General Discussion

The Velveteen Ocelot

(128,807 posts)

11. No, of course not. And a SOTU speech isn't even required.

Reply to LakeSuperiorView (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:09 PM

Jan 2019

The Constitution requires the President to periodically "give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Woodrow Wilson was the first president to give a SOTU address; before that the president submitted only a written report. In modern times it's mainly a statement of the president's policy initiatives and is therefore a political statement and not one that was ever intended to be given under oath.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should the State of the Union Address be considered "under oath"? [View all] LakeSuperiorView Jan 2019 OP

30 minutes of complete silence? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #1

Members of Congress, distingushed guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, - I plead the fifth. LakeSuperiorView Jan 2019 #3

Perfect. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #4

We expect the truth. But Trump cant help himself. pwb Jan 2019 #2

Maybe Congress should just ask for a written statement Buckeyeblue Jan 2019 #5

We need somebody to pull a Joe Wilson! Va Lefty Jan 2019 #6

On one hand I don't want democrats to behave the way republicans do. johnp3907 Jan 2019 #12

I think it was. It keeps rerunning in my mind all these years later, too. Judi Lynn Jan 2019 #15

Will Putin be in balcony with Melania? nt DURHAM D Jan 2019 #7

No. That's a pretty silly suggestion. PoindexterOglethorpe Jan 2019 #8

Do you have anything to bring to the conversation other than insults? LakeSuperiorView Jan 2019 #9

Sometimes it's just snark. Igel Jan 2019 #10

Thank you Igel. PoindexterOglethorpe Jan 2019 #16

No, of course not. And a SOTU speech isn't even required. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #11

WHY? He's already taken the oath of office,, benld74 Jan 2019 #13

You don't have to be under oath to run afoul of the law. SeattleVet Jan 2019 #14