CNN Files Challenge To Suspension Of Acosta’s Press Access

A couple of days ago, we discussed the prospect of CNN suing the Trump Administration over the suspension of CNN’s Jim Acosta’s press credentials after a flair up in a former press conference with President Donald Trump and the refusal of Acosta to surrender the microphone.  CNN has now filed its  lawsuit and it is basically the claims that we anticipated with one addition: a claim that the move violated the Administrative Procedure Act.  As I have said from the outset, I strongly oppose the move by the White House, even though I feel that Acosta went too far in the press conference.  However, I still remain a bit more cautious than many commentators on what is being described as a slam dunk of a case.

The First Amendment claim cannot be based on some constitutional right to access.  There is no right of access to the White House for the public, as established by the D.C. Circuit in  Sherrill v. H. Knight (1977). Moreover, the court reaffirmed that the press does not have a guarantee of access but only that the denial of access cannot be denied “arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons.”  This comes down to whether Acosta’s conduct offered a compelled reason for his suspension when he refused to yield the mike and continued to speak over the President.  As I mentioned earlier, the court may have to compare his conduct with past behavior of other journalists.  However, the White House is not barring CNN and did not toss others asking the same questions.

The Fifth Amendment claim also only takes you so far.  Whatever due process is owed Acosta will be relatively slight on an issue of access.  The White House is not saying that he is permanently barred and it makes decisions all the time on access for representatives of different media outfits.

The APA claim may suffer from the same problem.  Whatever APA protection that Acosta has in this circumstances would be modest.  It will also return the question to the merits.  Was it “arbitrary and capricious” to suspend access when a reporters would not yield the floor and continued to speak over the President at a formal press conference?  If so, it would be difficult to maintain decorum in such settings.  More importantly, what would the APA afford CNN in this circumstance in terms of procedural protections. There might be a notice requirement and written explanation obligation. However, this is still a procedural device.

None of this means that Judge Timothy J. Kelly will not rule for Acosta and CNN. However, it is not the easy case that many have described in my view and could well be a bad case that makes bad law for the media if they lose.

191 thoughts on “CNN Files Challenge To Suspension Of Acosta’s Press Access”

  1. Bob Woodward criticizes CNN’s Acosta lawsuit, says media’s ’emotionally unhinged’ about Trump

    Bob Woodward, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Watergate journalist whose recent book, “Fear,” described chaotic infighting at the White House, on Tuesday criticized CNN for filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration and charged that too many media figures “have become emotionally unhinged.”

    Speaking at the Global Financial Leadership Conference in Naples, Florida, Woodward said “the remedy [isn’t suing the administration]. … It’s more serious reporting about what he’s doing.” NBC reporter Dylan Byers first flagged Woodward’s comments.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bob-woodward-criticizes-cnns-acosta-lawsuit-says-medias-emotionally-unhinged-about-trump
    —-
    Great links at the story.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  2. “…in my view and could well be a bad case that makes bad law for the media if they lose.”
    ~+~

    Yes, it might establish the doctrine of “Acosta’s Interruptus”

  3. ” As I have said from the outset, I strongly oppose the move by the White House, even though I feel that Acosta went too far in the press conference. ”

    ****************

    Okay so at this legal crossroads what do you do if the POTUS? Accept Acosta back and encourage his antics or bar him and let the courts decide? I opt for position two since it has the virtue of sanctioning a jerk if only for a while.

    1. Why should the courts decide who gets a press pass? Does the president regulate who’s allowed to sit next to Nina Totenberg and Linda Greenhouse when Ruth Bader Ghastly is reading her latest opinion (and not taking questions from NT or anyone else)?

      1. There is no first amendment right to attend or participate in a press conference with POTUS. I don’t care what the 70s DC Circuit Court said. That’s old news.This SCOTUS is not going to side with a sniveling, creep like Acosta who tried to disrupt the proceedings for his own self-aggrandizement.

      2. they can’t. they may just defer to hear the case on separation of powers doctrine alone. dismissed

        or they can hear it a little and then dismiss it. one way or another they tread lightly on this.

    2. all the bad actors in the world and can we really afford to let the POTUS look like he can be totally disrespected at his own press conference by a putz like acosta. good move DJT

      the lawsuit is just stupid

      1. Mr Kurtz – If disrespecting people were the criteria, Trump himself would have to be banned. Keep in mind that one day the other party will be in the White House, how would you feel if it were Ed Henry or some other Fox News reporter asking difficult questions.

