Liberal Democrat biased media has been trying for months to trap President Trump in a corner with his tweets. Even though the primary purpose of Twitter is simply to vent the most important 140 characters that happen to be on your mind at the time, because of his position, the President is held to a higher standard. When it comes to Trump, his tweets are statements of official policy.

When the issue is one that liberals care about, Trump’s tweets are carved in stone. “Legally speaking, the tweets are quite significant. They provide a window into his beliefs and motivations,” insists Neal Katyal. He used to be Obama’s solicitor general and lately is on the case fighting against Trump’s travel ban.

That strategy has just come back to bite them in the rear. Robert Mueller has been conducting a witch hunt of an inquisition into alleged collusion between President Trump and Russia to swing the election in his favor. The entire case appears to have been built around a dossier that Hillary, her campaign, and the DNC paid to have dug up. Liberals all over Washington have been salivating about its contents ever since it got intentionally leaked to the media just before the election.

The only problem is that the most scandalous revelations in the file are total lies. Liberal insistence on Trump tweets being taken as official statements of policy has just backfired.

President Trump posted a tweet on Tuesday morning that called the dossier “bogus.” “FBI CANNOT (after all of this time) VERIFY CLAIMS IN DOSSIER OF RUSSIA/TRUMP COLLUSION.”

According to CNN, the post is “already being used to argue that intelligence agencies should release a related government summary of the contentious document.”

It seems that every time Trump tweets that the file is fake, “he could be acknowledging that the intelligence community investigated it and presented to him their findings.”

Lawyers trying to get even a part of the file released have already used that argument in court. “Operating upon the good faith assumption that this court has more important things to do than monitor the president’s Twitter feed, the plaintiffs feel they have no choice but to keep this court updated on the continuous official statements by the president in which he specifically and substantively addresses” the subject matter of the suit.

Lawyers for the President confirm that Trump’s twitter posts are indeed “official statements of the president of the United States.” That does not mean you can read more into them than is written.

According to lawyers for the James Madison Project, out to get their hands on copies of the Steele dossier, or at least a copy of the two page summary that was allegedly shown to President Trump by the FBI, “Trump’s tweets are public statements, and thus show that he knows the intelligence agencies vetted the document.”

Trump’s attorneys say don’t get so excited. None of the tweets President Trump wrote on the subject of the dossier say a word about what the intelligence communities did or did not tell him about the accuracy of the reports. “The tweet could be evidence that Trump watched news reports about the dossier or that he’d know first-hand the truth of the accusations about him.”

Back in October, Trump referred to the offensive collection produced by Steele as “discredited” and “fake” at least four times. His attorneys argued then that “nothing in the statements states or even implies that [the agencies] made a final determination as to the veracity of any factual allegation allegedly contained in the two-page synopsis.”

In other words, unless Trump actually specifically spells out that a particular agency told him the report was false, it is nothing more than his own opinion.

Trump’s tweets are an issue in several pending cases. A tweet about how the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau treated Wells Fargo Bank affects whether Mick Mulvaney gets to keep his job. Immigrants who are against Trump’s temporary ban on travel say his tweets “show that he meant to discriminate against Muslims.”

Even being blocked by Trump is cause for litigation. Trump has been accused of violating the Constitution by blocking troublemakers because he uses the public forum to make official statements.

Now that the issue has been identified, it could soon be setting legal precedent. The question never came up before “because it wasn’t a matter of dispute.” For example, “When Barack Obama was talking about drone strikes, he was talking about what he learned as president, not from watching Fox News.”