Law CNN suing trump for Jim Acosta ban

[Andy Capp]

Context will always matter.

I invite you to watch the Trump, Abby exchange video I linked above which no Trumpbot wants to discuss.

If Trump says day after day that he wants to shut down, stop or otherwise disrupt the Muller Investigation and he hires a guy as AAG who has said he thinks the Muller Investigation should be shut down or otherwise creatively shut down then the Press has EVERY RIGHT to pursue that question to an answer no matter how much Trump tries to deflect.

Abby would have EVERY RIGHT to have replied to Trump 'no you are the stupid one and a liar' but she did not She remained polite. Trump was wrong. But no Trumpbots call him out. But had Abby responded in kind, as per her right, they would certainly call her out. You would have posters like Inga saying what Trump said or did was 'irrelevant' while trying to judge her actions in a bubble.

The way the Press deals with the POTUS is and WILL BE a direct reflection of how the POTUS deals with the Press. It is that way by NECESSITY. Otherwise you end up with Trump/Abby exchanges where the POUTS just walks all over the reporter denying her the ability to do her job.

Can you imagine if Trump tried to dodge a question and the reporter shot back with, You are a liar and a disgrace to the constitution of the United States, IF you can't answer this straight-forward question. I feel this is well within the rights of the 4th estate as you do, but there's no way a reporter could ever get away with it in either the US or Canada. I acknowledge we're not much different. That person would be publicly flogged in a verbal way via social media, no matter how many people might be in silent agreement.

 

[Andy Capp]

So you agree with what my point but disagree with the part I never said

Got it

Er no. And thus ends our discussion on this topic.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

For as bad a reputation as O'Reilly deservedly has, this does happen to be one topic he's very qualified to speak on. Problem is he doesn't address the legal issues presented in this case. Ethical/moral ideas of right/wrong don't always align with legal ideas of right/wrong

EDIT: Just saw the courts already ruled in favor of CNN. Lol I guess I should probably do better to keep up with the present

Yeah, and I think that this is where there is a communication breakdown is in this thread.
What is legal vs what is 'right'. It just feels like Acosta/CNN are winning on a technicality here.
The judge ruled that the White House had to give Acosta his pass back because it violated due process.
I didn't know the due process law in relation to a case like this, so I just thought the 1st amendment argument was bullshit.

But the way that the CNN lawyer , and CNN supporters framed their argument was a mischaracterization of what actually happened. I can't stand Trump, but let's not stoop to his level to try and score points. The CNN lawyer acted like Trump went 3rd world dictator and just took Acosta's pass away because he asked some sort of 'forbidden question.'
It was very clear what precipitated the move, and it had to do with Acosta being a disruptive asshole.

I'm honestly curious what exactly is the president expected to do if Acosta did the same thing again? If a guy can just hog the mic, refuse to give it up, and shout out during someone else's turn, there is nothing you can do? You have to fill out some paperwork before you can boot him? That just seems pretty absurd to me. Trump told him he was done multiple times, walked away from the podium to signal he was done with him, and even tried to get someone to forcefully take the mic away, so what else was supposed to be done here?
Acosta acting like some kind of victim that is getting his rights trampled on is some bullshit. The press wasn't under attack here, it was one asshole.

 

[trac209]

Ok, so you can't actually what a leftist is, gotcha. Also, the very idea of protest is discomfort and shaking the status quo. If your sentiment about protesting at people's homes was heeded during the revolution, we would have never become a free nation.

So this is a revolution to you ?

 

[SmilinDesperado]

What people keep missing is that yes the WH can set rules but unless there is a fundamental re-writing of the press role at a Constitutional free speech level they won't be able to stop guys like Acosta.

What people keep missing is that IT IS the press role to be adversarial when necessary and that does not involve cordiality. There is NO expectation of cordiality in that room.

So while the POTUS can refuse to hold any Press Conferences and he can just get up and leave, what he cannot do is control the Press Conference in a way that he limits the challenges that he receives. If a politician is lying, aggressive, a bully and indignant, the Press have EVERY right to meet that fire with fire. And partisan like of dislike of the politician will not impact that.