        I personally feel reporters should stop attending press conferences until such time as Sarah Huckabee Sanders, trump, et al, stop with the outright and blatant lies and personal attacks..

          1. Paul – You mean the Governor making claims without evidence and trying to keep votes from being counted? (Along with the President). The truth is, not all of the votes have been counted, in Broward County, a huge undervote in the Senate race is likely due to A. Poor placement on the ballot or B. Machine error. If the latter, Nelson may well have been the winner. Living in Florida I’m aware of things Republicans have done for years to reduce voting by some groups by removing people from the rolls, in some cases for having names similar to felons (applied particularly to Hispanic surnames). Republicans have admitted in court to voter suppression yet it continues. I don’t claim to know who the winners are in the three contested races. I suspect when all is said and done, DeSantis will end up beating Gillum, the Dem’s will win the Agriculture Secretary race and the Senate race is up for graps although Scott has control of the levers of State government and will use them all.
            I do wish the local people in Broward Count could get the concept of simple ballots right, they gave us “hanging chads” in 2000, the year the recount was never finished and some argue a partisan SCOTUS gave Bush the Presidency. I think legally they were correct that the Florida Supreme Court made Unconstitutional findings to achieve a fair result which still doesn’t mean Bush won?

                1. enigma – not reporting 45 minutes after the polls closed. Not knowing how many ballots she had, etc. We have some problems that suddenly cropped up here, too. So, you are not on you’re own, Lone Ranger. 😉

            1. “and trying to keep votes from being counted?”

              Paul, Enigma is right for the wrong reason. The Democratic lawyers insist that non-citizen votes be kept. There is blatant fraud on the left but that is what Enigma wants to see happening as long as the fraud favors Democrats.

              This is a chronic problem in Democtatic Broward County where Democrats run the voting process. The county has a lot of votes but it seems after people vote some Democrats come up with cartons of votes in someone’s trunk that suddenly have to be added.

              Enigma says he lives in Florida so he is aware of things. He also makes things up in order to bend the truth. Several groups did recounts of the Bush election including one of the leftist newspapers which concluded Bush won. Enigma will whine and cry about these things forever. That is his nature.

              Everyone wishes Broward would get things straight but they can’t because they are crooked with all sorts of crooked people. Remember the Sheriff who was supposed to protect those Parkland students is in Broward County.

              1. Several groups did review the election results using varying criteria. Many declared Gore the likely winner. Show us the “leftist newspaper” that concluded Bush won? Document the “cartons of votes in someone’s trunk?” Do something besides spew false claims and change the subject. Parkland? Really?

                  1. Here’s summaries of two studies which under certain standards suggest a Gore win. Each of these were not actual recounts because despite what Allan says, a recount was never completed. These studies looked at undervotes and looked at the available public information. Plaese note Allan hasn’t documented a thing!

                    “According to the study, 3146 (3%) of the 111,261 examined overvotes “contained clear and therefore legally valid votes not counted in any of the manual recounts during the dispute.”[4] According to Anthony Salvado, a political scientist at the University of California, Irvine, who acted as a consultant on the media recount, most of the errors were caused by ballot design, ballot wording, and efforts by voters to choose both a president and a vice president. For example, 21,188 of the Florida overvotes, or nearly one-fifth of the total, originated from Duval County, where the presidential ballot was split across two pages and voters were instructed to “vote every page”. Half of the overvotes in Duval County had one presidential candidate marked on each page, making their vote illegal under Florida law. Salvado says that this alone cost Gore the election.

                    Including overvotes in the above totals for undervotes gives different margins of victory:

                    Lenient standard. Gore margin: 332 votes.
                    Palm Beach standard. Gore margin: 242 votes.
                    Two-corner standard. Bush margin: 407 votes.
                    Strict standard. Bush margin: 152 votes.”
                    “USA Today, The Miami Herald, and Knight Ridder commissioned accounting firm BDO Seidman to count undervotes. BDO Seidman’s results, reported in USA Today, show that under the strictest standard, where only a cleanly punched ballot with a fully removed chad was counted, Gore’s margin was three votes.[69] Under the other standards used in the study, Bush’s margin of victory increased as looser standards were used. The standards considered by BDO Seidman were:

                    Lenient standard. Any alteration in a chad, ranging from a dimple to a full punch, counts as a vote. By this standard, Bush margin: 1,665 votes.
                    Palm Beach standard. A dimple is counted as a vote if other races on the same ballot show dimples as well. By this standard, Bush margin: 884 votes.
                    Two-corner standard. A chad with two or more corners removed is counted as a vote. This is the most common standard in use. By this standard, Bush margin: 363 votes.
                    Strict standard. Only a fully removed chad counts as a vote. By this standard, Gore margin: 3 votes.”

