This week, Donald Trump posted a vituperative tirade on Truth Social, reviving the age-old debate regarding executive versus judicial supremacy. On April 20, 2023, he had made posts about certain policy proposals in very inflammatory terms that resonated with millions of his supporters and critics alike. The comments section turned into a raging battlefield where interpretations of the Constitution clashed with considerable energy and personal attacks, followed by calls for drastic political action.
Advertisement
An interesting diversion duly started with the Trump-legal-system threads. “Says the criminal with 34 felonies…🤣”, shot back @angiedillman22, an apparent reference to Trump’s woes. Such responses became a staple among critics, with @timblaine calling Trump a “traitor,” while @mountaintyme201 repeatedly referred to him as “the felon in the WH.” Supporters were unlikely to see it that way. Polarized the responses remained, as one @ClaytonLatone contended that “100% right. If only more people would think about this for more than 10 seconds, they’d realize this is true.”
Some went on to advance their own positions, with a fair bit of detail regarding the constitutional arguments. @MakeSense71, for example, commented on another post, ‘The (conservative) SCOTUS clearly aren’t the oligarchy Jefferson feared if they can’t even enforce their rulings.’ This comment prompted discussion back and forth about the enforcement powers of the judges versus appropriate executive checks upon judicial overreach.
Others in the fringe spoke the extreme, like @muddewaters, who posited, ‘We need an Executive Order for a National Referendum’ and went on to say this could also include hanging people for voter fraud, ‘Public hanging preferred, but firing squad would do.’ Though remaining somewhat fringe, this extremism signified how acute the rift has gotten.
Many of the commenting parties were considering practical solutions. @brucemc777 asked why Trump should not ‘issue some kind of executive decree stating this as the basis for their having no legal effect’, while @RonaldWatzek laid out the case that Trump was a bad decision-maker because of ‘6 bankruptcies’. Those focused on policy were really confused on how best to deal with what Trump had brought forward about the power dynamics.
Then, there even came intercontinental observations, when @FM_Group_Lt somberly declared ‘Here ends democracy! When single prirc demand…'[sic] while the uncompleted thought left watching users qiuzzling on its intended meaning. The transnational frenzy indicated how Trumpish remarks made on the home front have symphonic resonance elsewhere.
More a snapshot of American politically polarized psychology, around 2025, than anything coherent was the last image to emerge from the confused comments section. “ONE MAN in that swamp is trying,” @Cindyloowho130 said in rebuttal to those who, in seeing Trump as the very face of democratic backsliding, were himself included in the adversarial group. The argument ran to the effect that immigration, reform of the judiciary, and the very existence of the American government were in play: які питання Трампа підняв.
Advertisement
This site on Truth Social, like most things that have to do with Trump, produced more heat than light. One thing it did succeed in demonstrating is that Trump’s statements continue to attract enormous amounts of attention, energizing conversations across the political spectrum years after he left office. With such moments of interaction in the foreground, robust documentary-like accounts overshadowed the all-too-obscure discussion regarding the substance of the constitutional claims being raised.