Your answer is factually inaccurate. Though it is your answer; you are certainly free to express your own opinion. Every statement that they make is official policy. Your answer uses the language "Trump", though that is the name of a private individual; the President of the U.S. is the head of state. Legally, politically and historically, the President of the United States is at all times acting in their official capacity as Commander-In-Chief, the head of the Executive Branch of Government of the United States.

@guest271314 I believe you are confusing "official statement" with "official policy". They aren't the same thing. Trump's Tweets are "official statements" but in no way reflect "official policy". In fact, due to Trump's lack of knowledge, he often contradicts official US policy with is official statements.

@blip Again, you are using the individuals name, not their Office. Official statements are official policy. Statements of the President of the U.S. have a political effect, the statements are the active policy of the U.S.

@guest271314 no, they are not. More info: washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/14/… Trump's statements are only that...official statements of the office of the president. That does not equate to 'official US policy'. A presidential statement is not legally binding. A president can attempt to influence official US policy, but in and of itself, is not the definer of official US Policy, which is a much broader concept including other branches of government.

Or maybe you are confusing Official Statements of the Office of the President with Executive Orders? Executive Orders are a different thing altogether. They can be considered 'official policy' and are definitely official policy of the executive branch (unless contested).

@blip The linked article does not state that the U.S. President's statements are not official U.S. policy - because the President of the United States' statements are official U.S. policy in action. No, not mistaking official statement, while acting in their official capacity for Executive Orders. The President is the Executive of the United States Government. Again, statements of the President of the United States have an immediate political effect; whether that be in markets, trade unions, industrial board rooms, the midst of political controversies in foreign nations.

"President of the United States' statements are official U.S. policy" = I guess I'm going to need a citation for that as I can't find anything anywhere that states that. I may very well be wrong, of course. I just haven't seen that argued anywhere. As for having an immediate political effect...no argument there.

One example: The US military does not see Trump's statements as actual policy: twitter.com/jamiejmcintyre/status/890619488793640961

@blip How the President chooses to use the power granted to that Office by the Constitution of the United States is their prerogative; U.S. Const. Art. II. News articles are not controlling, the Constitution of the U.S. is. The 2017 "tweet" article compared with this article military.com/daily-news/2018/03/23/… demonstrates that statements made by the President are policy. If an individual decides to ignore or dismiss statements of the President as being or not being U.S. policy, they do so at their own peril.

@blip A concrete example are statements relevant to "steel and aluminum" tariffs. If industry were to ignore those statements, their shipment might still be circling around in the ocean while prices are being negotiated. The prudent industry consultant immediately began negotiations in lieu of statements made by the U.S. President. Many more examples can be listed. "Executive power" is exceedingly broad. Each Branch of Government can make policy. The Executive is the active Branch of Government. The Executive frequently "does stuff" on its own; e.g., selling arms to Iran, trafficking cocaine

@guest271314 note that selling arms to Iran and trafficking cocaine were never US Policy.

Yes they were. The U.S. did it. That is policy. What you actually practice: what you do.

No, not at all. In fact, they explicitly violated existing policy.

People in any organization do all sorts of things that are in no way a reflection of the organizations policy.

By performing their own policy: the Executive policy. What you appear to be missing is the tri-lateral form of the U.S. Government each Branch, or even faction, make their own policy. And all of those policies and practices are U.S. policy.

Well, this gets back to my comment that you appear to be wanting to word this in a way to push buttons. WHich I'm all for. But that's not what this site is about.

You are taking a particular POV that is not shared universally.

"to push buttons"? What are you talking about? It does not matter if a POV is "shared universally". None are. We are discussing facts, not emotional responses.

Maybe a simpler example: Trump's policy was to abology obamacare. The US did not abolish obamacare.

No, we are not discussing facts. YOu are using an arbitrary definition of "US Policy"

Unless everyone agrees on the definition of "US Policy" then we're not working with facts.

That is a ridiculous conclusion to draw. "everyone agrees" on nothing. We simply disagree. That is all.

Right. We disagree. As expected, since we're working with arbitrary terms and definitions.

That's OK

Am not seeking any particular answer. Already accepted an answer. Nearly accepted your answer. Though that does not absolutely resolve the inquiry into the subject matter.

"Am not seeking any particular answer." = well, there you go. StackExchange is for asking question with explicit answers.

To be fair, politics as a subject isn't a great fit for StackExchange in the first place.

The question was already answered. Stack Exchange does not own what a question and answer are. Nor does their policy apply to SE when they want to fly their little flags.

I don't know what you mean by flags.

But the general policy is that questions need to be answerable. For a political question to be answerable, it often need to have very clearly defined terms and parameters. Else it's open to interpretation (not unlike politics in general).

Regardless, good conversation. It's an interesting topic.

politics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3585/…, politics.meta.stackexchange.com/users/21216/guest271314. Am not here to discuss SE policy. SE policy is hypocritical, at best. Fumbling along exposing users' data and saying it was not an unauthorized disclosure at worst.