Absurd! We have a First Amendment right to speech, but not a right to force anyone to listen.
-
-
-
I agree, but doesn't that apply more to mute than block?
-
Even the President gets discretion over with whom he communicates outside his official duties. Block vs mute is irrelevant IMHO.
-
If Twitter was being used by President or US govt as an official channel to disseminate public information, then blocking would be improper.
-
It is. He's said so himself on many occasions, and Sean Spicer has reiterated that as well.
-
Would you agree muting is OK tho?
-
Muting allows the communication to still happen and it's still archived.
-
Then that seems fine enough with me!
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I am surprised that
@realDonaldTrump actually has time to read and block#twitter users. Oh, wait, never mind.#Covfefe - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
They have free speech. We have the right to block.
-
Private citizens yes, elected officials no
-
Rubbish.
-
You saying that has exactly zero impact on reality or legality, but thanks for playing!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Blocking any Tweets (except extreme threatening ones) should be unconstitutional.
-
New conversation -
-
-
I don't recall leftist trolls being mentioned in the Constitution. Blocking annoying followers is a feature of Twitter. And non-violent.
-
he is silencing citizens while using, by his own admission, official government communication.
-
No. I'm pretty sure he'sblocking trollslike you.
-
he's blocking people he disagrees with. thats a violation of the 1st amendment.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
