The Former Trump Presidency Thread

Tao · Post by **Tao** » Wed May 23, 2018 4:01 pm

Fitzy wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:13 pm
El Guapo wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 2:04 pm
So, unfortunately Trump's personal Twitter feed is clearly government speech and reflects policy decisions by the President of the United States. He might have some kind of argument to the contrary if he limited his tweets to clearly personal matters ("How about American Idol last night, huh?"), but clearly he doesn't do that (e.g., "I hereby demand that an investigation be conducted...", talking about the North Korea summit, etc.). Once the Twitter feed clearly reflects government policy / discussion, it becomes governed by various constitutional and other legal provisions that limit and control the government. And there would be similar constitutional issues if, say, he limited his press briefings only to journalists who are Republicans or conservatives, say. I haven't read the opinion, but I gather that it's saying that him blocking people on Twitter is another version of that - "you can only listen to my government policy pronouncements if you agree with me politically."
I am uneasy with the idea that Trump’s twitter feed is government speech. First, blocking someone doesn’t really stop them. You can easily still read the tweets. It’s an inconvenience to be blocked, but not the same as blocking access to the information. Second, Trump is still an American citizen and person, though I’ll accept arguments contrary to the latter. As such he has the same rights as anyone else to associate with who he wants. I see it more as the president can still do private gatherings and fundraisers during which he can speak on government matters despite those not being open to the public. At least I think he can.

I’d be more sympathetic to the argumement if he took his Twitter feed private and continued to use it to disseminate government information. Since a private Twitter is viewable only by invited people. Though that still bumps into the above idea of the president having privacy and assoiatation rights.

I see it as an outlet where he is able to vent and whine. I doubt he reads responses, so blocking seems pointless, but I think he should have the right to do it. The official government owned communication avenues would be a different story.

I agree with the sentiment of what you wrote and would have +1-ed your post prior to this week. Trump's twitter account has been something of a gray area in my mind and he has skirted the line of private and public speech. When Trump used twitter to make a declarative command that a Federal Agency open an official investigation and said agency used the same medium to respond and affirm an action then, in my mind Trumps twitter became a government channel of communication similar to a memo or email or what have you.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Wed May 23, 2018 4:13 pm

Fitzy wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:42 pm An officer of the federal government, as themselves and not representing the government, can in fact say some individuals are not allowed to address him. Which is what I thought was going on, however I was. clearly wrong. While representing the government, keeping some out is just wrong. Though I’d still argue blocking on twitter is kind of pointless as a means of stopping tweets from being seen and pathetic as the president of the US blocking anyone.

FWIW, you can't block someone on Facebook either. This was written last year, but the case touches on the fact that while blocked people can still see the tweets via workarounds, they can't engage them which is the issue.

Fitzy · Post by **Fitzy** » Wed May 23, 2018 5:11 pm

I surrender! I was wrong. I let my occasionally libertarian belief in privacy and a lack of the full story lead me to the wrong conclusion.

I agree there is compelling evidence that the Twitter feed in question is or should be considered an official government channel of communication.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Wed May 23, 2018 5:26 pm

At one point, Spicer said Trump's twitter blather is considered official White House statements. Although, in typical fashion for this administration, they were sufficiently vague about it to give wiggle room.

"The President is the President of the United States, so they're considered official statements by the President of the United States," Spicer said, when asked during his daily briefing how they should be characterized. Spicer did not indicate whether that included both of the President's Twitter handles: @realDonaldTrump and @POTUS.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed May 23, 2018 5:40 pm

I didn't even know @POTUS was a thing. In any case, it has only about 2,800 tweets (almost all of them, as far as I can see, retweets of official administration announcements or of things Trump posted as @realDonaldTrump) compared to the personal account's 38,000.

@POTUS is almost certainly the responsibility of some WH intern. There's almost no "original content" there.

EDIT: Of course @realDonaldTrump has been tweeting for about 8 years compared to his 1.5 as @POTUS, but it's clear that the former is the one he considers his public voice (and I don't believe he was tweeting at his present rate before 2016).

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Wed May 23, 2018 5:56 pm

They moved everything pre-inauguration over to POTUS44

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Wed May 23, 2018 7:03 pm

YellowKing wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 2:01 pm I'll take the unpopular view of not wanting to see Rip go. You can't debate if everyone agrees, and I think it's valuable to see things from the other side. And at least Rip does post articles and things.

Ignoring people we don't agree with is the entire reason the country is in the state it's in today.

