Acosta from CNN crossed the line and is removed from press core

Trump gave Jim Acosta one question and he answered it. Then Acosta refuses to hand the mic to the next journalist whom Trump selected. Acosta then stands there like a douche, repeatedly asking another question over and over again and juking the intern who tried to take the mic away from him. I hope Acosta loses his job, he's a prick.

The Trumpettes are the most unpatriotic people I've ever met.

Nothing more than faux patriots. First they deny speech and now doctoring photos? Trumpettes belong in the same ash heap of history as Communists and Nazis.

Trumpettes will believe anything. Trumpettes thought Trump was on a boat helping people too. Seriously, this is sad.

Fact is Acosta asked a question and Trump threw a hissy fit. lol

/thread

Didn't a judge recently judge in favour of CNN and Acosta on this?

@horgen: Yup, don't expect any follow up on this thread from Jac lol.

Oh yeah, aren't Trump supporters for free speech?? Oh aparantly it's only for rascist speech and not for a reporter asking legitimate questions.

Accosta takes the win, for now.

@horgen: Not really, the “lawsuit” is pending and all the judge did was say that until it´s settled Acosta should have his press pass back.

Which is no surprise considering the judge.

?

@drlostrib: While he was appointed by Trump, he is still a lower court judge and we all know how they have a lot of trouble with dealing with the actual law and just pass the buck on to the higher courts.

I thought the right wouldn't see him as a cuck since he never backs down and fights. I guess that insult is now just purely random if you don't like the person's politics?

Oh and he's back.

Link?

BTW, until further notice and developments, this is a clear loss for the WH and a win for CNN.

Didn't he now upheld the law?

There's upholding the law and alternatively upholding the law. Clearly that's what Jacanuk meant.

Yes indeed.

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/16/668576526/federal-judge-orders-white-house-to-restore-press-credentials-to-cnns-jim-acosta

So you don't trust the courts now either? Cool!

He has stated such before.

Apparently WH is going to take his credentials away again after the 14 day order expires

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cnn-requests-emergency-briefing-as-white-house-looks-to-revoke-jim-acostas-credential-again

Based on a fabrication of the white house. Awesome. Little Hitler in the making.

white house backed down on legal fight and restored it. how many times does Fox News have to get it wrong before people wake up?

@Serraph105: You can't make that comparison. Drawing historical parallels isn't allowed.

Especially not to Hitler, accurate or not. I already lost.

The media has been playing the general populace since it's inception..

Edward Bernays made a book about it almost 100 years ago.

The majority of the population will never wake up. Even if they did it would still be effective because it appeals to our emotions.

not sure that falls in line with my specific observation of people not believing anything the news says regardless of what it is but believing in what Trump says 100%.

Really.

I could have sworn you referenced Fox News but okay.

Little Jimmy can now wear his TV makeup and sit in the WH briefing room while Trump and Sanders refuse to let him ask another question, ever.

Yes because free press isn't allowed in a fascist society.

@comeonman: Lol trying to spin this factually legal and occupational win for Accosta as some kind of loss.

This thread title didn't turn out so well.

Little Jimmy can still spew his crap on the airwaves all he wants, can't he?

Do you think he has a constitutional right to be called on during the WH press briefing?

I'll grant you it is a "win" for Little Jimmy, even though it is a temporary restraining order.

All I am pointing out is that he will not get called on for a question ever again. And, although he may try, he'll never get a court to find he has a constitutional right to be called on for a question.

Silencing the press from asking questions is fascist. And it's sad that any American is okay with that. But democracy dies in silence. Step by step.

That's a guess. I'm stating facts.

Equating the act of throwing one man out of the WH press gaggle for acting like a jerk, with "silencing the press" is pure hyperbole.

Holding up Little Jimmy Acosta as being a functional part of a free press performing its constitutional purpose is laughable.

Democracy will survive the loss of Little Jimmy Acosta's Whitehouse access, and no one, not a single person, has been silenced by Trump's actions in this case.

Ok there Sgt Joe Friday. Just the facts ma'am.

To be more precise, the portion of my post you cherry picked to call out as a "guess", is a prediction. A prediction I make based on wisdom, guided by experience. Trump can be a petty, vindictive man, and it will surprise the hell out of me if Little Jimmy ever gets to hold the WH microphone again. At least while Trump is POTUS.

So, Sgt. Friday, do you believe Little Jimmy has a constitutional right to be called on for a question? Or did I get my facts right on that specific question?

@comeonman: You clearly have zero clue on how a press briefing is held. Nearly every reporter including small news outlets gets a question.

You think Obama wanted to field questions from Fox News who consistently called into question his legitimacy and citizenship? You don’t just get to ignore a major news outlet because they hurt your feelings. If you could every president would do it and lock out liberal or conservative news based on their own affiliation.

Well, no, not nearly every reporter gets a question. There is no requirement to hold a daily briefing. There is no requirement to televise a WH briefing. There is no requirement to allow ANY questions.

CNN has dozens of people already credentialed to enter the WH, besides Little Jimmy. So CNN can still have their representative at the briefing to ask whatever they want asked.

