Judge orders Trump administration to restore Acosta's press pass

Isn't the White House something in the nature of a private home?

This was Trump's SECOND press conference, I don't think we'll see another soon, if ever. IMO Trump's gonna quit, probably shortly after Congress goes back into session in January. Being a REAL politician, that is, one that must actually "play" politics with people who are something less than ass-kissing sycophants, is not really fun for pathological narcissists

You have to remember that while they may yell and curse at them sometimes most pols at the Presidential level actually LIKE the press because it gives them a chance to look good, IF they are clever enough to use it

 

Does it occur to you guys that;

A. Trump is going to have to be re-elected in 2020. His being made President-for-Life appears unlikely before then
B. Not everybody in the USA loves Trump with the unending, deep and above all unconditional-to-the-point-you-resemble-dogs love you and other Trumphumpers display. Some of us might just be a little less likely to vote for a President who makes people sign an agreement not to ask tough questions but I'm not the one to ask as you couldn't make me vote for the *******-in-chief with all the AK-47's in the NRA headquarters

 

I am not making the argument that the White House should be considered public property in the sense that everyone must have access. You might think that, but it is public property in the most broad sense. The White House has been closed to the public at multiple times in the past, but it was open up to the public now with restrictions. Saying it is private property is just by definition wrong. You might want to watch that argument closely too because it contains an outright misrepresentation.

 

Not “based on”; just not in violation of.

 

Then you agree that the president and the Secret Service have the legal right to grant and deny access to whom they choose.

 

If they pose a security risk or violate any rules, yes. If they are restricting access due to biased measure, for example, I only want people that agree with me in the WH, no. An extreme example would be if a President banned all people of a certain race or religion from entering the WH, this would not be constitutional.

 

Do you think that reporters should have access and free reign during press conferences without any limitations as to their conduct? Remember now, CNN has 50 reporters that have hard passes. It isn't like Acosta is the only one that can attend the press conference. Booting one combative reporter that refuses to give the microphone back while arguing with the president isn't restrictive at all.

 

The exact number of press passes is unknown to the public. So to claim that one agency has a specific number is a bit of a misrepresentation. Also, to claim that a reporter is combative is another strong claim. Acosta was not combative, but he was aggressively asking questions. No, I do not think a reporter should be kicked out for aggressively asking questions, but if one became combative and started a fight, yes that person should be kicked out.

I also do not think that an intern should repeatedly grab for a microphone. There should be some basic decorum on both sides. The President and the press need to both step back a bit. It has not become this contentious in many decades. We have a President calling the press the enemy of the people. That is dangerous language. I expect more from a President than I do from reporters. Their job is to challenge a President. It is part of our Democracy. I may disagree with how some Presidents have been treated, but I expect them to rise above the actions of reports, not sink to their level.

 

CNN hasn't disputed this statement:
"This is just more grandstanding from CNN, and we will vigorously defend against this lawsuit,” Sanders said. “CNN, who has nearly 50 additional hard pass holders, and Mr. Acosta is no more or less special than any other media outlet or reporter with respect to the First Amendment. After Mr. Acosta asked the President two questions — each of which the President answered — he physically refused to surrender a White House microphone to an intern, so that other reporters might ask their questions. This was not the first time this reporter has inappropriately refused to yield to other reporters.”
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...-house-journalists-should-never-be-weaponized

The intern's job is to get the microphone when the president has answered the question. It isn't the right of the reporter to hold the microphone until her or she decides they are done with it. It doesn't belong to the reporters. Acosta argued with the president rather than asked a question. They are usually given one question. He asked several while debating with Trump. Do you deny that he was arguing with Trump over the definition of "caravan"? Is his purpose to debate the president or to ask and report the answers or to debate the president about his policies? He has a history of being confrontational during press conferences. I think this was the last straw. CNN is not damaged by this. The 1st Amendment isn't damaged by this. He can even watch the press conference on TV and then report on it.

 

A reporter's job is not simply to report what was said, but to get to the truth. If someone is misrepresenting or avoiding questions, a reporter should push harder for those questions to be answered. The job of our press in the WH is to hold our President accountable for his/her actions. Do reporters go to far sometimes, yes. There should be checks and balances on each side. As I said before, the relationship between the press and the President has become worse than I have ever seen it before. It started out during the early campaigning. I have never seen a candidate that was so aggressive in demonizing a press. It should worry you that from the beginning of his campaign before his "negative" press, Trump was attacking the media. The media serves an important role in our country, and attacking them from the beginning of a campaign is dangerous. It has gotten worse. Trump should learn to act with some semblance of an understanding of the office he holds. Yet, he runs around like hurt child lashing out at any question he dislikes. It is not healthy to have a President that attacks the media like this.

 

We have to agree to disagree at this point.

 

Thanks for the civil conservation. I enjoy these types.

 

Trump Won The Acosta Lawsuit:

The judge framed it as a matter of process, which justifies Trump issuing a set of rules of decorum. I assume the rules will include a requirement that a reporter who has received a response (whether it’s to his liking or not) must relinquish the microphone, that there can be no physical interference with a staff member who reaches out to take the microphone, and that one much stop talking once the President (or press secretary) has moved on to the next questioner.

Any complaints about these rules and the prescribed consequences of violating them can be met with pieties about adhering to the judge’s ruling. Things must be done in an orderly way — in the press room and in a system of due process. Any complaints premised on freedom of the press will be met with statements like “We want total freedom of the press” and we want perfect due process. So here you are, here’s notice of our rules of decorum. And that should be the end of the kind of questioning Acosta has become famous for. Trump wins.​

The process will be the punishment.

 

Me too.

 

Trump cuts of Acosta all the time when he is trying to formulate a question.
Acosta is not screaming. You're making it all up.
In the end, Trump had nothing on Acosta, so says the judge who Trump appointed.
Get over it.

 

Special snowflake should get over it. If he doesn't like to have a press conference where he gets confronted with his retardation, than he can just hide behind twitter.

 

first amendment

 

lolol
he was asking 2 questions even

 

Trump and decorum in the same sentence?

 

Let Acosta twitter his questions to Trump. Stop supporting the crude hostile Acosta.

 

When information is announced by the government, and you may not be there to report it because of the government,
than the government is interfering with the distribution of information that is being announced.

/facepalm

 

Judge never said anything of the sort, Maybe you should get on it.

 

Exactly. Costa will behave our he will be ejected, or the Press Conference will end and the rest of the reporters can listen to Sassy Jim stamp hie cute boots.

Trump already made up his new pass

 

The First Amendment in no manner requires
the President to have Press conferences or regulate how he does so.


PLEASE Chapter and Verse with explanation with such unconscionable "reach".
For starters, The First Amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


In what manner by the above does Trump owe Acosta a seat. Or even CNN.
It is the President's Press Conference. Not the Constitution's. Unless muy stupidos can demonstrate otherwise. I hope Trump appeals this dastardly ruling on the Presidency. Where is the RT reporter
Does the RT reporter have the same First Amendment
Constitutional, First Amendment right per @notme interpretation of
"How I Wish It Was Written"

Tell me it ain't so and explain!



Moi
It's the 21st Century.
It's How "I" Feel About It.
Just ask @notme

​

 

No it's not. Because A: Acosta isn't the only media source(Hell, not even for his own Network) and furthermore, the press conference is being TELEVISED. Know what that means? Trump could literally say "no questions", give a press statement, walk off and there's nothing the ants can do. As long as information is being filtered through ANY media source, then the "media" is being fulfilled.

But see, that's not enough for the bastards. They want to be treated as Gods. When the first amendment argument was defeated in Court, sanity was restored.