White House revokes CNN's Jim Acosta's press credentials

[Mike Honcho 4,010]

:lol:

 

 

There is absolutely no way CNN ultimately prevails in their lawsuit. This is not a 1st Amendment issue. However, I fully expect them to judge shop and find the looniest liberal judge who will make up a reason for the lawsuit to proceed until saner and more logical minds squash it.

 

The Atlantic

 

The Legal Precedent That Could Protect Jim Acosta’s Credentials

A 1977 court ruling said that administrations cannot bar correspondents from the briefing room without “due process.”

 

Sherrill v. H Knight

 

 

The new steps enunciated in the Sherrill decision to ensure that reporters’ First Amendment rights are not violated include the requirement to give the reporter notice and the right to rebut a formal written decision, which must accompany any revocation. “We further conclude that notice, opportunity to rebut, and a written decision are required because the denial of a pass potentially infringes upon First Amendment guarantees,” the court’s ruling states. “Such impairment of this interest cannot be permitted to occur in the absence of adequate procedural due process.”

 

“If the Secret Service makes this kind of determination that they’re going to no longer let someone have access, or limit access from the start, there should be a really good reason for that,” Michele Kimball, a media-law professor at George Washington University, said. “And if you are denied that access, there should be some sort of procedural due process for you, [so] that you can find out what happened. And it’s sort of that check to make sure that, again, it’s being handled evenhandedly.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the decision:

 

 

13

Rather, we are presented with a situation where the White House has voluntarily decided to establish press facilities for correspondents who need to report therefrom. These press facilities are perceived as being open to all bona fide19 Washington-based journalists, whereas most of the White House itself, and press facilities in particular, have not been made available to the general public. White House press facilities having been made publicly available as a source of information for newsmen,20 the protection afforded newsgathering under the first amendment guarantee of freedom of the press, see Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 681, 707, 92 S.Ct. 2646, 33 L.Ed.2d 626 (1972); Pell v. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817, 829-35, 94 S.Ct. 2800, 41 L.Ed.2d 495 (1974), requires that this access not be denied arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons. See Southeastern Promotions v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546, 95 S.Ct. 1239, 43 L.Ed.2d 448 (1975); Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444, 58 S.Ct. 666, 82 L.Ed. 949 (1938). Not only newsmen and the publications for which they write, but also the public at large have an interest protected by the first amendment in assuring that restrictions on newsgathering be no more arduous than necessary, and that individual newsmen not be arbitrarily excluded from sources of information. See Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 491-92, 95 S.Ct. 1029, 43 L.Ed.2d 328 (1975); Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630, 40 S.Ct. 17, 63 L.Ed. 1173 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); United States v. Associated Press, 52 F.Supp. 362, 372 (S.D.N.Y.1943) ("right conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues, than through any kind of authoritative selection") (L. Hand, J.).

 

 

I'm sure you two will be proven right.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

 

 

 

The Atlantic

 

The Legal Precedent That Could Protect Jim Acosta’s Credentials

A 1977 court ruling said that administrations cannot bar correspondents from the briefing room without “due process.”

 

Sherrill v. H Knight

 

 

I'm sure you two will be proven right.

 

We will.

 

Liberals always running to the courts and judge shopping. CNN is free to send someone else besides Acosta. No 1A issue here at all.

[supermike80 1,285]

So he wins.i still say slap him in the back and never call on him. Acostas ego will never be able to handle that and he will end up doing something stupid

[RLLD 3,455]

So he wins.i still say slap him in the back and never call on him. Acostas ego will never be able to handle that and he will end up doing something stupid

 

That is a solid way to go, he wants to be a douche, put his hands on women, completely ignore anything he ever says, dont even look at him.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

So he wins.i still say slap him in the back and never call on him. Acostas ego will never be able to handle that and he will end up doing something stupid

 

Hmmm...not a bad idea. I wonder if that is actually a more worse punishment than banning him outright.

[wiffleball 4,631]

So this is one more example of the lunatics on the left not giving a fock about "freedom of the press" until Orange Man Bad kicked out a troll.

No. Let me explain it to you. Plenty of reporters have been kicked out for a day. It's like getting kicked out of your favorite bar for being too drunk. There's a difference between being 86th in the moment and being banned for life. In the instances described above, they didn't lose their hard pass. They lost maybe an event to send a message.