And heck, if you guys were able to convert me, there's hope for anybody.

I will take that side with you so you are not so lonely. I also would add that the piling on Rip while somewhat self-invited at times seems to get personal and cross the CoC. I will not be ignoring him but I will also not have any issues with pointing out his hackery silliness when it is appropriate. I hope others don't block me because I occasionally quote a post.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Wed May 23, 2018 8:57 pm

Enough wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 7:03 pm
YellowKing wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 2:01 pm I'll take the unpopular view of not wanting to see Rip go. You can't debate if everyone agrees, and I think it's valuable to see things from the other side. And at least Rip does post articles and things.

Ignoring people we don't agree with is the entire reason the country is in the state it's in today.

And heck, if you guys were able to convert me, there's hope for anybody.
I will take that side with you so you are not so lonely. I also would add that the piling on Rip while somewhat self-invited at times seems to get personal and cross the CoC. I will not be ignoring him but I will also not have any issues with pointing out his hackery silliness when it is appropriate. I hope others don't block me because I occasionally quote a post.

I'll take it too. If I don't care to engage on the mindless stuff, I won't, but sometimes he'll respond with actual thoughts rather than memes, and I appreciate those times. Additionally, he was kind enough to keep (almost) all of his Hillary memes in the Hillary thread, so I knew not even to go in there when I saw it bump up with a Rip post

.

As to Remus saying it covers the bases on the Trumpian memes, oh lordy. Rip is a freaking pinko-commie socialist lover compared to those depths. Remus - you need to get on the conservative uncle's email forwarding chain, or dive into r/thedonald to really see how screwed up they are, but I don't really recommend it that much.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed May 23, 2018 8:57 pm

El Guapo wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:41 pm
As a side note: Garak is also the best.

You say that as if it’s news. Everyone knows this.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed May 23, 2018 9:42 pm

hepcat wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 8:57 pm
El Guapo wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:41 pm
As a side note: Garak is also the best.
You say that as if it’s news. Everyone knows this.

Agreed. Although really all of the secondary characters were great. (Dukat, Winn, Damar, Martok, etc).

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Wed May 23, 2018 10:04 pm

Fitzy wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:26 pm
Alefroth wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:11 pm
cut video and stuff
That has to be parody, right?
Watch the entire thing. It’s not parody.

It's naive optimism. It's like if the LDS got really edgy with their ads.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Wed May 23, 2018 11:12 pm

Pyperkub wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 8:57 pm
Enough wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 7:03 pm
YellowKing wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 2:01 pm I'll take the unpopular view of not wanting to see Rip go. You can't debate if everyone agrees, and I think it's valuable to see things from the other side. And at least Rip does post articles and things.

Ignoring people we don't agree with is the entire reason the country is in the state it's in today.

And heck, if you guys were able to convert me, there's hope for anybody.
I will take that side with you so you are not so lonely. I also would add that the piling on Rip while somewhat self-invited at times seems to get personal and cross the CoC. I will not be ignoring him but I will also not have any issues with pointing out his hackery silliness when it is appropriate. I hope others don't block me because I occasionally quote a post.
I'll take it too. If I don't care to engage on the mindless stuff, I won't, but sometimes he'll respond with actual thoughts rather than memes, and I appreciate those times.

+1 or 3 or whatever we're up to now. We're too small a community to shun anyone, and it's not like new members are beating on the doors.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Wed May 23, 2018 11:52 pm

I see a distinct difference between responding to genuine viewpoints that I disagree with (or even to devil's advocacy) and responding to an act put on to elicit extreme responses. One is being open minded and fair. The other is going along with being manipulated for someone else's satisfaction.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Thu May 24, 2018 12:02 am

I was reading through Trump's tweets today. Three of them stood out, in order:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 8182258688
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 5316866048
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 1351618561

Specifically, the second in relation to the others. The complete lack of context says so much. It doesn't even occur to him that whatever comment, news clip, or conversation he just experienced isn't automatically part of all of our lives. From his perspective, if he experienced it, we all did.

The man truly believes the universe is built around him.

