accoster
so with the policy making judges ruling that this prick HAS to be reinstated then does that mean that ALL "reporters" shall be given access to the White House press room ????? if i was labeled a "reporter" from the Weekly Wipe here in tiny Jackass Flats that means i have a "RIGHT" to be seated ????? i am tired of judges blatantly functioning in the other 2 TWO branches of govt.....
0
-
then WH press conferences may need to be held in a football stadium to accomodate every "reporter" in the world ....i am from FIJI and I want my seat.....some common sense crowd control does not have to emamate from a throne 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
Acosta has been a disruptive pain in the ass for almost two years. He preaches rather than questions, and takes more time than any other reporter in the room.
At some point, one has to decide if his presence advances or retards the spirit of the 1st Amendment. If his elimination advances that cause, it would be in support of the Constitution.
Suggesting that the exclusion of one individual because of his specific behavior is in any way an abridgment of freedom of the press is a ridiculous position, IMO.
That said, CNN should be given a seat, and if they choose Acosta, that seat should be a silent one and he will be free to report upon anything he hears.0 -
It should be a privilege and you should be invited.
When you show up you should exude a decorum toward the POTUS no matter how he acts.
Be the better man.
Jim Acosta is a little pimp and CNN should be ashamed to have him as their representative.0 -
Exactly right, Sam. 0 -
If memory serves me right Obama did the same thing and the democraps never said a word 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
There was zero constitutional issues involved in this matter. CNN has roughly 50 credentialed reporters that can have access to these briefings, barring one jerk does not impede CNN's ability to report. There was no censorship, there was no criminal charges or invasion of his person. His 1st and 5th amendment rights were not violated. No unwarranted searches, no suppression of what he says or writes. He was simply barred for being as jerk.0 -
Someone should just bitch slap him. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
Once again, for the extremely feeble minded ones, he only lost his permanent badge.
He could still apply for a daily pass. He just thinks his self importance is way higher than that.0 -
Who ever heard of him before Trump? Just another poser trying desperately to turn his 15 min of fame into 16. 0 -
Sam - I?m right there with you on this - Privilege not a Right.
If I were the President, I?d be sure to consider not have another presser until the new rules were in place... Same as kids, punish them all for one?s infraction then part of the punishment to the guilty one is dealt by the others.
But maybe the President has some items that he feels he can advance via the press until then.0 -
to answer your question, not reporter is entitled to get a had pass to the White House. Each National News Network are given X amount of passes that they can give to their reporters. So you have to be working for one of these national news networks and pass a background check to be eligible to get one of their (the national news networks) hard pass. They don't just give them out to high school reporters or local news reporters. They have to be working for one of the national news networks. That said
What needs to happen is that whoever gives a press conference put on a pair of noise eliminating headphones that only receives the reporters that's called upon question, and have a couple of microphones that have the ability for the person that giving the news conference the ability to shut off the microphone that automatically goes to the other microphone. that way loudmouth Jim can't be heard...
By the way whoever gives the press conference isn't obligated to call any particular person to ask their question. So Jim will just be wasting his time being there if nobody calls upon him.
CNN will fire him and find somebody else to feel his seat if he is never called upon to ask a question. Problem solved. Plus it would make an example out of him for any other reporter that wants to lecture, or not ask one question with a follow-up question to the first question as proper decorum dictates.0 -
Since fake news rules the airwaves. Rules of engagement are now required since jack offs like Jim Accosta are allowed to be the jerks they are. Back when there was respect for the office of the president this kind of crap never occurred.
In a age of non political correctness. Jim A would have just got a good ass whopping that he so richly deserved by his peers.0 -
Trump WILL engage Occoster, if nothing else to prove he (Trump) is fair and to have the last word. 0 -
I would like someone in the press pool to start bullying Jim. Like yelling at him "Sit down you frickin beaner".
Jim Acosta is a little pimp that needs his ass kicked. I bet he has never been in a fist fight in his life. He looks like a squirrel to me and I would love to jap slap him in the face.
I would have given $100 to see that girl slap his face when he put his hands on her.
rain on acosta
Here is what Major Garret said:
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.?
+1 Major you are there to report not be the news, acosta is a pimp.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
Acosta has been a disruptive pain in the ass for almost two years. He preaches rather than questions, and takes more time than any other reporter in the room.