[wiffleball 4,631]

Honestly wh had little else leverage. What are they going to do? Refuse to do sit down Interviews with CNN?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,590]

Just don't do press conferences on a daily basis. Just do canned press releases.

[wiffleball 4,631]

Just don't do press conferences on a daily basis. Just do canned press releases.

They're pretty close to that already.

 

Trump does even less than gwb i believe.

 

I wrote about the 'open outcry' somewhere. I wouldn't do it either.

 

But I would do maybe a weekly one on one with rotating press.

[RLLD 3,455]

CNN is really ruining all the fun....

[Herbivore 904]

 

That is a solid way to go, he wants to be a douche, put his hands on women, completely ignore anything he ever says, dont even look at him.

the "put his hands on her" angle is embarrasing

[RLLD 3,455]

the "put his hands on her" angle is embarrasing

 

Don't be embarrassed, if SJW's can use this logic, so can I ....

[KSB2424 3,082]

No. Let me explain it to you. Plenty of reporters have been kicked out for a day. It's like getting kicked out of your favorite bar for being too drunk. There's a difference between being 86th in the moment and being banned for life. In the instances described above, they didn't lose their hard pass. They lost maybe an event to send a message.

 

Acosta was banned for life?

[wiffleball 4,631]

 

Acosta was banned for life?

...he also wasn't in a bar...

 

Sheesh

[Herbivore 904]

 

Don't be embarrassed, if SJW's can use this logic, so can I ....

its just who you are

[KSB2424 3,082]

...he also wasn't in a bar...

 

Sheesh

 

[RLLD 3,455]

its just who you are

 

Absolutely, I can only hope that SJW-types cry foul, it really demonstrates the duality within....

[KSB2424 3,082]

[cbfalcon 824]

You all are acting like you didnt realize Trump planned this whole story as a distraction. I mean, Trump called on him first or almost first in a full room of reporters, right? Its good for ratings, keeps worse stories about Trump off page 1, plays well with the Trump base (see almost every post in this thread), etc.

[RLLD 3,455]

I think the WH should really just give him the access back at this point, but I can also understand why they want to let it ride out.....

 

I think there is some strategic advantage to be found here, but ultimately they need to know that the courts will compel them to let him back. For fun I would just give it back to him the day before it goes before a judge, then take it away a few days later, make CNN go through all the court stuff all over, rinse and repeat....

 

At this point, I hate CNN more than I hate Fox....

[RLLD 3,455]

https://giphy.com/gifs/leroypatterson-jkZprul7I0zh4EhMBe

 

 

[NorthernVike 2,080]

https://giphy.com/gifs/leroypatterson-jkZprul7I0zh4EhMBe

 

 

 

[Cdub100 3,368]

You all are acting like you didnt realize planned this whole story as a distraction. I mean, Trump called on him first or almost first in a full room of reporters, right? Its good for ratings, keeps worse stories about Trump off page 1, plays well with the Trump base (see almost every post in this thread), etc.

I thought Trump had already been up there for an hour?

[supermike80 1,285]

You all are acting like you didnt realize planned this whole story as a distraction. I mean, Trump called on him first or almost first in a full room of reporters, right? Its good for ratings, keeps worse stories about Trump off page 1, plays well with the Trump base (see almost every post in this thread), etc.

Honestly, I don't think he's that smart

[wiffleball 4,631]

https://giphy.com/gifs/leroypatterson-jkZprul7I0zh4EhMBe

 

 

Lol

 

They do it in sports all the time!

[edjr 5,547]

https://giphy.com/gifs/leroypatterson-jkZprul7I0zh4EhMBe

 

 

 

[cbfalcon 824]

I thought Trump had already been up there for an hour?

I saw someone on twitter say he went straight to Acosta, but I suppose I dont know if that is accurate.

 

Regardless, it seems like an obvious distraction ploy, and one that plays very well with his base.

[RLLD 3,455]

Honestly, I don't think he's that smart

 

I agree.

 

I think he is stumbling in the woods more often than not, and if CNN would try a little less hard to attack him, he would almost certainly finish himself off. He is like Forrest Gump.....

