Trump Owns CNN's Jim Acosta

[Adonia]

We now are living in an era of Judicial tyranny. Where does a member of one of the 3 co-equal branches of the Federal government get off on telling the leader of one of the other co-equal branches of the Federal government how to conduct operations within his own domain? I dare say this Judge would be outraged if the President tried to tell him how to run his courtroom.

The fact is, this sort of thing has been happening too many times of late, especially since Mr. Trump became the President. These Judges are turning privilege's into rights and ignoring the rights that are actually listed in the Constitution. This stuff must stop and the proper balance and respect between the 3 co-equal branches of the Federal government restored.

But concerning Mr. Acosta. So now the low class disrespectful reporter gets his press pass back, so what? The WH simply does not have to call on him anymore. I say let him sit there and stew in silence.

 

[Salty]

Remember - the ruling was that due process was not given. - it was not a first amendment ruling.

 

[church mouse guy]

Remember - the ruling was that due process was not given. - it was not a first amendment ruling.

I am sure that you agree that that was a crazy ruling, too, --due process--since when does the President need a Judge to throw a bum out of the White House?

I don't totally blame Acosta--I am sure that he is only doing what his bosses at CNN tell him to do. CNN is trying to run a network news broadcast on the cheap. They don't want to pay to put on a first-class operation.

 

[Adonia]

Remember - the ruling was that due process was not given. - it was not a first amendment ruling.

Due process not given? Let me go into that Judge's courtroom as a journalist and harangue him with a speech, browbeat him with my opinion, and then refuse to yield the floor when told to and see how much "due process" I would get. I would probably be removed from the courtroom immediately AND held in contempt of the court at the same time. And I would not be surprised if I wasn't allowed in his courtroom in the future either.

This is nothing less than one co-equal branch of the government wrongly attempting to tell another what to do. As for the alleged 1st Amendment violation, that charge is completely without merit in my opinion. No news outlets have been closed down and no journalist has been arrested. The 1st Amendment continues to be respected by the Trump Administration despite trying to ban one single reporter.

 

[church mouse guy]

There're a lot of good questions to be asked of Trump. CNN and others with their tedious antics disrupt true journalism so that the American people are kept in the dark. Remember when Trump went to Houston, the "journalists" played up the fact that Melania wore high heels to the plane and then changed to tennis shoes in Houston. They actually had time for this sort of thing in a severe emergency. What is wrong with the American people?

 

[TCassidy]

since when does the President need a Judge to throw a bum out of the White House?

There are two issues in play here. The first is that the White House is government owned property (we, the people) and is therefore public property. Access to public property may be restricted but those restrictions must be for a specific and specified reason.

The second issue is that there are no firm rules for issuing or revoking a hard pass. The judge has (correctly, in my opinion) ruled that "because I don't like him" is not a valid reason to revoke the hard pass as no such reason is specified when the pass is signed for.

The judge is not saying the White House cannot ban a reporter by revoking his hard pass. He is saying there has to be a specified reason for such a revocation and that reason had to have been made known to the person requesting and accepting the hard pass.

 

[church mouse guy]

There are two issues in play here. The first is that the White House is government owned property (we, the people) and is therefore public property. Access to public property may be restricted but those restrictions must be for a specific and specified reason.

The second issue is that there are no firm rules for issuing or revoking a hard pass. The judge has (correctly, in my opinion) ruled that "because I don't like him" is not a valid reason to revoke the hard pass as no such reason is specified when the pass is signed for.

The judge is not saying the White House cannot ban a reporter by revoking his hard pass. He is saying there has to be a specified reason for such a revocation and that reason had to have been made known to the person requesting and accepting the hard pass.

No one has a transcript of the decision because the judge refuses to publicly post it and one has to pay money for it. Secondly, there is no law concerning this issue with press conferences only about one hundred years old having been started by the progressive Wilson. Thirdly, the executive branch can clearly regulate this issue since it is purely an executive branch issue. There is no need to have press conferences and there is no reason to have them in the White House, which I think lost a swimming pool to this event. The solution seems to be to move them out of the White House so that reporters cannot threaten the life of the President in his home. Finally, the President needs to assume total control over who is invited and who can speak. Acosta is still a bum who did not do what the Commander-in-Chief asked.

 

[TCassidy]

No one has a transcript of the decision because the judge refuses to publicly post it and one has to pay money for it.

That is because there is no "decision" to transcribe. The judge issued a TRO. The TRO itself contains all the language required. And you always have to pay for copies of court documents. That is standard operating procedure.