                    1. You provide a lot of data from people that didn’t touch the ballots or use the figures based on the agreed upon methods of counting votes between Democrats and Republicans. When the agreed upon method was used Bush won. A bunch of studies made all sorts of what if guesses to create a sense of victory for Gore. They were one-sided types of studies that only used the guess work in Gore’s favor.

                      The most publicized count was the chad count. When one pushed the peg into the chad it didn’t always break away completely and the voter wouldn’t know that. If a chad was barely hanging and was counted Bush won. That was quite acceptable to all normal people. I seem to remember that Gore wished to limit the count to a limited number of counties and of course the populous counties that had the highest percentage of Democrats were involved. A question came up about a total recount that Gore rejected because it would have had to include a whole bunch of absentee ballots from the military that were not originally counted.

                      Then again there was fraud that has not yet been excluded from voting in Florida. Just look at what is happening in Broward. People like Enigma prevent proper ID from being used when voting because they like the idea of being able to increase their vote illegally.

                1. Enigma, I notice Allan accuses you of “making things up to bend the truth”.

                  You see Allan is the self-appointed enforcer of right-wing talking points on this thread. And anyone who veers from approved, right-wing talking points is a ‘liar’ according to Allan.

                  But I’m sure you’ve figured out by now that Allan is simply a mean-spirited, self-righteous old fart entering the early stages of dementia.

                  1. Analyzing Allan would be time in my life I’d never get back. His tactics are limited to accusing everyone else of lying, spewing fake facts and in my case, calling me racist. He documents nothing which is probably equivalent to what he knows on most subjects.

                    1. Peter it is nice to find that you have a friend in someone who has the same problems with the truth that you have. Keep Shilling Peter Shill.

                  2. “And anyone who veers from approved, right-wing talking points is a ‘liar’ according to Allan.”

                    Peter, I don’t give a darn for right wing talking points. I care about honesty something that is generally lacking from your responses. Start bringing some proof to your accusations and innuendo. I’ve written enough that you should have been able to prove me wrong over and over again but you haven’t yet you are proven wrong over and over again. Besides when someone informs me I was wrong and they were right I say thank you.

                2. You are making things up again.

                  I think it was the Palm Beach Post or the Miami Herald.

                  ” Parkland? Really?”

                  Yes, Parkland really. Sheriff Israel is a hack. He and most of the local people in charge in Broward to protect students are Democrats if not all of them. The father of one of the killed students had to light fires under their butts to get them moving on the investigation. …And yes Obama’s Promise Program was the cause. Countless calls to the police some of extreme urgency along with numerous calls to the FBI about Cruz led to nothing being done because of the Promise Program. Chicago type government was relocated to the Parkland school and a lot of kids died, but what do you care about their deaths as long as you can complain about things that haven’t significantly existed in years or decades decades.

                    1. Yeah it makes no sense to conclude that if you let thugs run free out of some pathetic notion of guilt and self-loathing they won’t be encouraged to go on being bigger thugs. You need empirical evidence for that proposition since human common sense is denuded on some people by their warped ideology.

                    2. “Allan’s definition of documentation, “I seem to remember.””

                      What are you talking about Enigma? I told you two newspapers one of which was involved in a legitimate recount. It was either the Palm Beach Post or the Miami Herald. My best bet is it was the Miami Herald and you know that because some of the stuff you said sounded right out of the newspaper I am talking about since they announced a 363 vote win.They agreed with the Bush win even though they were on the left. The standard of counting was agreed on by both parties before knowing how the count would turn out. Had a lesser standard been used Bush would have won by a wider margin.

                    3. There was no “legitimate recount” ever. See if you recognize the “I seem to remember” quote from your own writing. Not documentation! If the only source is you remembering, that’s pretty lame.

                      “The most publicized count was the chad count. When one pushed the peg into the chad it didn’t always break away completely and the voter wouldn’t know that. If a chad was barely hanging and was counted Bush won. That was quite acceptable to all normal people. I seem to remember that Gore wished to limit the count to a limited number of counties and of course the populous counties that had the highest percentage of Democrats were involved. “

                    4. See if you recognize the “I seem to remember” quote from your own writing. Not documentation! If the only source is you remembering, that’s pretty lame.”