I don't think this is the issue that most people have though. That's how CNN has framed the argument, but that isn't what the problem is. I don't think anyone really has a problem with a reporter asking tough questions. I don't think anyone here is saying "you should only ask nice questions, and kiss Trump's ass".

I think Trump is an asshole, and a disgrace to the office, but he is still the president. The media can't take any moral highground here if they are just going to be as unprofessional as Trump is. It is important that the press have power, but so long as they actually remain the press--meaning, they need to continue to be impartial, and report information. A lot of these guys are not asking legitimate questions. They are making statements. They are "asking" leading questions to get their own opinions out instead of trying to get Trump's actual thoughts and opinions.
The media has been acting differently largely because of how Trump and Sanders act.

Should Trump stop being an abrasive asshole, and be a better leader? Of course. But does that excuse the press ratcheting up their own brand of assholeness? No. Even when I agree with them, their job is to get information, not try to see who can get the best verbal smackdown/lecture in. If every reporter acted the way that Acosta did it just turns into a clusterfuck. There has to be some level of cordiality, or these events don't work. These guys keep asking stupidly worded questions that can only lead to squabbles.
They aren't doing the people any good by asking questions that have no answers. Especially if all this does is result in Trump just deciding not to do press conferences, or severely limiting them in time and scope.
Their job is to ask questions and interview people, they should be able to form better worded questions that Trump will answer.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Yeah, and I think that this is where there is a communication breakdown is in this thread.
What is legal vs what is 'right'. It just feels like Acosta/CNN are winning on a technicality here.
The judge ruled that the White House had to give Acosta his pass back because it violated due process.
I didn't know the due process law in relation to a case like this, so I just thought the 1st amendment argument was bullshit.

But the way that the CNN lawyer , and CNN supporters framed their argument was a mischaracterization of what actually happened. I can't stand Trump, but let's not stoop to his level to try and score points. The CNN lawyer acted like Trump went 3rd world dictator and just took Acosta's pass away because he asked some sort of 'forbidden question.'
It was very clear what precipitated the move, and it had to do with Acosta being a disruptive asshole.

I'm honestly curious what exactly is the president expected to do if Acosta did the same thing again? If a guy can just hog the mic, refuse to give it up, and shout out during someone else's turn, there is nothing you can do? You have to fill out some paperwork before you can boot him? That just seems pretty absurd to me. Trump told him he was done multiple times, walked away from the podium to signal he was done with him, and even tried to get someone to forcefully take the mic away, so what else was supposed to be done here?
Acosta acting like some kind of victim that is getting his rights trampled on is some bullshit. The press wasn't under attack here, it was one asshole.

Even though the the judge only ruled on the procedural stuff, he specifically told the WH and Trump that if they pushed forward on the 1st amendment stuff they would likely lose based on his readings so far.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I don't think this is the issue that most people have though. That's how CNN has framed the argument, but that isn't what the problem is. I don't think anyone really has a problem with a reporter asking tough questions. I don't think anyone here is saying "you should only ask nice questions, and kiss Trump's ass".

I think Trump is an asshole, and a disgrace to the office, but he is still the president. The media can't take any moral highground here if they are just going to be as unprofessional as Trump is. It is important that the press have power, but so long as they actually remain the press--meaning, they need to continue to be impartial, and report information. A lot of these guys are not asking legitimate questions. They are making statements. They are "asking" leading questions to get their own opinions out instead of trying to get Trump's actual thoughts and opinions.
The media has been acting differently largely because of how Trump and Sanders act.

Should Trump stop being an abrasive asshole, and be a better leader? Of course. But does that excuse the press ratcheting up their own brand of assholeness? No. Even when I agree with them, their job is to get information, not try to see who can get the best verbal smackdown/lecture in. If every reporter acted the way that Acosta did it just turns into a clusterfuck. There has to be some level of cordiality, or these events don't work. These guys keep asking stupidly worded questions that can only lead to squabbles.
They aren't doing the people any good by asking questions that have no answers. Especially if all this does is result in Trump just deciding not to do press conferences, or severely limiting them in time and scope.
Their job is to ask questions and interview people, they should be able to form better worded questions that Trump will answer.

I could not disagree with your post more.