Secondly, there is no law concerning this issue with press conferences only about one hundred years old having been started by the progressive Wilson.

The problem is the White House never put the requirements to get, or keep, a hard pass in writing.

Thirdly, the executive branch can clearly regulate this issue since it is purely an executive branch issue.

It certainly can. The problem is that it didn't. Go into your local Post Office and read the posters on the wall. There is one called Rules and Regulations Governing Conduct on Postal Service Property. It is known as Poster #7. It outlines the reasons a person can be removed from Post Office property. All the White House has to do print up a similar set of regulations. Problem solved.

 

[church mouse guy]

That is because there is no "decision" to transcribe. The judge issued a TRO. The TRO itself contains all the language required. And you always have to pay for copies of court documents. That is standard operating procedure.

The problem is the White House never put the requirements to get, or keep, a hard pass in writing.

It certainly can. The problem is that it didn't. Go into your local Post Office and read the posters on the wall. There is one called Rules and Regulations Governing Conduct on Postal Service Property. It is known as Poster #7. It outlines the reasons a person can be removed from Post Office property. All the White House has to do print up a similar set of regulations. Problem solved.

No, the information about this ruling should have been released to the public because of the national issue of the ruling. The White House is not some post office somewhere. The President does not need to satisfy some judge somewhere about how admittance to the White House is determined. No President needs to draw up a set of regulations to satisfy any court anywhere on this matter. The reporters guild that controls the organizations allowed should not have that privilege anymore. CNN has a very small audience and the President should invite more professional organizations to send reporters and should deny access to CNN. People such as Acosta who is mostly a political operative of some sort without a modicum of shame or decorum should be thrown out of the White House forever. Even CBS showed disgust with CNN. Cuban communist dissident Silvio Canto in Dallas said that Trump should have ignored CNN because of their small audience and low ratings. I think that Trump will ignore CNN in the future. The press conferences should be moved out of the White House forever. The building is too small and too old for these businesses to trample all over it all the time. People say that it is kind of a dump inside.

 

[carpro]

No, the information about this ruling should have been released to the public because of the national issue of the ruling. The White House is not some post office somewhere. The President does not need to satisfy some judge somewhere about how admittance to the White House is determined. .

I believe the White House is the President's home. He doesn't have to allow anyone in that he doesn't want in. And he alone makes the rules.

 

[TCassidy]

I believe the White House is the President's home. He doesn't have to allow anyone in that he doesn't want in. And he alone makes the rules.

Only part of the White House is designated as the President's Residence. The rest is governmental offices, storage, kitchens, etc.

The President can certainly ban someone from entering those portions of the White House that are designated as "Residence" but he cannot do the same to those portions that are functionally part of the Executive Branch of government.

 

[carpro]

Only part of the White House is designated as the President's Residence. The rest is governmental offices, storage, kitchens, etc.

The President can certainly ban someone from entering those portions of the White House that are designated as "Residence" but he cannot do the same to those portions that are functionally part of the Executive Branch of government.

There are some legal experts that disagree with you.

” The White House is the president’s house. He lives there, and sleeps there. Yes, it has offices, but the White House is not a department; it is not an agency created by Congress and subject to standard congressional oversight. It is instead the residence of the independently elected head of state, and those who work there do so as part of his household staff.

CNN and Acosta are asking a federal judge to order the president as to whom he must allow into his home. The executive branch is a separate, coequal branch from the judicial branch. It would be as much of an insult for a federal judge to tell the president that he must allow someone into his living room as it would be for the president to order the Supreme Court regarding whom the justices must allow into their courtroom.'

 

[InTheLight]

CNN is reporting that the White House sent Acosta an email saying as soon as the judge's temporary restraining order is lifted they will impose the ban on him again. So once again CNN is pounding the drum of 1st amendment rights being violated. Not really. Acosta can still cover the White House, he just can't do it from inside the White House. CNN has other correspondents inside the White House. Acosta and CNN are going to lose this argument.

 

[carpro]

CNN is reporting that the White House sent Acosta an email saying as soon as the judge's temporary restraining order is lifted they will impose the ban on him again. So once again CNN is pounding the drum of 1st amendment rights being violated. Not really. Acosta can still cover the White House, he just can't do it from inside the White House. CNN has other correspondents inside the White House. Acosta and CNN are going to lose this argument.

Eventually.

 

[church mouse guy]

Maybe Trump should move out of the White House so that Acosta will be more comfortable there.