3.3.2 – Informal sources of presidential power and their use
3.3.3.2 – Limitations on presidential power and why this varies between presidents
3.3.4 – Interpretations and debates of the US presidency
Since returning to the White House, Donald Trump has made relentless use of the bully pulpit, the informal power of the presidency to command attention and shape political debate. Rather than relying on formal speeches or carefully scripted statements, Trump has governed through constant visibility. Press interviews, rallies and spontaneous remarks have become central to how he exerts influence, reinforcing a style in which attention itself functions as power.
One of the clearest illustrations is Trump’s frequent, unscripted encounters with journalists aboard Air Force One. These exchanges, quickly nicknamed “toilet interviews” by reporters because they often take place near the rear of the aircraft mid-flight, are informal but highly performative. In one widely reported incident, Trump snapped at Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey, telling her “Quiet, piggy” when she pressed him on the release of sensitive documents. The moment went viral not because it revealed policy, but because it demonstrated dominance. During similar exchanges, Senator Lindsey Graham has often stood nearby, nodding vigorously as Trump speaks, reinforcing authority through visible loyalty. These scenes underline how Trump uses tone, insult and spectacle to assert control over both the press and his own party.
Trump’s rally appearances follow the same logic. They blur governing and campaigning, allowing him to announce intentions, attack critics and frame controversies before Congress, courts or agencies can respond. His language is deliberately stark. In recent months, this has been especially evident in his rhetoric on Venezuela, where he has repeatedly described Nicolás Maduro and his associates as “narco-terrorists”. The phrase has no settled legal meaning, but it fuses criminality with national security. By using the language of counterterrorism, Trump encourages the public to view foreign policy disputes as urgent security threats rather than diplomatic disagreements, narrowing the space for dissent.
This communication style closely reflects a strategy associated with Steve Bannon, Trump’s former campaign chief and White House strategist. Bannon argued that political success depended on “flooding the zone” with information, controversy and outrage so that critics could not focus on any single issue. Although Bannon no longer holds a formal role, the method remains visible in Trump’s constant interviews, rallies and provocative language.
The bully pulpit has no constitutional basis, yet it remains one of the presidency’s most potent resources. Trump’s use of language, repetition and spectacle shows how informal power can shape agendas, pressure opponents and normalise extraordinary claims. At the same time, it exposes a clear limit: while words can dominate debate, they cannot substitute for the slower processes of law-making and institutional accountability that ultimately define democratic governance.