At some point, one has to decide if his presence advances or retards the spirit of the 1st Amendment. If his elimination advances that cause, it would be in support of the Constitution.
Suggesting that the exclusion of one individual because of his specific behavior is in any way an abridgment of freedom of the press is a ridiculous position, IMO.
That said, CNN should be given a seat, and if they choose Acosta, that seat should be a silent one and he will be free to report upon anything he hears.
As is so often the case,.......spot on again IMO.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by SCOUT5
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
There was zero constitutional issues involved in this matter. CNN has roughly 50 credentialed reporters that can have access to these briefings, barring one jerk does not impede CNN's ability to report. There was no censorship, there was no criminal charges or invasion of his person. His 1st and 5th amendment rights were not violated. No unwarranted searches, no suppression of what he says or writes. He was simply barred for being as jerk.
I believe that Acosta's right to profession was one of the significant issues in question regarding due process.
Whether or not all CNN reporters were being barred is not the issue, because if one can be barred for no clear and defensible reason today, what is to prevent all reporters from particular news sources being banned tomorrow ? or what is to prevent the intimidation of reporters who wish to challenge a response given by a politician ?
Have you read either the initial litigation or the court's decision ?
I thought I posted up the link to the 18 pages of swill. It is irrelevant. It is not the Constitution of the United States of America, and his (Accoster) behavior is not protected as such.
Funny thing is the judge who made the ruling was a Trump Appointee, not hearing much about that now are we? And yes, that judge needs to be jailed for TREASON. So for the Trump haters, why are they not on this? Trump picked a judge who ruled against himself. Funny how that would not be splashed all over the Fake News.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by SCOUT5
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
There was zero constitutional issues involved in this matter. CNN has roughly 50 credentialed reporters that can have access to these briefings, barring one jerk does not impede CNN's ability to report. There was no censorship, there was no criminal charges or invasion of his person. His 1st and 5th amendment rights were not violated. No unwarranted searches, no suppression of what he says or writes. He was simply barred for being as jerk.
I believe that Acosta's right to profession was one of the significant issues in question regarding due process.
Whether or not all CNN reporters were being barred is not the issue, because if one can be barred for no clear and defensible reason today, what is to prevent all reporters from particular news sources being banned tomorrow ? or what is to prevent the intimidation of reporters who wish to challenge a response given by a politician ?
Have you read either the initial litigation or the court's decision ?
Yup, you are right.
Furthermore to prevent these type of issues in the future I would create clear standards of conduct during these events. After that Jim Acosta would be welcome with open arms with a newly minted press pass. Then during future conferences I would not call on him for a question.0 -
new pass if issued indicates a new cubbie reporter to be ASSIGNED a newbie seat on the BACK ROW....and staff sees to it he parks there ONLY 0 -
quote:And here I thought you were a fan of the constitution.
POTUS is a government employee, not the king.
The top government employee elected by the people and given a 4 year lease on the house he lives in. I have a right to throw out any trash that comes into my leased apartment and disrespects me. If the Turd can't be professional or civil, I have no problem throwing him out.
And by the way I own just as much of that house as you or anybody else and I don't want him there. We already voted on who lives there and I see no reason why he should have to take that kind of crap while he occupies the White House.
New future rule - If you do what he has done in the future you have to spend 3 months as a personal aid to Maxine Waters.
Or spend 3 months sitting on a stool during press conferences, facing the corner with a "Dunce" hat on and your mouth shut.
PS: Where in the constitution does is say the POTUS has to put up with the wild, undisciplined, rude pigs of CNN.
Perhaps you are a fan of Acosta and want to shower together but keep that moron on your side of the fence.0 -
Accoster said the immigrants were 1000's of miles away. He was wrong on two counts, there aren't immigrants they are invaders and they were at the Texas / Mexico border in days.
Accoster is a dickweed and I hope he returns to the press conferences and I'd bet Trump can't wait to see him wave his hand shout.
This was a good excuse for Trump to write the rules, another thing I'm looking forward to seeing.
Hoping Accoster "bucks" the rules and Trump throws him out and asks him to drop off his pass with WH Security.
He's about a screwed as it gets.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sam06
It should be a privilege and you should be invited.
When you show up you should exude a decorum toward the POTUS no matter how he acts.
Be the better man.
Jim Acosta is a little pimp and CNN should be ashamed to have him as their representative.
