetting system” label Spicer gave it earlier this year.

“I think we’ve made it clear with respect that the court should follow the law,” Spicer replied. “And I think the danger is real, the law is clear, and there’s no question that we should prevail at the Supreme Court.”

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

New:

Trump’s lawyers asked to renew two of their failed requests to recuse Justice Merchan in his New York criminal case.

Prosecutors denounced their “vexatious and frivolous attempt” to revive efforts repeatedly rejected by the trial and appellate courts.

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2024 2:37 pm For the benefit of those who lack the bandwidth to dive deeper here, was there any *attempt* at a substantive reason for the review/appeal/replay?