• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would Trump Refusing to Answer Press Violate the First?

So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

Yes it's legal. No it's not impeachable.

It's a stupid idea. The press would go after him even more - including press that's been favorable to him.

And voters, if they had any sense whatsoever, would give him a one way ticket out of town at the next election.
 
As long as the GOP and their Con Media allies keep spewing hate at the gays, the Mexicans and Muslims, and the Clintons a good part of the Republican base won't give a damn about Russia, about Trump's lies, or shutting down the press coverage of the WH.

The GOP no longer even needs to govern, all they have to do is push their agenda of hate, and they will get a pass on all their other lies and BS.

Care to actually detail this 'agenda of hate' and perhaps even name a few names of people that are spewing hate at 'gays, Mexicans and muslims?' Or are you just content with letting this sort of vile smear stand? Seriously, when you stupid posts like this you have just admitted that you have no intelligent point to make. Rather than smearing people that fill you with hate and anger, why not just say "I would love to reply to that post, but I have nothing intelligent to say." At least that way you could retain some self respect and be taken seriously as an honest poster.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

Those are NOT questions being asked ! The press happens to be a joke they serve NO purpose .
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

Sorry, dude...if you want to get rid of Trump, you'll have to do it the hard way. Quit being lazy.
 
Why should it be a problem? The press creates its own narrative anyway.

Trump does himself no favors. Someone should take a page out of the HRC campaign playbook and smash his blackberry with a hammer. But Press Conferences are press conferences. Nothing more or less. Hell...its not like the left believes anything that is said there in the first place.
 
Are banks failing Calamity? Is the auto industry going out of business? How about the unemployment rate?

Things are a lot better when Barack was president. I don't know if you remember, our economy collapsed during his presidency.

Do you believe Barack's presidency just popped up out of the ether? You must have never heard of George W Bush and the recession he left behind. :lol:

Both of you are wrong. The housing bubble and burst was/is a result of misguided policy that crossed party lines and crossed several administrations.
 
Where in the U.S.Constitution does it say that the president has to answer any questions?

Fill us in.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

It is clearly legal. He has no obligation to the press only the American people. The press is only one of many conduits he can use for this purpose.
 
3 legal votes here...

What Trump and Congress can't do is pass laws that strip away the 4th estate by violating rights given in the First Amendment.



If Trump shuts down the press interviews and opts for a more... "Ministry of Trump's truth" approach. The ramifications and counter-response would be to invigorate the 4th estate to come after him harder and harder, wanting to break the story, that Trump is so obviously covering up. As well as reflect HORRENDOUSLY on the Republican party causing electoral losses.



They can if they have enough votes to repeal,and/or change the 1st Amendment.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

The first amendment states..."Congress shall not make no law...or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"...

I would say it would be perfectly legal which is completely different from being wise. The press has the freed to print what it wants, ask questions that it wants, etc. I think Trump or any president also has the right to refuse to answer any questions put forth by the press or the media. He can ignore them which is done many times during briefings where it is either announced ahead of time no questions will be taken or the president just leaves or says that is it. Over with.

Press conferences has become a tradition, but nothing in the law or the Constitutions states they must be held legally. Woodrow Wilson held the first presidential press conference. Hoover instituted the press secretary, but daily briefings weren't held then. I can't find when the daily press briefings began, it looks like during Eisenhower or JFK. Also questions by the press at times had to be asked in writing in advance which the press secretary choose which ones to answer and which ones not to.

Cutting the press off from asking questions is legal and Constitutional. But it would be dumber than dirt to do so, not in today's political age.
 
Where in the U.S.Constitution does it say that the president has to answer any questions?

Fill us in.

It is clearly legal. He has no obligation to the press only the American people. The press is only one of many conduits he can use for this purpose.

The first amendment states..."Congress shall not make no law...or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"...

I would say it would be perfectly legal which is completely different from being wise. The press has the freed to print what it wants, ask questions that it wants, etc. I think Trump or any president also has the right to refuse to answer any questions put forth by the press or the media. He can ignore them which is done many times during briefings where it is either announced ahead of time no questions will be taken or the president just leaves or says that is it. Over with.

