The world's most followed politician on Twitter is still Obama (ca. 90 million on one twitter account), according to Socialbakers, here (it is not a free service!).

Only because 60 million illegals are following him.

How do we know it was abuse? As far as the report says, it was because they were disagreeing with him.

Given what a thin-skinned butthurt he is, I would assume that if they were questioning him and his statements that would be enough for him to wave the ban-stick.

Also, is Obama still a politician?

We don't know if it was abuse, and they may have only been disagreeing with him. However the point remains that he had every right to block them and that they have no right to an audience. Rather like the ignore button on here.

As you are an expert on all things twitter, you'll know that unless it was a DM, all tweets at the president are entirely open for eveyone to see. We know exactly what tweets caused him to block people. For example this one, which is just awful:

https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/876397178780078081

"Covfefe: The same guy who doesn't proofread his Twitter handles the nuclear button."

The lack of a comma offends me, but the content seems to offend the thinnest skinned bully on the planet more.

Nice of you to pre-judge the result of the court case.
Myself I will wait to see the court decision

There need be no reason to block someone, the content of the tweet is irrelevant.

Cofveve

For mere mortals like you and me, I completely agree.

For the President, who is using the account to disseminate official information, then you start running into legal difficulties, it would seem.

Indeed

Source

More on the topic of the number of enforcers needed to implement US immigration policies. It is hard to distinguish reality from bluster and posturing

On Jan 25th Trump signed an executive order "take all appropriate action to hire 10,000 additional immigration officers" and "shall take all appropriate action to hire 5,000 additional Border Patrol" so 15,000 additional people in total. source

The planned increase in Border Patrol (BP) agents was despite the fact the BP already had 1,700 vacancies.

Sadly the current draft US budget for 2018 only has funding for 2,100 new people, not the 15,000 ordered by Trump "The bill funds 500 new Border Patrol agents and more technology for securing the border, as well as money for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hire 1,600 additional staff.
Source

It is not even clear that this draft 2018 budget will be approved

It depends on the account.

The POTUS account was handed from Obama to DJT upon his inauguration, it's an attribute to his presidency. As such I doubt he can legitimately ban people simply because they disagree or criticise him (as long as it's done respecting common manners).

His RealDonaldTrump account however is his personal thing, his private decision whom he bans, if any.

Except, as we discussed above, he has been using it for official statements, so nope.

Also, I doubt there is a dual personality here. Once you assume the mantle of President, you are the President only and not private citizen Donald Trump. Hence his need to divest business interests (ha!), and the like.

Seems only the Senate will cancel part of their Summer holiday; the House is leaving for holiday as usual.
They claim they can reconvene in 72 hours if necessary

Source

They know there is no chance the Senate will vote on any MAGA-healthcare bill, hence why not enjoy the beach?

First official step to impeaching Trump taken.

"A Democrat from the US House of Representatives on Wednesday filed a resolution to launch a procedure for the dismissal of Republican President Donald Trump. He accuses her of obstructing justice.

Brad Sherman, elected from left California, deposited a text containing an "impeachment" article. His colleague Al Green co-signed the measure. "Completely ridiculous, the worst political game," said White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

In the United States, the congress has the power to remove the president in a two-stage procedure. The House of Representatives votes an impeachment, then the Senate "judges" the President and votes to condemn (or a two-thirds majority) or acquit. In case of conviction, the president is automatically dismissed.

No dismissal

"Depositing items of removal is the first step of a long road," said Brad Sherman. "But if the impulsive incompetence continues, at the end, in many months, the Republicans will join the fight in favor of dismissal."

Never has a president been dismissed in American history. Two of them were indicted but were acquitted: Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Richard Nixon in 1974 preferred to resign to avoid a certain dismissal by Congress because of the Watergate scandal.

The resolution of Brad Sherman and Al Green believes that the hindrance to justice occurred in President Trump's interventions with former FBI director James Comey in the investigation of one of his close advisers, Michael Flynn."

https://www.bluewin.ch/fr/infos/inte...ution-pou.html

This is great.

I believe that is more of a political gesture than a real threat to remove Trump, the basis is quite "thin".

Anyway I am not sure how interested US voters are in the Russian issue despite the daily newspaper reporting.

I believe Trump's presidency and mid term election will hang on Healthcare and what happens with Obamacare repeal and replace.
If it turns out to be a bad deal that harms many millions then it will show up in the voting.
Likely many poor people will lose their insurance and although the aim is that insurance premiums will be reduced for those with more money that will long term, short term there will still be more increases. Consequently all sides will have grounds for complaints.

Trump's campaign claims that his new healthcare will cover everyone and be cheaper will never be achieved

How is that supposed to work?

Let's assume the draft budget passes unchanged. From what source will the 13k surplus employees be paid?