This is exactly what Trump and the WH want.



They want Trump to be able to ignore and simply move on from tough questions or bully and berate those who ask them so they learn not to. Same effect either way in that they want to put a chill on reporters pushing him for the truth.

That is exactly what is at stake. Jim Acosta types are born BECAUSE Abby types (this video) cannot push back on Trump appropriately.

Would you agree she would have every right to tell Trump he 'is a disgrace and a liar' and worse as a retort to what he said and what do you think the Trump bots would say about that? Funny how no one talks about this video and you want TO KNOW WHY? It is because Trump shut this reporter down and no one gives a f*ck about Trump's behaviour. He has normalized his own bad behaviour such that most do not even think it relevant just as Inga said.

 

[voxom]

I could not disagree with your post more.

This is exactly what Trump and the WH want.



They want Trump to be able to ignore and simply move on from tough questions or bully and berate those who ask them so they learn not to. Same effect either way in that they want to put a chill on reporters pushing him for the truth.

That is exactly what is at stake. Jim Acosta types are born BECAUSE Abby types (this video) cannot push back on Trump appropriately.

Would you agree she would have every right to tell Trump he 'is a disgrace and a liar' and worse as a retort to what he said and what do you think the Trump bots would say about that? Funny how no one talks about this video and you want TO KNOW WHY? It is because Trump shut this reporter down and no one gives a f*ck about Trump's behaviour. He has normalized his own bad behaviour such that most do not even think it relevant just as Inga said.

why do you keep trying to frame the acosta situation as if trump was trying to avoid answering a question? trump was trying to move on before acosta even asked his second, completely unrelated to the first, question.

 

[MikeMcMann]

why do you keep trying to frame the acosta situation as if trump was trying to avoid answering a question? trump was trying to move on before acosta even asked his second, completely unrelated to the first, question.

Trump is trying to avoid ANY and ALL reporters who ask tough questions and NOT answer honestly. He does not want to be aggressively pursued to answer to a topic he has already lied about.

It is the media's JOB to not allow him to engage honestly only with suck up media.

 

[voxom]

Trump is trying to avoid ANY and ALL reporters who ask tough questions and NOT answer honestly. He does not want to be aggressively pursued to answer to a topic he has already lied about.

It is the media's JOB to not allow him to engage honestly only with suck up media.

that isn't what he did here at all. why do you keep acting like that is what he was doing here?

 

[hillelslovak87]

that isn't what he did here at all. why do you keep acting like that is what he was doing here?

Maybe because that is what he always does, and what he did in fact do in this instance?

 

[SmilinDesperado]

I could not disagree with your post more.

This is exactly what Trump and the WH want.



They want Trump to be able to ignore and simply move on from tough questions or bully and berate those who ask them so they learn not to. Same effect either way in that they want to put a chill on reporters pushing him for the truth.

That is exactly what is at stake. Jim Acosta types are born BECAUSE Abby types (this video) cannot push back on Trump appropriately.

Would you agree she would have every right to tell Trump he 'is a disgrace and a liar' and worse as a retort to what he said and what do you think the Trump bots would say about that? Funny how no one talks about this video and you want TO KNOW WHY? It is because Trump shut this reporter down and no one gives a f*ck about Trump's behaviour. He has normalized his own bad behaviour such that most do not even think it relevant just as Inga said.

"Do you want him to reign in Robert Mueller? "
On the campaign trail you called yourself a nationalist, some would say you are emboldening white nationalists."
"As you know Mr, president, the caravan was not an invasion."
"In my opinion it was my an invasion."
"Do you think you demonized immigrants? "
"No, not at all. I want them to come in legally..."

These are dumb, lazy questions. There is a way to ask about Mueller, racism, and immigration without being a combative asshole. There's a way to formulate a question that will make a person more likely to answer the question. These guys aren't doing that.
And in the case of Acosta, Trump did answer his questions--Acosta just didn't like the answers.

