7 ms·

What are "official accounts", may still be up for some debate? Both Trump and AOC were sued for blocking people on Twitter. I understand that if you manage the

What are "official accounts", may still be up for some debate? Both Trump and AOC were sued for blocking people on Twitter. I understand that if you manage the Twitter account of the Department of Blank, that you may be prevented from blocking citizens, but for Trump and AOC, were the accounts in question not as much a personal account as anything else?

krapp 3y ago
Obviously @realDonaldTrump is a personal account and @POTUS is the account representing the office of President. But as far as I know, Trump never touched the official White House account, and mistrusted the press, and used his personal account as a primary source of communication, which is why the courts ruled as they did in his case. Being denied access to Trump's personal account became a Constitutional issue because of the way Trump was using it. If you do business on a personal account, at some point that's now a business account. I don't know about AOC but I assume the same situation applies.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  The obvious fix to that would be to introduce a law mandating that communication with the general public by a government official has to be made on government-provided/managed social media and email accounts. Using "private" accounts to bypass legal requirements (archival, monitoring, insider trading, or blocking political opponents/critical citizens) should result in getting immediately booted from office. Even if it's the President.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    Yeah, it's like running an email server in your basement, or bringing your laptop in for repair.
    - orwin 3y ago
      agree for the first (Clinton got out easy imho, but as i understand, Republicans were afraid of setting a precedent), hard disagree on the second. Unless you think you can use politician children against them.
      - Akronymus 3y ago
        [flagged]
        krapp 3y ago
        If that were actually the case, the Republicans would be impeaching him with it as we speak. Fox News and all the right-leaning press would be running wall to wall coverage on it. It's getting pathetic at this point. Hunter Biden's laptop isn't going to take down the Biden administration. It isn't going to be Biden's Watergate. It isn't going to get Trump another term. Find something real that actually sticks.
      - krapp 3y ago
        It's become an autonomic response on HN at this point, if one mentions Trump in any capacity other than ebullient praise, the Trumpists show up to spread insinuations about the Bidens and Hillary Clinton. I guess in their heads somehow that "wins" the argument every time.
        reportgunner 3y ago
        I don't think anyone wins in that argument.
        krapp 3y ago
        realistically, if they manage to derail the thread, they win.
      - r3trohack3r 3y ago
        I’m hesitant to comment on this because we are so far off topic. But I’m not sure this is the take I would have on Hunter Biden. > Unless you think you can use politician children against them. As a senator, Joseph Biden went through tough on crime phases and his hands are not clean in the war on drugs. There are a lot of single family houses in the U.S. whose children grew up talking to dad through a plexiglass window, all over hookers and powder. These policies have ruined families, ruined childhoods, and destroyed communities. And Senator Joseph Biden was, and continues to be, a part of that damage by shaping the policies that sent dads to jail. Then hookers and powder show up on his back porch. Now it’s a different story. His grandchildren don’t have to talk to dad through a plexiglass window. His grandchildren don’t have to grow up in a single parent household. I’m not saying we should do that to his grandchildren, that would be awful. I’m saying send those dads you locked up for hookers and powder home to their families.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      For what it's worth, compliance with basic ethics of governance should not be a partisan topic. Clinton, Biden and Trump all fucked up massively (and Trump, most obviously, the hardest). Neither of the three should be in any position of power any more, alone because of the precedent that Biden and Trump's laissez-faire attitude towards top secret documents set for the lower rungs - after all, why not take top secret documents home and share them with others when Trump (most likely) did the same?
- danaris 3y ago
  Furthermore, for Trump, literally every American was his constituent. Blocking any of them is clearly a violation. For AOC, her constituents are New York State's 14th district residents. Anyone beyond that is not someone she's actively representing. Now, does the law make a distinction here? (I'm genuinely asking; I'm unfamiliar with the specific statute.) If it does, then unless AOC was actually blocking a resident of her district, the situations are clearly different.
rcme 3y ago
I don't think it's a question of "official" vs. "personal" accounts. It's like if you use a personal email at work, you're still subject to regulatory information withholding guidelines. Using a personal account to conduct official business doesn't magically absolve you of your responsibilities under the law. If you use your personal Twitter account to talk with friends and personal interests, then go ahead and block whomever. But if you use your personal account for official business, e.g. to discuss your administration's policies and priorities, then you're acting in an official capacity and should not be allowed to block citizens.

