Problems with Presidential Privacy

By Teresa Buzzoni

Shelley D. Lane and Helen McCourt argue that communication is based upon a common ethical
conduct understood by engaged members of society. They believe that a common set of ethics
restrain behavior and action for the benefit of others, which reflexively benefit oneself. However,
as a result of such conduct, the civility of one’s restraint can limit what is acceptable to say under
the First Amendment, which grants all citizens freedom of speech. Such invisible norms are
responsible for the feasibility of democracy. As a result, when a citizen is elected to a position of
authority in the government or military, part of their freedom of speech is checked by the norms
established by the American public.

Presidents are held to a higher standard of civility because of their power to command and
represent the government. President Trump described his position on Twitter as acting as
“Commander in Chiefs”. While entirely misspelled, President Trump attempts to maintain two
lines of communication. Holding his private Twitter account (@realDonaldTrump) and his
official Presidential account (@POTUS), Mr Trump maintains a constant stream of public
communication with which he publicly calls out other figures on both accounts. Mr Trump’s
inability to distinguish between these two forms of public and private discourse have led to his
impeachment, and demonstrated his inability to act with civility in the American democracy.

When one’s status is elevated to that of the President, the increased ethos of the position
produces a new expectation of conduct. Largely established by the norms of previous Presidents,
restraint is a necessary quota for acting as President. However, Mr. Trump has seemingly set a
new precedent for the office. During his election in 2016, the New York Times published an
audio recording of Mr Trump’s comments on a “Days of Our Lives” actress, Arianne Zucker,
who is twenty-eight years his junior. He described how he “moved on her like a bitch. But I
couldn’t get there… I did try and fuck her… I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing
her… I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them… I don’t even wait.
And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.” In this instance, Mr Trump’s
private thoughts become publicized. While the video was recorded in private, the sharing of a
transcript and video file to the New York Times placed the conversation into the public domain.
The value of these words painted a frenzy as the public attempted to reconcile a presidential
candidate with a man who hypersexualizes young actresses twenty-eight years his junior. As he
was elected, the harmful conversation continued.

After his election, President Trump gained access to a massive following. On his Twitter
account, he began calling women out for their physical appearances, then venerating himself for
remaining “politically correct”. First, he called out called out singer, Bette Midler for being
“unattractive”, after stating that he would never say that about a woman. Next, he addressed
Megan Kelly, stating that he refused to call her a “bimbo”, yet settled for the term
“lightweight reporter”. With both women, Mr. Trump used vernacular insults that are societally
dubbed as inappropriate for civil conversation. Further proof of the inappropriateness of these
comments is demonstrated by their violation of the Twitter Code of Conduct, which states that
“You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We
consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice.” Yet,
President Trump’s line of hateful rhetoric remained unchecked, regardless of its incivility and
unlawfulness against the rules of conduct on the Twitter site.

In addition to the aforementioned harassment, Mr Trump’s notable attack on a woman at

Mar-A-Lago took his abuse one step further. He victimized himself by stating that a woman,
“bleeding badly from a face-lift”, had made sexual advances unto him. The revolting phrase
created a media scandal that was not uncommon to his administration. During the first two years
of office, the media scandal of Mar-A-Lago was just a single kink in a long chain of rhetoric that
made employee retention difficult. President Trump’s administration got off to a slow start
following the frenzy linked to the Mar-A-Lago incident where President Trump venerated his
Chief of Staff, John Kelly, for giving “Crazed Lowlife” Omarosa Manigualt Newman, “a break”
after her use of a private car service, known as "CARPET". President Trump's praise of a
procedural matter demonstrated his inability to remain absent from political drama. Rather, he
hoped to become involved because of inability to acknowledge his limitations as President that
should restrict him from such base behavior.

Consequences of Mr. Trump’s commentary run deeper than his incivility. As the leader of the
Free World, President Trump’s communications with foreign governments must be interpreted as
direct communiques from the United States. When President Trump decided to write an open
letter on Twitter to Iranian President Rouhani, he acted as a toddler would, using capital letters
and threatening language to instigate a retort against the leader. He shouted, “you [President
Rouhani] will suffer consequences the likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered
before. We are no longer a country that will stand for your demented words of violence & death.
Be cautious”. His assault on this leader not only demonstrated his inability to hold his tongue,
but also his uncaring attitude regarding the consequences. His uncivil language and retort
demonstrated that he had no restraint with which to hold back his commentary. This example
presented the continuing issue of Trump’s rhetoric proving harmful to the American public who
found this commentary worrisome in the face of Iranian retaliation. The opinions that should
have remained separate from the public sphere were directly published for both the American
and Iranian publics to notice, which produced calls for action and reactionary procedures by both
republics.
By his defiance of the ethical norms described by Lane and McCourt, President Trump
demonstrates the problematic results of incivility, and how each of these actions contributed to
his impeachment. His inability to distinguish between public and private expression isolated the
President to a singular sphere solely occupied by himself. Rejected by government and by the
public, Mr Trump’s impeachment demonstrated the final straw of his demise.