Can't express enough that I'm not a Trumpbot, so don't want to be defending him. Can't stand the man, but the media does ask him a lot of stupid questions. When you're basically asking the guy if he is a racist, or if he thinks his new AG should do some shady shit to make an investigation go away, what kind of answer do you expect to get?
Despite what your personal opinion is of the man, he gave you his answer.
I don't think Trump likes to be challenged. He is temperamental. But baiting him with dumb, loaded questions is just going to get the typical Trump answer. He isn't going to answer like a gentleman, because he isn't one. He started the bullshit with his rhetoric, but an impartial media should be above the bullshit.

In the video that you posted...I think what she asked was kind of a silly question---or at least how she framed it was silly. I get where she is going from, but I think there were plenty of other smarter ways to ask that question without being insulting.
And Trump, the most unpresidential president to ever president, gave her a Trump answer. He wasn't 'right' in that exchange. I'm not defending his uncouth ways at all, but she didn't ask an 'A+' question there herself.

But I don't really see why we should devolve into who has "the right" to be nasty to whom.
The reporters are there to do a job, and they are doing a crappy one. How many dumb, baiting, leading questions are you going to ask that result in Trump calling you a moron before you start asking some better worded questions? We all know who Trump is now. Their job is to get information, and they aren't getting any out of Trump because they're more worried about getting into pissing matches with him.

And I'm honestly curious on what do you think should be done about any sort of future Acosta situations. If he and reporters refuse to give up the mic, stand up and talk during someone else's turn, what should happen?
I understand that there is a legal process for removing someone, but clearly no one should be allowed to just take over a presidential press conference.

 

[voxom]

Maybe because that is what he always does,

then take it to a thread discussing trump actually doing this instead of trying to act like this is what he was doing here.

and what he did in fact do in this instance?

did you watch the video? acosta asked him a question about the caravan, trump answered, acosta asked a follow up question about the caravan, trump answered again, then said "ok, that's enough. peter, go ahead" trying to move on to the next reporter. then acosta started asking about the russian investigation while the intern was trying to get the mic from him, but acosta wouldn't let it go, and even though truimp was trying to move on acosta finished asking the russian question, trump answered it, then tried to move on again, acosta asked the same question that trump already answered, then acosta finally gives up the mic.



if any of you actually watched the video it's pretty easy to see he wasn't trying to dodge a question about the russian investigation because he was trying to move on before acosta even said anything about russia

 

[hillelslovak87]

then take it to a thread discussing trump actually doing this instead of trying to act like this is what he was doing here.

did you watch the video? acosta asked him a question about the caravan, trump answered, acosta asked a follow up question about the caravan, trump answered again, then said "ok, that's enough. peter, go ahead" trying to move on to the next reporter. then acosta started asking about the russian investigation while the intern was trying to get the mic from him, but acosta wouldn't let it go, and even though truimp was trying to move on acosta finished asking the russian question, trump answered it, then tried to move on again, acosta asked the same question that trump already answered, then acosta finally gives up the mic.

Trump dismissively bitched at Acosta before he had even answered the fucking question. Acosta challenged him on his bullshit, which Trump then took the chance to bitch and moan again, acting as if Jim Acosta ran CNN.

Most people see a pathetic, childish display by the leader of the free world, and you MAGimps see a courageous man standing up to the enemy of the people.

 

[MikeMcMann]

that isn't what he did here at all. why do you keep acting like that is what he was doing here?

It is exactly what he was doing there. ANd more importantly it is his regular M.O so reporters will learn how to deal with him based on how he regularly deals with them.

 

[voxom]

Trump dismissively bitched at Acosta before he had even answered the fucking question. Acosta challenged him on his bullshit, which Trump then took the chance to bitch and moan again, acting as if Jim Acosta ran CNN.

Most people see a pathetic, childish display by the leader of the free world, and you MAGimps see a courageous man standing up to the enemy of the people.

none of what you just said is trump trying to dodge a question...

if trump is as bad as you guys claim he is why can't you guys talk about this situation without lying about it, and claim trump was doing something he wasn't?

 

[voxom]

It is exactly what he was doing there. ANd more importantly it is his regular M.O so reporters will learn how to deal with him based on how he regularly deals with them.

what question was he trying to dodge?

