I also agree that Trump should continue tweeting.
Anything that fortifies arguments against his policies and laws in court, even better revealing their (and by extension his) true intentions, while doing no harm to people's lives should be encouraged. Trump's twitter habits are gonna give liberals (and Mueller, etc.) enough ammo to last any army of lawyers he sends after them.
@Timjer
Its a very common belief in rural and particularly southern America that you simply have to work hard to be successful. If you're not successful, then you're just not working hard enough or doing something wrong. If you are rich, you are a hard worker and successful. Ergo, rich people are the smarter folks, or the sort of person the rural/southern American totally are once they work harder, make America great again, make coal popular again, etc. And Trump, to them, is the physical embodiment of this belief. They've built their entire argument on assuming that everybody who is criticizing Trump is just wrong, lazy, greedy, etc. because they don't want to work hard. They've also invested so much emotionally as well as hinging their beliefs about success onto this man that they cannot painlessly let go. To let go of him would be to say that they and everything they know about success is wrong.
When the reality is, its a hell of a lot more complicated than that. Good work ethic certainly helps but other factors-- your parents', guardians', or family's connections and money; your race; your sex; your sexuality; your place on the social hierarchy; the region you live in and the amount of opportunities it contains; your living situation; how able you are to get out of the region you live in if you so desire; if local laws are helpful or hurtful to your future prospects; how much access you have to a proper education under the age of 18; how much access you have to higher education after the age of 18; your family situation; etc.-- also come into play. Which is why even the most communistic of societies always end up with people who are significantly richer than everybody else, and even the best capitalistic and/or socialistic societies always have a mix of people who are poor, people who are middle class, and people who are rich. Differences in how much money people have or what social status people have naturally crop up no matter how hard people try to force them not to-- its a leftover from the tribal days of humanity when these sorts of social structures were necessary to coordinate hunts, gathering sessions, etc.
In the end, its about ensuring quality of life for as many people as possible, not necessarily ensuring that every member of your population is filthy rich. Because money really doesn't buy happiness-- no really, apparently studies show that happiness in relation to money possessed runs on a parabola. People's tendency towards happiness increases more and more until the lower-to-mid-middle class income level is reached, then as the income level gets higher and higher people tend to be less and less happy.
Which is what stuff like the estate tax and higher taxes for the rich tend to be trying to do. Income and (to a smaller extent) property tax killed 18th century American opulence. It became untenable for people to keep living in these lavish, ornate, and gigantic Victorian-style manors as their rise to and maintenance of wealth was stunted. And with it, its the excesses, abuses of power, stagnation of human rights, and corruption also died. Its time for the modern notion of opulence to be laid to rest too.
Because the consequences are going to be harsh. If Mueller and his crew actually manage to pull off a massive unveiling of collusion with Russia, and that winds up getting Trump impeached and/or puts much of the GOP out of commission, these people are going to have no choice but to acknowledge what they've been pushing away for years. And that's not gonna be pretty.
