Deacfreak07
Ain't played nobody, PAWL!
Sailor, how do you feel about this tweet?
The irony of a citizen (the president no less) expressing through his freedom of speech that flag burning should lead to a loss of the citizenship that protects that first amendment right is pretty astounding.
How about, rather than ban or imprison those citizens, we try and have a country where people choose not to burn our flags.
Just bring in President Pence. Im sorry LGBTQ community. We'll keep fighting.
Sailor, how do you feel about this tweet?
Not particularly a fan of flag burning. In his tweets, in as much as I can determine, not being on twitter either, Trump overstates things quite regularly. I don't think he should be taken literally but rather his exaggerations simply reflect that he feels strongly about the issue, and that's probably the way his voters understand it. But I am just guessing here.
I might also add that the SC has permitted flag burning, so that is the law of the land until the decision is reversed. I think Trump probably knows that; on the other hand, someone, who approves the burning of the flag, probably should not try to be POTUS.
Question for you lawyers out there: couldn't flag burning be interpreted as hate speech, even a hate crime? Why, or why not?
While I know this tweet is likely just trying to distract from something, the idea of a PEOTUS even joking about revoking citizenship as a punishment for something worries me a little. Maybe I'm just being too PC though.
Really, you think he knows this?
The point isn't whether or not you think flag burning is good or bad, but rather the fact that the PEOTUS either doesn't know or doesn't care about the SCOTUS ruling on the matter.
Really, you think he knows this?
The point isn't whether or not you think flag burning is good or bad, but rather the fact that the PEOTUS either doesn't know or doesn't care about the SCOTUS ruling on the matter.
Not particularly a fan of flag burning. In his tweets, in as much as I can determine, not being on twitter either, Trump overstates things quite regularly. I don't think he should be taken literally but rather his exaggerations simply reflect that he feels strongly about the issue, and that's probably the way his voters understand it. But I am just guessing here.
I might also add that the SC has permitted flag burning, so that is the law of the land until the decision is reversed. I think Trump probably knows that; on the other hand, someone, who approves the burning of the flag, probably should not try to be POTUS.
Question for you lawyers out there: couldn't flag burning be interpreted as hate speech, even a hate crime? Why, or why not?
Trumps tweet is hideously embarrassing for someone who is going to be our president. It is the exact reason why he should have never been elected. He is like a petulant child who thinks he can do and say whatever he wants without consequences. This is probably because he has spent his entire life without consequences for poor actions. What an idiot.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Trumps tweet is hideously embarrassing for someone who is going to be our president. It is the exact reason why he should have never been elected. He is like a petulant child who thinks he can do and say whatever he wants without consequences. This is probably because he has spent his entire life without consequences for poor actions. What an idiot.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#@ is how his buddy Putin tells him that it works.
Trump tweets stupid shit to distract the media and divert their attention away from real stories like his conflicts of interest around the world.
OH LOOK A SHINY OBJECT! Never mind about that real news we were about to talk about...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/us/politics/donald-trump-international-business.html?_r=0
So in your world, someone who supports the 1st Amendment and the SC shouldn't be POTUS.
You've posted some whoppers, but this one has to be Top 5.
"Can you believe there really are aliens at Area 51. Been there the whole time! Build a space wall!"
Lots of presidents have had disagreements with interpretations of the Supreme Court. Indeed, we have probably never had a president who has agreed with every single interpretation of the court. It's not capital crime to disagree with some Supreme Court decisions, including some concerning the First Amendment. Indeed, disagreeing with the SC from time to time is as American as apple pie.