3 ms·
> The constitution makes him the commander in chief and delegates war authority to congress. So yes, in deference to the constitution. > Commander in Chief ≠
by tertius 9y ago
> The constitution makes him the commander in chief and delegates war authority to congress.
So yes, in deference to the constitution.
> Commander in Chief ≠ Command of Twitter. A private entity doesn't have to indulge him and such dissent is protected by the 1st amendment.
I don't know who you're arguing with here.
- SapphireSun 9y agoI think you misunderstood what I meant by allowable. He can legally act using the powers of his office, but we can shun him. It's morally abhorrent and violates international law. It's only in a very limited sense that his behavior is "allowable" even if that sense is the one that ends up mattering practically.
- tertius 9y ago> He can legally act using the powers of his office, but we can shun him. Yes, he has legal rights. And they exist whether I like his actions or not. I don't have those legal rights...