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

Trump has put America in its best position in decades and people are questioning his intelligence? But his tweets are embarrassing they say as our country and its economy continues to boom.

Republicans should nominate a different candidate in 2020 that wont stick up for himself.

[cbfalcon 824]

Trump has put America in its best position in decades and people are questioning his intelligence? But his tweets are embarrassing they say as our country and its economy continues to boom.

Republicans should nominate a different candidate in 2020 that wont stick up for himself.

 

Economy is doing well and he deserves some credit for that.

 

On most other issues, many would argue that we are nowhere close to our best position in decades and in some cases we are in our worst position in decades. But of course, there would be disagreement on many of those topics and those disagreements simply come down to having different values and/or believing different things are more important to the big picture for this country.

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

He only deserves some credit for the economy and on most other issues we arent close to where weve been in the past. Ok

[Cdub100 3,368]

I saw someone on twitter say he went straight to Acosta, but I suppose I dont know if that is accurate.

 

Regardless, it seems like an obvious distraction ploy, and one that plays very well with his base.

I'm not sure either.

 

Also I'm not sure it was a ploy. Acosta has been an @ss for a long time. He finally stepped over the line. It was going to happen sooner or later and I'm shocked it didn't happen after his out burst during the meeting with Kim un.

 

If anything Acosta wanted to be marter... At least in his eyes.

[cbfalcon 824]

He only deserves some credit for the economy and on most other issues we arent close to where weve been in the past. Ok

 

You can delete the word SOME if that makes you feel better. I wasn't meaning to use the term as a figure of measurement.

[MDC 5,877]

Unemployment is down what - 0.5% since Trumps been in office? Whoop Dee Focking Doo.

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

Unemployment is down what - 0.5% since Trumps been in office? Whoop Dee Focking Doo.

Stop

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/trumps-numbers-october-2018-update/

[RLLD 3,455]

Unemployment is down what - 0.5% since Trumps been in office? Whoop Dee Focking Doo.

 

Who can say what his actions actually did to deliver this, typically there is a lag from action to outcome in an economy like ours.

 

BUT, I have to disagree pretty emphatically with your characterization. Low unemployment is HUGE for our economy, and if sustained is absolutely a broad sword to smash away at poverty. This is a big deal.

[cbfalcon 824]

I'm not sure either.

 

Also I'm not sure it was a ploy. Acosta has been an @ss for a long time. He finally stepped over the line. It was going to happen sooner or later and I'm shocked it didn't happen after his out burst during the meeting with Kim un.

 

If anything Acosta wanted to be marter... At least in his eyes.

 

I just glanced at a transcript. It doesn't list names beside the questions, but.........it looks like Trump talked for a long time, then when he went to questions, Acosta was 4th or so out of the 50-60 people he took questions from. It's somewhat difficult to be 100% sure because the questions don't have names beside them, but it seems obvious which ones were the same person asking a follow up, etc.

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/transcript-trump-raucous-press-conference-midterm-election/

 

That said, how quickly he went to Acosta isn't the main point. I don't think very much of Trump's intelligence, but I do think he knows exactly how to bate the media (in this case CNN).... and I think this CNN story has been good for him this week, as it has gotten more coverage than others that may not play as well with his base.

[MDC 5,877]

Stop

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/trumps-numbers-october-2018-update/

Sorry - 1%. It was falling for years before he took over.

 

Are there other accomplishments Im missing? You guys act like these results are so staggering we can only get them if we elect a toddler who pays hush money to horsefaced hookers. Thats the price we pay for outside the box ideas like tax cuts and deficit spending.

[MDC 5,877]

 

Who can say what his actions actually did to deliver this, typically there is a lag from action to outcome in an economy like ours.

 

BUT, I have to disagree pretty emphatically with your characterization. Low unemployment is HUGE for our economy, and if sustained is absolutely a broad sword to smash away at poverty. This is a big deal.

Unemployment was low and moving in this direction when Trump took office. Naturally when it goes up again the Trumpers will blame Congressional Dems.

 

Also youre mixing metaphors - nobody smashes things woth a broad sword.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Unemployment was low and moving in this direction when Trump took office. Naturally when it goes up again the Trumpers will blame Congressional Dems.

 

 

Whoopdedoo that it went down, but if it is a big deal Obama did it.