 

[MikeMcMann]

"Do you want him to reign in Robert Mueller? "
On the campaign trail you called yourself a nationalist, some would say you are emboldening white nationalists."
"As you know Mr, president, the caravan was not an invasion."
"In my opinion it was my an invasion."
"Do you think you demonized immigrants? "
"No, not at all. I want them to come in legally..."

These are dumb, lazy questions. There is a way to ask about Mueller, racism, and immigration without being a combative asshole. There's a way to formulate a question that will make a person more likely to answer the question. These guys aren't doing that.
And in the case of Acosta, Trump did answer his questions--Acosta just didn't like the answers.

Can't express enough that I'm not a Trumpbot, so don't want to be defending him. Can't stand the man, but the media does ask him a lot of stupid questions. When you're basically asking the guy if he is a racist, or if he thinks his new AG should do some shady shit to make an investigation go away, what kind of answer do you expect to get?
Despite what your personal opinion is of the man, he gave you his answer.
I don't think Trump likes to be challenged. He is temperamental. But baiting him with dumb, loaded questions is just going to get the typical Trump answer. He isn't going to answer like a gentleman, because he isn't one. He started the bullshit with his rhetoric, but an impartial media should be above the bullshit.

In the video that you posted...I think what she asked was kind of a silly question---or at least how she framed it was silly. I get where she is going from, but I think there were plenty of other smarter ways to ask that question without being insulting.
And Trump, the most unpresidential president to ever president, gave her a Trump answer. He wasn't 'right' in that exchange. I'm not defending his uncouth ways at all, but she didn't ask an 'A+' question there herself.

But I don't really see why we should devolve into who has "the right" to be nasty to whom.
The reporters are there to do a job, and they are doing a crappy one. How many dumb, baiting, leading questions are you going to ask that result in Trump calling you a moron before you start asking some better worded questions? We all know who Trump is now. Their job is to get information, and they aren't getting any out of Trump because they're more worried about getting into pissing matches with him.

And I'm honestly curious on what do you think should be done about any sort of future Acosta situations. If he and reporters refuse to give up the mic, stand up and talk during someone else's turn, what should happen?
I understand that there is a legal process for removing someone, but clearly no one should be allowed to just take over a presidential press conference.

Sorry but you say there are ways to ask the questions without being combative and get the answers.

please cite examples of that with Trump or GTFOH with that.

Trump is always combative and lying and lazy in his answers particularly when dealing with a reporter he feels he can bully or walk over.

I don't know your posting to call you a Trump bot or not but you are certainly a Trump apologist here. You have no issue tearing apart Abby for asking proper and rightful questions and you do not say a WORD about Trumps reply. Nice. You belong with Inga saying what Trump says or does ie irrelevant.

 

[rokzilla]

Sorry but you say there are ways to ask the questions without being combative and get the answers.

please cite examples of that with Trump or GTFOH with that.

Trump is always combative and lying and lazy in his answers particularly when dealing with a reporter he feels he can bully or walk over.

I don't know your posting to call you a Trump bot or not but you are certainly a Trump apologist here. You have no issue tearing apart Abby for asking proper and rightful questions and you do not say a WORD about Trumps reply. Nice. You belong with Inga saying what Trump says or does ie irrelevant.

Jesus man, get off your high horse. Your response to this can be summed up in, the president acts shitty so the press can act shitty. Newsflash, they’ve been acting shitty and foolish his entire presidency. Do you know how many major stories they’ve had to retract because they’ve been wrong? Again, you can’t seem to bring yourself to hold the press to any kind of decency standard because you don’t like the way the president acts. You’re as partisan as they come.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I am shutting down for the night but will just say that simply saying something is not always an answer to a question. The 'he just did not like the answer' is BS more times than not.

An example would be if someone says to Trump (or any Republicans) 'are you trying to get rid of pre-existing conditions in court while saying you are trying to protect them' and Trump or the Repub basically ignores the question while repeating 'we are trying to expand and protect health care including pre-existing conditions for all' that is not an answer anyone has to accept. IT is a lie. Idiot partisans have got to a point recently where they say 'he said SOMETHING' therefore its an answer and you just don't like the answer. NO., it is not an answer just because you say something. An answer addresses the question in a true and honest way and the reporter can CHASE that answer until he gets it. That is their right.