++++0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sam06
It should be a privilege and you should be invited.
When you show up you should exude a decorum toward the POTUS no matter how he acts.
Be the better man.
Jim Acosta is a little pimp and CNN should be ashamed to have him as their representative.
++++0 -
His freedom of speech was not infringed. He was not imprisoned or charged with a crime. He was free to write or say what ever he wished. He was simply told his behavior was not appropriate for that setting and not to come back.
It was not a constitutional issue and in no way impaired the free press or his right to express his opinions. The man was simply being held accountable for his inappropriate actions. Heaven forbid a man that acts inappropriately would have to be held responsible.
It was not a constitutional issue.0 -
quote:Originally posted by SCOUT5
His freedom of speech was not infringed. He was not imprisoned or charged with a crime. He was free to write or say what ever he wished. He was simply told his behavior was not appropriate for that setting and not to come back.
It was not a constitutional issue and in no way impaired the free press or his right to express his opinions. The man was simply being held accountable for his inappropriate actions. Heaven forbid a man that acts inappropriately would have to be held responsible.
It was not a constitutional issue.
This is where Trump may actually start drying the swamp. The media has lied and mis interpreted so much for so long and has hidden behind a non existent protection they made up under the guise of "Free Speech".
Trump is letting them know their words and actions do have consequence in a civilized nation.0 -
The courts are as corrupt as the ruling elite. 0 -
The judicial branch has no authority over the executive branch's constitutional rights. Obama simply never had many press conferences. He just did whatever he dam pleased with no consequences. If Trump was black that would solve all this crap and they would love him. Or if he was a traitor it would be OK also. Right BARZY? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by SCOUT5
His freedom of speech was not infringed. He was not imprisoned or charged with a crime. He was free to write or say what ever he wished. He was simply told his behavior was not appropriate for that setting and not to come back.
It was not a constitutional issue and in no way impaired the free press or his right to express his opinions. The man was simply being held accountable for his inappropriate actions. Heaven forbid a man that acts inappropriately would have to be held responsible.
It was not a constitutional issue.
Did you read the court opinion ?
Do you have a link?0 -
But...
The transcript of the Nov. 16 court session in which Kelly delivered his oral ruling was released in group of court papers on Monday. Kelly declared that the White House could not eject Acosta without first providing him due process ? specifically, notice of the revocation of his press pass, a chance for Acosta to respond, and a written decision.
In short, the judge said to the White House: You can't throw out a reporter without going through a process. But if you go through a process ? which you, the White House, can design ? then you can throw the reporter out. In the end, it could be that Kelly's ruling will make it easier for the White House to oust reporters in the future ? and to make the decision stick.0 -
It is an insult to the president and the executive branch.
If I graciously give you a key to my home, and you abuse your privilege, I will take my key back and ban you. There is no in between or other process. If you demonstrate to me that you are worthy of a key, you will get it back.
As such, Accoster had his key revoked. He can still knock on the door and ask for admittance, but he don't have free run any longer until he can prove he is worthy.
For some slimy judge to say any different is just plain disrespect to the leader and the office he holds.
Legislating from the bench, and the kicker is it is one of his appointees. But Trump is still the bad guy. Until Trump grows a pair and starts to demand these clowns follow legal directives and orders, we are sunk.
Liberal judges over-riding the president so our borders can be invaded. What the heck?
If Trump had any balls, he would stop this abuse. He is too worried about being called a dictator.0 -
quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
quote:Originally posted by mag00
It is an insult to the president and the executive branch.
If I graciously give you a key to my home, and you abuse your privilege, I will take my key back and ban you. There is no in between or other process. If you demonstrate to me that you are worthy of a key, you will get it back.
As such, Accoster had his key revoked. He can still knock on the door and ask for admittance, but he don't have free run any longer until he can prove he is worthy.
For some slimy judge to say any different is just plain disrespect to the leader and the office he holds.
Legislating from the bench, and the kicker is it is one of his appointees. But Trump is still the bad guy. Until Trump grows a pair and starts to demand these clowns follow legal directives and orders, we are sunk.
Liberal judges over-riding the president so our borders can be invaded. What the heck?
If Trump had any balls, he would stop this abuse. He is too worried about being called a dictator.
[B)]
Context grasshopper, context, that will be your next challenge.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
48 comments