Victoria Raverna · Post by **Victoria Raverna** » Thu May 24, 2018 2:03 am

gilraen wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:51 pm
Fitzy wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:13 pm I am uneasy with the idea that Trump’s twitter feed is government speech. First, blocking someone doesn’t really stop them. You can easily still read the tweets. It’s an inconvenience to be blocked, but not the same as blocking access to the information. Second, Trump is still an American citizen and person, though I’ll accept arguments contrary to the latter. As such he has the same rights as anyone else to associate with who he wants. I see it more as the president can still do private gatherings and fundraisers during which he can speak on government matters despite those not being open to the public. At least I think he can.
He chose not to use the official @POTUS account and instead continues using his personal one. And his tweets *are* policy speech. If he had been using @realDonaldTrump account for non-government tweets, no one would bat an eye if he blocked people. But just as the presidents are not allowed to block anyone from seeing tweets on the @POTUS feed, he's now prohibited from blocking people on his (formerly) personal account as well.

What if Trump decide to ignore the ruling and block people he doesn't like?

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu May 24, 2018 7:58 am

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status ... 4044502017

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:24 am

Maybe the 2nd amendment people should do something about you. I don't know.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:37 am

I'll be counter-boycotting the NFL over this. Fuck you and your forced patriotism. This is a free country even if we do have a dictator in the White House.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:41 am

I truly believe Trump feels not that they're not showing respect to the United States, but that they're not showing HIM the respect he feels he deserves.

Everyone should take a knee if that's the case.

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:43 am

We open every school day with the pledge of allegiance. To this point I have simply stood quietly while it was going on and then moved on with my day. I shall now be taking a knee for it in protest of our current government.

edit: over reliance on auto-correct

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:47 am

2 l's, 2a's, 2 e's.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:50 am

I couldn't write anything more absurd for a session of Paranoia RPG.
- Clapping is Mandatory.
- Kneeling is Treason.
- Citizen, the Deep State is Above Your Security Clearance.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Thu May 24, 2018 8:57 am

YellowKing wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:37 am I'll be counter-boycotting the NFL over this. Fuck you and your forced patriotism. This is a free country even if we do have a dictator in the White House.

Pretty sure it's going to backfire on the NFL. Players will be allowed to stay in the tunnel/locker room in lieu of taking a knee. Guesses as to how they'll cover an empty sideline?

I'm more and more done with the NFL each year. Bash your skulls in for us but don't you dare use your fleeting platform to make a meaningful statement. Get back out there and dance.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:08 am

YellowKing wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:37 am I'll be counter-boycotting the NFL over this. Fuck you and your forced patriotism. This is a free country even if we do have a dictator in the White House.

The Jets just became my adopted team.

Well, not really. I don't really know about the Jets but they just became an interesting team.

I don't care for using the idea of players using the owners toys as "their political platforms" but I hate that the owners take sponsorship to be patriotic and then play this unified bullshit card, so it really makes the Jets ownership stand out in this instance.

Remus West wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:43 am We open every school day with the pledge of allegiance. To this point I have simply stood quietly while it was going on and then moved on with my day. I shall now be taking a knee for it in protest of our current government.

edit: over reliance on auto-correct

For as long as I can remember, I have stood against the pledge of allegiance. I never gave a shit about God being in the pledge, but what got me was that I was pledging allegiance to a flag. Fuck that noise. While our flag still brings a lump to my throat I owe it no loyalty. The flag is a symbol and people co-opt symbols and symbols change meaning all of the time. Propagnadizing children toward a vagueness that is so arbitrary is can be changed on a whim is puppies and should be discouraged whenever possible. I think I cam to this conclusion around 8 or 9 before I even knew what arbitrary or propaganda were. Nothing in the forty years moving forward has done anything to sway this views.

Fitzy · Post by **Fitzy** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:11 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 10:04 pm
It's naive optimism. It's like if the LDS got really edgy with their ads.

Yeah.
Obviously optimistic.
Hopelessly naive.

I liked it anyway. It’s a demonstration of how communication should work. The second part has elements of active listening I was not expecting in a song.

If more people would communicate like this the country would be a better place. But I don’t expect it.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:22 am

While our flag still brings a lump to my throat I owe it no loyalty. The flag is a symbol and people co-opt symbols and symbols change meaning all of the time.

Its all about symbolism. The pledge even states that the flag is a stand in for "the Republic."

Taken literally the Anthem is pretty silly too.

Say, can you see
By the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed
At the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars
Through the perilous fight
O'er the ramparts we watched,
Were so gallantly, yeah, streaming?
And the rockets' red glare
The bombs bursting in air
Gave proof through the night
That our flag was still there
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave

Tl;dr, hey, it's morning. Can you see that flag that we saluted at sundown and that we caught glimpses of all night long when shit was exploding? That beautiful flag, can you see it? It's still there! America!

