its not really much of anything, tbh.

I mean, the first amendment is the right to speak, not the right to be heard wherever you choose.

Dosent help that some of these so called journalists are making a living of peddling this shite. They tried this before with trump interfering with their livelyhood since they get all their traffic from there.

You have a link to teh ruling on hand?

yes, but can you reply to tweets of people who have you blocked?

That is not the presidential twitter page.

This is Donald Trump's own twitter page.

i mean, it is. At what point while being POTUS, is trump not POTUS?

yes, its not the official white house presidential twitter. but it is the presidents twitter

It's Donald Trump's twitter.

Trump just happens to be the president.

He does not use that twitter to make state addresses.

yes, so while he is president, he counts as the government

He's got several other established medium for that.

So, does a Judge count as the government as well?

Congressman? Senator? Mayor? Sheriff? Dog Catcher?

At what point do we draw the line between someone being an individual in power

and someone being the power they hold?

That was my question

I have NEVER considered the president of the United States to be the government.

Was wondering if they made it clear where it stops in the ruling

I have considered them to be the custodian of it.

This judgement is reaching.

If the president uses his privilege to broadcast a message over the television

Private citizens are NOT entitled to broadcast their own replies.

Still, what can the judge do? Force him to unblock them?

okay, so it would be fine for the president, as a private citizen, to use their own money to hire private security to silence certain people? I mean, its not the government then. He is not, necessarily, using any government power, only the power he wields as a private citizen right?

where do we draw the line?

when does his actions as a private citizen then suddenly cross the line?

Define silence?

Because when you put it that way, that sounds like hiring a hitman.

which is illegal anyway.

no, prevent from speaking

now allow them into a place "open to the public"

lets say some other place that is designated a public forum

That's a poor point.

Like forcfully holding them?

If Trump has a state of the union address

He actually DOES have a security force

that stops people from coming up and using the podium for a rebuttal.

law and the constitution dictates that the government cannot prevent people from going to an open public form