Press conferences has become a tradition, but nothing in the law or the Constitutions states they must be held legally. Woodrow Wilson held the first presidential press conference. Hoover instituted the press secretary, but daily briefings weren't held then. I can't find when the daily press briefings began, it looks like during Eisenhower or JFK. Also questions by the press at times had to be asked in writing in advance which the press secretary choose which ones to answer and which ones not to.

Cutting the press off from asking questions is legal and Constitutional. But it would be dumber than dirt to do so, not in today's political age.

You all are correct. It's perfectly legal for Trump to shut out the press. My mistake.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

These memes are so transparent. Is there really a belief people are that gullible?

For example, a little blast from the past.....

President Barack Obama has not helda press conference in many months - ABC News

Jan. 14, 2010

There's a tug of war in every administration between the White House and the media that cover it. Reporters want more access and more quality time to question the president, while staffers want to control how the message plays. The two goals are quite often at odds.

In the era of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and blogs, the Obama Administration has been savvy about how it communicates its message and seems to agree with the previous administration on at least one point: Go around the media filter and engage directly with the U.S. public.

At issue is whether the president has an obligation to take questions on a regular basis from the group of reporters that cover him daily. The reporters say yes. The White House says, well, we choose to do that differently.

President Obama has not held a full news conference at the White House since July 22, the night he said that the Cambridge Police "acted stupidly" in the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates.​
 
These memes are so transparent. Is there really a belief people are that gullible?

For example, a little blast from the past.....

President Barack Obama has not helda press conference in many months - ABC News

Jan. 14, 2010

There's a tug of war in every administration between the White House and the media that cover it. Reporters want more access and more quality time to question the president, while staffers want to control how the message plays. The two goals are quite often at odds.

In the era of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and blogs, the Obama Administration has been savvy about how it communicates its message and seems to agree with the previous administration on at least one point: Go around the media filter and engage directly with the U.S. public.

At issue is whether the president has an obligation to take questions on a regular basis from the group of reporters that cover him daily. The reporters say yes. The White House says, well, we choose to do that differently.

President Obama has not held a full news conference at the White House since July 22, the night he said that the Cambridge Police "acted stupidly" in the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates.​

see post 36
 
Care to actually detail this 'agenda of hate' and perhaps even name a few names of people that are spewing hate at 'gays, Mexicans and muslims?' Or are you just content with letting this sort of vile smear stand? Seriously, when you stupid posts like this you have just admitted that you have no intelligent point to make. Rather than smearing people that fill you with hate and anger, why not just say "I would love to reply to that post, but I have nothing intelligent to say." At least that way you could retain some self respect and be taken seriously as an honest poster.

A major problem with Republicans like you today is you refuse to do any research on your own. You sit there and mindlessly get all your info from Fox and Breitbart.

Try doing some of your own homework for ONCE, learn to use Google. It's easy. I'll get you started. Google Gen Flynn, you remember him, Right? He's the guy Trump picked for Security Adviser. Anyway Google him and 'lock her up'. Look at the videos of him leading that chant during the Republican CONVENTION! That's pretty hateful. But I admit it is better than Trump rallies where they were chanting 'lock the bitch up'.

I'm sure you won't see that as hate though, you will see it as a tern of endearment. But it's not.

Have a nice day. I'll let you do some research on the long history of hate the GOP has used against gays.
 
A major problem with Republicans like you today is you refuse to do any research on your own. You sit there and mindlessly get all your info from Fox and Breitbart.

Try doing some of your own homework for ONCE, learn to use Google. It's easy. I'll get you started. Google Gen Flynn, you remember him, Right? He's the guy Trump picked for Security Adviser. Anyway Google him and 'lock her up'. Look at the videos of him leading that chant during the Republican CONVENTION! That's pretty hateful. But I admit it is better than Trump rallies where they were chanting 'lock the bitch up'.

I'm sure you won't see that as hate though, you will see it as a tern of endearment. But it's not.

Have a nice day. I'll let you do some research on the long history of hate the GOP has used against gays.