You can make an argument that Trump is being vindictive to poor Little Jimmy, but this notion this represents some tyrannical suppression of first amendment right of the press is hyperbole.

It absolutely is not. If the president can pick and choose which reporters he allows to ask questions he can force news outlets to censor themselves or risk losing access to these briefings. Losing access isn't even the greatest concern, the greatest concern is that the president can intimidate reporters into not challenging him when he deserves to be challenged. If he ever tried to cross a red line one day like, say, putting American citizens in concentration camps like Roosevelt did in the 40's, then reporters could be pressured into not challenging such a move in their questioning. If the president can write the narrative of any particular issue that appears in news coverage by himself then freedom of the press is effectively dead. That is exactly what a Trump appointed judge said in his legal ruling ordering the White House to restore Acosta's press pass.

So you are okay with no accountability for the president? And yet conservatives get upset when the government of Germany is mentioned in the 40s. The parallels are there.

So, I've done my best to read, and re-read, your rambling wall-o-text, and here is what I think you are trying to say.

Trump is using intimidation tactics to try to control the narrative in the press/media.

Given that every bit of survey work done vis a vie coverage of Trump and his actions shows that coverage is overwhelmingly negative, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any evidence to justify your fear/theory.

Further proof you are overstating the effect of Trump kicking out Little Jimmy, is the fact that there are plenty of journalists who are openly antagonistic to Trump that still have their access; still get to ask questions; still get to publish/broadcast their criticism of Trump.

Finally, CNN has not been banned. They have dozens of people credentialed to enter the WH and attend briefings/press conferences.

One last point: The judge issued the temporary order restoring Little Jimmy's access based on 5th amendment protections, not 1st amendment. The theory being that Acosta was kicked out without due process.

First, why are you butting in to this conversation, when you haven't responded to my last retort to you (see post 185) ??

But in the interest of civil discussion, allow me to retort.

The POTUS is accountable to voters/citizens, not the press, and certainly not to Little Jimmy Acosta. To suggest that, by kicking one person out for acting like a jerk, Trump is attempting to gain an ability to act without restraints or accountability, is, again, hyperbole from you.

Your last sentence, attempting to draw parallels between Trump and Hitler shows that hyperbole is the only currency you have to barter with in this discussion. So far I have yet to see any reasoned arguments, or rational dialog from you.

The press is made up of people as well. They are the people with access to the president. Bull ship in that post right there.

Oh hell. You got me. Enjoy your victory dance.

You're going to accuse me of rambling and then just ignore everything I said? Another braindead conservative shill, what a surprise. Like I already explained to you, there's a danger that news outlets will be intimidated into self-censoring. Even if CNN isn't banned, they and other outlets could refrain from asking tough questions out of fear of losing access, which is just as bad as outright censorship. You're advocating censorship, plain and simple. That is un-American, unpatriotic, and undemocratic. But what else should I expect from a conservative?

Sounds to me like I surmised your point pretty well, as you have made the same point again, with no facts or evidence to support it.

You are claiming that Trump is trying to control the narrative by intimidating the media/press in to self censorship.

Please point me to any instance where a news/media outlet has been intimidated in to holding their criticism of Trump.

If your only point is that self-censorship COULD happen, well, I guess we'll have to wait and see who in the WH press corp Trump throws out next as he implements his plan to intimidate the media/press. Sure seems like he's taking his time, waiting 2 years in to his term to throw the first one out. Also, his aim sucks, if his purpose is to intimidate and silence. April Ryan has been far more effectively critical of Trump, in my opinion, and yet, she remains a credentialed, called upon member of the WH press corp. Hmmm.

In the meantime, let me make this point: I am not advocating censorship. I do, however advocate for civil, polite behavior by all. Little Jimmy acted like a total asshat, and got his peepee whacked for it.

I will abstain from admonishing you for the ad hominem attacks, as I have come to expect them on this board. Ad hominem attacks and panic stricken hyperbole seem to be the currency on this forum.

have to stop you right there.

'trying to control'

and

'has been'

are not the same thing. not really clever but clearly you are trying to deflect. (well 'obfuscate' might be the better word here) regardless it does look like you said it that way intentionally

Doesn't sound in the least that you understood his point. In fact, it's patently clear you did not. So stop patting yourself on the back.

Whether or not an attempt to silence the media actually works is beside the point. If I break into your house to rob you and the cops catch me while I'm picking the lock do I get off scott free because I didn't technically steal anything? No. Attempts to silence the press are dangerous whether or not they are successful. Besides, how can you know whether or not they're successful? Yes, the media coverage is still negative now, but a change like that doesn't happen overnight. It's not like we have a free press one day, wake up the next, and it's gone. And the media coverage could still be overwhelmingly negative with the press still being silenced. Yes, news outlets could still write negative stories, but if their access to facts about what the administration is actually doing is restricted and the administration feels no compulsion to explain its reasoning to the press, then a major function of the free press has been effectively neutered. That is dangerous, whether you can comprehend why or not.

Calls for civility have been a trademark tactic of dictators and their apologists throughout history. Congratulations on joining their company. Take your civility and shove it.

Are you coming on to me ?? ;)