TheMix · Post by **TheMix** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:23 am

Blackhawk wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 11:52 pm I see a distinct difference between responding to genuine viewpoints that I disagree with (or even to devil's advocacy) and responding to an act put on to elicit extreme responses. One is being open minded and fair. The other is going along with being manipulated for someone else's satisfaction.

Exactly. Well said. I'm not proposing that anyone be booted from the community. But people are talking about viewpoints and meaningful discourse with someone that has repeatedly stated that his sole purpose is trolling. I'm baffled at people thinking that there will be a discussion involved. Or even that what he posts represents a reasoned viewpoint. He is a self-professed troll that enjoys seeing people unhappy.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:32 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:22 am Its all about symbolism.

That's my problem, since before I knew what symbolism was.

Taken literally the Anthem is pretty silly too.

The anthem is not literally demanding my allegiance through daily re-enforcement.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:37 am

Zarathud wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:50 am I couldn't write anything more absurd for a session of Paranoia RPG.
- Clapping is Mandatory.
- Kneeling is Treason.
- Citizen, the Deep State is Above Your Security Clearance.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:40 am

TheMix wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:23 am
Blackhawk wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 11:52 pm I see a distinct difference between responding to genuine viewpoints that I disagree with (or even to devil's advocacy) and responding to an act put on to elicit extreme responses. One is being open minded and fair. The other is going along with being manipulated for someone else's satisfaction.
Exactly. Well said. I'm not proposing that anyone be booted from the community. But people are talking about viewpoints and meaningful discourse with someone that has repeatedly stated that his sole purpose is trolling. I'm baffled at people thinking that there will be a discussion involved. Or even that what he posts represents a reasoned viewpoint. He is a self-professed troll that enjoys seeing people unhappy.

Yup. I mean, of course everyone should do what they want. I'm just saying (which has been said before) that responding is a waste of everyone's time and makes everyone dumber for it. That's not because of the viewpoint, it's because of the trolling and unseriousness.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:57 am
YellowKing wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:37 am I'll be counter-boycotting the NFL over this. Fuck you and your forced patriotism. This is a free country even if we do have a dictator in the White House.
Pretty sure it's going to backfire on the NFL. Players will be allowed to stay in the tunnel/locker room in lieu of taking a knee. Guesses as to how they'll cover an empty sideline?

I'm more and more done with the NFL each year. Bash your skills in for us but don't you dare use your fleeting platform to make a meaningful statement. Get back out there and dance.

This just seems phenomenally dumb on the part of the NFL. The whole kneeling thing could have faded away, or at least become a second-tier story, next season. This guarantees that they'll be more fighting on this. The Jets probably won't be the only team to pay players' fines, and on top of that (depending on how significant the fines are) I imagine some players (or even people outside the league) will be willing to pay fines too. And that makes kneeling more of a defiance / confrontation with the league. And on top of that I assume that the Union will wind up filing a grievance / going to court over these fines in some fashion, which will be its own thing. And in the meantime no one is going to be happy. The NFL will lose viewers from conservatives who will be unhappy because the NFL isn't firing kneeling players. It will lose viewers from liberals who are unhappy with the whole fining policy. This kind of seems like the worst possible option for the league.

Probably good for Trump, though, as he gets to stroke the biases of his base.

Scoop20906 · Post by **Scoop20906** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:54 am

Remus West wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:43 am We open every school day with the pledge of allegiance. To this point I have simply stood quietly while it was going on and then moved on with my day. I shall now be taking a knee for it in protest of our current government.

edit: over reliance on auto-correct

Are you really going to do this? I am not trying to egg you on but I worry this might get you in some hot water with the school. I am sure some kids are going to go home and tell their parents about it (and kids should be talking to their parents). Having watched my own parent's deal with parents I can imagine someone of them are going to go after you.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:55 am

And on top of that I assume that the Union will wind up filing a grievance

Out of everything to come out of this in the last two days this is one thing that really get my

From where I sit, this whole thing looks like at an attack on the union, to trivialize it. And it can't come at a worse time then when it looks like the NFL has been trying to cover up CTE discovery for a very long time.

The NFL are losing their workers and their losing their customers and they continue to make one stupid move after the next from the perspective of my pocketbook.

Toe · Post by **Toe** » Thu May 24, 2018 9:57 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am This just seems phenomenally dumb on the part of the NFL. The whole kneeling thing could have faded away, or at least become a second-tier story, next season. This guarantees that they'll be more fighting on this.