krapp 3y ago

Obviously @realDonaldTrump is a personal account and @POTUS is the account representing the office of President. But as far as I know, Trump never touched the official White House account, and mistrusted the press, and used his personal account as a primary source of communication, which is why the courts ruled as they did in his case. Being denied access to Trump's personal account became a Constitutional issue because of the way Trump was using it. If you do business on a personal account, at some point that's now a business account. I don't know about AOC but I assume the same situation applies.

mschuster91 3y ago
The obvious fix to that would be to introduce a law mandating that communication with the general public by a government official has to be made on government-provided/managed social media and email accounts. Using "private" accounts to bypass legal requirements (archival, monitoring, insider trading, or blocking political opponents/critical citizens) should result in getting immediately booted from office. Even if it's the President.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  Yeah, it's like running an email server in your basement, or bringing your laptop in for repair.
  - orwin 3y ago
    agree for the first (Clinton got out easy imho, but as i understand, Republicans were afraid of setting a precedent), hard disagree on the second. Unless you think you can use politician children against them.
    - Akronymus 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - krapp 3y ago
        If that were actually the case, the Republicans would be impeaching him with it as we speak. Fox News and all the right-leaning press would be running wall to wall coverage on it. It's getting pathetic at this point. Hunter Biden's laptop isn't going to take down the Biden administration. It isn't going to be Biden's Watergate. It isn't going to get Trump another term. Find something real that actually sticks.
    - krapp 3y ago
      It's become an autonomic response on HN at this point, if one mentions Trump in any capacity other than ebullient praise, the Trumpists show up to spread insinuations about the Bidens and Hillary Clinton. I guess in their heads somehow that "wins" the argument every time.
      - reportgunner 3y ago
        I don't think anyone wins in that argument.
        krapp 3y ago
        realistically, if they manage to derail the thread, they win.
    - r3trohack3r 3y ago
      I’m hesitant to comment on this because we are so far off topic. But I’m not sure this is the take I would have on Hunter Biden. > Unless you think you can use politician children against them. As a senator, Joseph Biden went through tough on crime phases and his hands are not clean in the war on drugs. There are a lot of single family houses in the U.S. whose children grew up talking to dad through a plexiglass window, all over hookers and powder. These policies have ruined families, ruined childhoods, and destroyed communities. And Senator Joseph Biden was, and continues to be, a part of that damage by shaping the policies that sent dads to jail. Then hookers and powder show up on his back porch. Now it’s a different story. His grandchildren don’t have to talk to dad through a plexiglass window. His grandchildren don’t have to grow up in a single parent household. I’m not saying we should do that to his grandchildren, that would be awful. I’m saying send those dads you locked up for hookers and powder home to their families.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    For what it's worth, compliance with basic ethics of governance should not be a partisan topic. Clinton, Biden and Trump all fucked up massively (and Trump, most obviously, the hardest). Neither of the three should be in any position of power any more, alone because of the precedent that Biden and Trump's laissez-faire attitude towards top secret documents set for the lower rungs - after all, why not take top secret documents home and share them with others when Trump (most likely) did the same?
danaris 3y ago
Furthermore, for Trump, literally every American was his constituent. Blocking any of them is clearly a violation. For AOC, her constituents are New York State's 14th district residents. Anyone beyond that is not someone she's actively representing. Now, does the law make a distinction here? (I'm genuinely asking; I'm unfamiliar with the specific statute.) If it does, then unless AOC was actually blocking a resident of her district, the situations are clearly different.

rcme 3y ago

I don't think it's a question of "official" vs. "personal" accounts. It's like if you use a personal email at work, you're still subject to regulatory information withholding guidelines. Using a personal account to conduct official business doesn't magically absolve you of your responsibilities under the law. If you use your personal Twitter account to talk with friends and personal interests, then go ahead and block whomever. But if you use your personal account for official business, e.g. to discuss your administration's policies and priorities, then you're acting in an official capacity and should not be allowed to block citizens.