I have no intention to research your idiotic charges. The idea that you point to chants of 'lock her up' as evidence of hatred is beyond stupid. If you werent so blinded by your partisan hatred and childish anger, you would recognize the fact that the hate is almost completely one sided--that is, coming from hateful leftists like you. Rather than use google to identify imaginary hatred you project upon others, why don't you try a little self-reflection. I suspect t you wont because you would hate what you see.
 
A major problem with Republicans like you today is you refuse to do any research on your own. You sit there and mindlessly get all your info from Fox and Breitbart.

Try doing some of your own homework for ONCE, learn to use Google. It's easy. I'll get you started. Google Gen Flynn, you remember him, Right? He's the guy Trump picked for Security Adviser. Anyway Google him and 'lock her up'. Look at the videos of him leading that chant during the Republican CONVENTION! That's pretty hateful. But I admit it is better than Trump rallies where they were chanting 'lock the bitch up'.

I'm sure you won't see that as hate though, you will see it as a tern of endearment. But it's not.

Have a nice day. I'll let you do some research on the long history of hate the GOP has used against gays.
Goalposts getting heavy?
 
I have no intention to research your idiotic charges. The idea that you point to chants of 'lock her up' as evidence of hatred is beyond stupid. .

Thank you VERY much for proving BOTH of my points.

Good day.
 
The first amendment states..."Congress shall not make no law...or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"...

I would say it would be perfectly legal which is completely different from being wise. The press has the freed to print what it wants, ask questions that it wants, etc. I think Trump or any president also has the right to refuse to answer any questions put forth by the press or the media. He can ignore them which is done many times during briefings where it is either announced ahead of time no questions will be taken or the president just leaves or says that is it. Over with.

Press conferences has become a tradition, but nothing in the law or the Constitutions states they must be held legally. Woodrow Wilson held the first presidential press conference. Hoover instituted the press secretary, but daily briefings weren't held then. I can't find when the daily press briefings began, it looks like during Eisenhower or JFK. Also questions by the press at times had to be asked in writing in advance which the press secretary choose which ones to answer and which ones not to.

Cutting the press off from asking questions is legal and Constitutional. But it would be dumber than dirt to do so, not in today's political age.

You quote is a little confusing, here's a link :Guide to the Constitution
 
He can't stop them from asking. But it would be perfectly legal for him to refuse to answer. But if the administration stops answering questions then I will once again start listening to what the "anonymous sources" say since that will be the only source of information.

To paraphrase Ron White: He has the right to remain silent, but he doesn't have the ability.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. That's it.

What part of that did President Trump not follow?

The press has the right to report what they find, subject to certain limitations. No one is under any obligation to make it easy for them.
 
Thank you VERY much for proving BOTH of my points.

Good day.

Your point was that your political opponents are full of hate. I demonstrated that you are the one full of hate projecting it onto others. Not sure how that proves your point at all.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?
There is no legal requirement that the President of the United States communicate with the press, much less hold press conferences. Setting aside the wisdom of such actions, for the President of the United States, or any member of his administration, to avoid communicating with the press is neither illegal nor unconstitutional. With regards to the press, the First Amendment clearly states only that the U.S. Congress may not create a law abridging the freedom of the press. The press is free to ask questions. That does not mean they are entitled to show up in the White House to ask them. That also does not mean the press is entitled to have their questions answered. Trump's threat, if carried out, would neither injure the First Amendment nor the rest of the Constitution and refusing to answer the questions of the national press corps hardly constitutes impeachable conduct by a federal office holder.
 
He won't last 8 years. Hell, at this rate, I'll be surprised to see him make it through the summer. :lol:

Be prepared for a surprise.
 
So, Trump threatens to cut off the press from asking him questions. Is that even legal? Should he be impeached if he even tries?

I'd say that even a few Republicans will turn on him if he goes there.

The first amendment bans the government from interfering with a free press. It doesn't require it to cooperate with a free press. Incidentally, Trump has not threatened to cut off the press from anything. He has just floated the concept of stopping the daily press briefing and replacing it with a written version. Fussy for the press to be sure but I don't blame him.
 
Back
Top Bottom