Yeah, I agree that this seems like a horrible option. I was wondering why didn't they just work with the broadcasters and say 1) don't broadcast players kneeling, 2) don't have the announcers bring it up. Sure there would be other ways for the public to see the kneeling and know what its about, but to me it would put enough distance between the viewers and the kneeling for many fans to be able to get past it and enjoy the game.

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:06 am

Scoop20906 wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:54 am
Remus West wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 8:43 am We open every school day with the pledge of allegiance. To this point I have simply stood quietly while it was going on and then moved on with my day. I shall now be taking a knee for it in protest of our current government.

edit: over reliance on auto-correct
Are you really going to do this? I am not trying to egg you on but I worry this might get you in some hot water with the school. I am sure some kids are going to go home and tell their parents about it (and kids should be talking to their parents). Having watched my own parent's deal with parents I can imagine someone of them are going to go after you.

My school is 90+% African American so I'll get a lot less flack than you may expect. Also, the parents can come after me. I'll happily tell them I am not and will not be asking or requiring any student to join me (I'll actually be joining multiple students already doing this) and assure them there are no grade repercussions either way. Kneel or not is up to each student and there is no reward or punishment for doing either. Also, I'm tenured so the district would have to justify doing anything other than noting it in my file and union so while they may not be excited about defending me from something that stupid but they'd be obligated.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:06 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 amThis kind of seems like the worst possible option for the league.

Yeah, sure does. There's a chance this kneeling thing would have faded away in the new season. Now? We'll definitely get at least a few teams that largely hang out in the locker room. And I'd think that the odds are high of a superstar or three realizing that the policy can't possibly apply to them if they choose to kneel. (Let Le'Veon Bell and Antonio Brown decide to kneel, with their pal Big Ben joining them, and tell me how you think potential suspensions will go.) And like you pointed out, Guap, the NFL is going to lose some folks on the right because of the protests, and some on the left because of their response. There is no scenario in which this plays well for the NFL.

I'm in the same boat as LB--pretty much done with the NFL at this point.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:07 am

Toe wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:57 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am This just seems phenomenally dumb on the part of the NFL. The whole kneeling thing could have faded away, or at least become a second-tier story, next season. This guarantees that they'll be more fighting on this.
Yeah, I agree that this seems like a horrible option. I was wondering why didn't they just work with the broadcasters and say 1) don't broadcast players kneeling, 2) don't have the announcers bring it up. Sure there would be other ways for the public to see the kneeling and know what its about, but to me it would put enough distance between the viewers and the kneeling for many fans to be able to get past it and enjoy the game.

Or not broadcast the anthem like other sports don't or worked with the players to discuss grievances and how the NFL can become a positive force against 21st century racial strife in the US or probably dozens of other things that take me longer than ten seconds to think about.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:15 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am The Jets probably won't be the only team to pay players' fines, and on top of that (depending on how significant the fines are) I imagine some players (or even people outside the league) will be willing to pay fines too.

They are not the player's fines. The fines are on the team from the NFL. The teams will each get to make their own policy regarding fining their players/employees.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:23 am

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 10:15 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am The Jets probably won't be the only team to pay players' fines, and on top of that (depending on how significant the fines are) I imagine some players (or even people outside the league) will be willing to pay fines too.
They are not the player's fines. The fines are on the team from the NFL. The teams will each get to make their own policy regarding fining their players/employees.

You know, I knew that, but I think I got confused because of the Jets owner saying that he would pay the fines. If it's a team fine....isn't he the one obligated to pay it ultimately anyway? I guess what he would ultimately be taking on then is the percentage of fine that could be allocated to (financial) minority owners?

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu May 24, 2018 10:24 am

LordMortis wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 10:07 am
Toe wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:57 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 9:44 am This just seems phenomenally dumb on the part of the NFL. The whole kneeling thing could have faded away, or at least become a second-tier story, next season. This guarantees that they'll be more fighting on this.
Yeah, I agree that this seems like a horrible option. I was wondering why didn't they just work with the broadcasters and say 1) don't broadcast players kneeling, 2) don't have the announcers bring it up. Sure there would be other ways for the public to see the kneeling and know what its about, but to me it would put enough distance between the viewers and the kneeling for many fans to be able to get past it and enjoy the game.

Or not broadcast the anthem like other sports don't or worked with the players to discuss grievances and how the NFL can become a positive force against 21st century racial strife in the US or probably dozens of other things that take me longer than ten seconds to think about.

Canadian networks broadcast the anthem(s) before NHL games they show all the time.