CNN and Jim Acosta file lawsuit against Trump administration

[Black Diamond]

That is a bullshit ruling. Screw his "precedent" if it is not lawful. WHAT First Amendment Right does Acosta have to be at a Presidential press conference? None.

I'd appeal the ruling. Everyone else has to follow the rules but some crybaby-ass CNN Dem who abuses the legal system doesn't. Fuck THAT. The Dems need to start getting their ases slapped hard, and so do justices ruling outside the law.

In th emeatime, I'd pretend the fucker wasn't there.

I would ignore him too but I doubt trump will. There will be some confrontation

[Gunny]

I would ignore him too but I doubt trump will. There will be some confrontation

I don't care if he goads him into something then kicks him out again.

It annoys the piss out of me that when I WANT Trump to be a dick, he isn't. He's got to be one about shit that doesn't matter.

[Elessar]

So you have the right to due process even if your behavior requires immediate action? Really. So how does this apply to all the losers the Dem's send into Congress to disrupt? What about THEIR due process?

The ruling is bullshit and it isn't about Acosta nor Trump. It should be appealed because it is a stupid ruling.

I was wondering about that as well. What about all of the disrupters at the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings?

They were removed by Capitol Police. That should happen to Acosta as well, should he step out of line again.

[Gunny]

I was wondering about that as well. What about all of the disrupters at the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings?

They were removed by Capitol Police. That should happen to Acosta as well, should he step out of line again.

The ruling is wrong. Trump needs to appeal it just to have it shot down for the rest of the world.

I realize just jerking the rules to screw Acosta will handle it, but that ruling will remain on the books. If I start shooting up a school do I have a Right to due process or can the police stop me? Should be some damned common sense going on here.

[aboutime]

Have a meeting of all 50 Badge holders who attend the Press briefings.

Tell them. If ACOSTA, or anyone else tries what HE DID again.

THE PRESS BRIEFING IS OVER. PERIOD...CAPUT'S, DONE, AND Everybody listen to FERRIS.

[Gunny]

Have a meeting of all 50 Badge holders who attend the Press briefings.

Tell them. If ACOSTA, or anyone else tries what HE DID again.

THE PRESS BRIEFING IS OVER. PERIOD...CAPUT'S, DONE, AND Everybody listen to FERRIS.

Exactly my point, but I got waylaid by a bot looking for bots that said my IP had suspicious activity? I forgot what I was posting

There are X number of badges and getting one is a privilege earned, not a Right. CNN itself does not have a "Right" to a badge and I have zero idea what due process has to do with it. THAT is a ridiculous assertion.

I agree with Sanders in that there should be and WILL BE decorum. The left thinks no rules apply to them. Fuck 'em. I'd TAILOR the rules specifically against the left. That isn't hard to do AND be fair. Just has to include the phrase "will behave or be removed". That screws the left right there.

In the meantime, I STILL would challenge the ruling legally. There is absolutely no common sense nor logic to it.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Protect yourself by avoiding having to actually answer the question? That's exactly how ACOSTA and the CNN Lawyers would be doing it too!

Your ability to sidestep, deflect, and resort to nearly blaming others...merely to avoid being held responsible, or accountable for actually answering a question, or presenting a logical thought is TELLING...Liberally, Progressively, and Almost American, Radically Democrat.

If you can't honestly present any kind of answer...OF YOUR OWN. Why bother pretending to be as smart as you want us to believe you are?

Or the little piss ant will just totally ignore you like he does me. I guess my brand of straight forward talk isn't something this little liberal snowflake can handle.

He runs to his safe space when I post. He's a little pussy... looks like one too.

[Noir]

It's quite EASY, Noir...

If the president tosses someone - and it's now being decided by a court - and if they allow it - then obviously the precedent set is that it is obviously allowable under certain circumstances. That is not good for any station no matter who you may support.

Clear?

Or will you deflect and say "ask AT" or whatever. It's truly that simple, it's about precedent and the law and not about who supports who over an incident.

It might be obvious to you and me that it’s a precedent, but it is wasn’t to AT, c’est la vie.

Any roads the court agreed that the action taken was unreasonable so the story rolls on to the next press conference.

[jimnyc]

It might be obvious to you and me that it’s a precedent, but it is wasn’t to AT, c’est la vie.

Any roads the court agreed that the action taken was unreasonable so the story rolls on to the next press conference.

The only thing they said that was unreasonable was the due process part, they never said that tossing him was wrong as of yet. The case will be continued It's still possible he gets tossed. And of course, him and others being a disruption can still be tossed on their ears if they continue.

[jimnyc]

As it should be.

---

PRESIDENT TRUMP Responds to Court Ruling on Acosta: “If He Misbehaves, We’ll Throw Him Out”

President Trump put liberal hack reporters on Friday on notice.

Trump told Chris Wallace if Jim Acosta misbehaves in the future that –“We’ll throw him out.”

Rest - https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...him-out-video/

[jimnyc]

Major Garrett Throws Shade on Jim Acosta: When President Says it’s Not Your Turn, You Give Up the Mic

CBS White House correspondent Major Garrett says he disagrees with how CNN’s Jim Acosta conducted himself in last week’s explosive tete-a-tete with President Trump.

Garrett spoke to Mediaite alum Larry O’Connor for his radio show on Friday, where he lamented the situation over CNN’s lawsuit against the Trump Administration for their revocation of Acosta’s press credentials. Garrett said he isn’t sure the White House will succeed in court with the legal argument they’re making against Acosta, though the lawsuit is “uncharted territory” in many ways and presents the judiciary with many new questions about press freedom.

The court has since ruled in favor of CNN and said Acosta’s press pass must be restored.

As Garrett talked about how he doesn’t make a habit of critiquing the journalistic styles of other reporters, O’Connor eventually asked him if there’s a “standard of conduct” that’s expected from the White House press pool. Garrett answered in the affirmative, and he recalled how he gave up the microphone at Trump’s latest presser after mistakenly thinking the president called upon him.

“Some of my colleagues might say ‘what did you do that for,'” Garrett said. “Some might say you laid down and were too deferential, I don’t feel that way…I deferred hoping he might call on me again, he didn’t, that’s how I orient myself to the institution…and I respect the institution and the country’s choice.”

In terms of whether Acosta’s actions were a breach of the code of conduct O’Connor asked about, Garrett said there was a point there, adding “I do my level best to not make myself part of story, and I think the best journalists operate that way.”

https://www.mediaite.com/online/majo...ve-up-the-mic/

[Abbey Marie]

Courts favor injunctions as they allow the aggrieved party to continue or stopmwhatever it was they were doing while the court sorts it all out.

If I was in charge of this at the WH, as part of their new rules, I’d create a soft (temporary) pass, sort of a trial pass, which only renews after a period of acceptable behavior.

Next time Accost-her or anyone gets mouthy, throw him out and instead of revoking, suspend his pass pending further review. And really take your sweet time reviewing. Eventually they will all get the message.