                      Exactly what I said will be in the archives of one of those two newspapers. The wording might not be exactly the same but the substance will and even you hit the correct number so there doesn’t seem to be much question about what I am saying and likely you know which of the two newspapers I am talking about. If you think what I said is wrong correct me, but you didn’t do that.

                1. To Mark M. an expert in incompetence.

                  The ballots in the trunk of the car after voting and all the rules broken have been widely reported in most newspapers.

                  Your citation comes from a left wing media spin site, but let me quote just one of their statements so that we can see you are not a very good lawyer if you are one. I don’t think you make an adequate legal assistant either based on your inability to sort out the truth.

                  You say: “While Broward has a history of lawsuits and voting problems, that isn’t the same as fraud.”

                  Let’s add a bit more information after going to your site. ” A Broward judge ruled in Scott’s favor and found Snipes was in violation of Florida public records laws for not fulfilling a record’s request by Scott’s campaign”. “The lawsuits that Rubio cited were filed in 2017. Snipes lost both lawsuits and has appealed them.” “Snipes testified that her office had destroyed the ballots after she signed an order Sept. 1, 2017 to authorize destruction of boxes. But under federal law, ballots are supposed to be preserved for 22 months Broward Judge Raag Singhal ruled in May against Snipes, finding “premature destruction of the records unlawful and in violation of the Public Records Act.”

                  Marco Rubio said ” the Broward elections department “has a history of violating the law”” to which through the site you referred me to said “We rate this statement Mostly True.”

                  I only touched one small portion of the claims and wasn’t even thourough but it provides enough infromation to know that if you are a lawyer you are a lawyer one should stay away from.

                  1. Haha. Excellent; another kellyanne pivot. You not-so-carefully evaded the non-citizen vote issue. What, you think we don’t recognize your ineffective and infantile tactics by now? So sorry for your loss–yet again.

                    this is to “when I’m losing, I just change the subject” allen / allan

                    1. ” You not-so-carefully evaded the non-citizen vote issue.”

                      “During the Canvassing Board meeting in Palm Beach County last Friday night, lawyers for both Bill Nelson and Andrew Gillum OBJECTED to Palm Beach officials rejecting a ballot from a non-U.S. citizen.” (from day 2 follow-up)

                      Rick Scott’s statements on the election:

                      I’ll first provide you with updatsthe speech by Rick Scott placing one statement ahead of all others to deal with your question. Then, later we can go one allegation at a time based on actual news and people that are at the polls. You, however, can’t seem to hold up any side of a debate so I suppose this posting will end it.

                      Gov. Scott’s Statement on Election Results

                      “Late Tuesday night, our win was projected to be around 57,000 votes.

                      By Wednesday morning, that lead dropped to 38,000.

                      By Wednesday evening, it was around 30,000.

                      This morning, it was around 21,000.

                      Now, it is 15,000.

                      On election night, Broward County said there were 634,000 votes cast.

                      At 1 am today, there were 695,700 ballots cast on election day.

                      At 2:30 pm today, the number was up to 707,223 ballots cast on election day.

                      And we just learned, that the number has increased to 712,840 ballots cast on election day.

                      In Palm Beach County, there are 15,000 new votes found since election night.

                      So – It has been over 48 hours since the polls closed and Broward and Palm Beach Counties are still finding and counting ballots – and the Supervisors – Brenda Snipes and Susan Bucher – cannot seem to say how many ballots still exist or where these ballots came from, or where they have been.

                      The people of Florida deserve fairness and transparency and the supervisors are failing to give it to us.

                      Every Floridian should be concerned there may be rampant fraud happening in Palm Beach and Broward Counties. And the Broward Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes has a history of acting in bad faith.

                      As you will recall, a judge ruled just this year that the office violated both state and federal laws by illegally destroying ballots in 2016.

                      In 2016, Brenda Snipes’ office posted election results half an hour before polls closed – a violation of election law. That same year, her office was sued for leaving amendments off of ballots.

                      In 2014, Brenda Snipes’ fellow democrats accused her of individual and systemic breakdowns that made it difficult for voters to cast regular ballots.

                      All Floridians should be concerned about that.

                      Palm Beach County is also refusing to provide information to the public. And they are illegally refusing to allow official party representatives into the ballot counting area and forcing people to stand behind a glass wall with limited visibility and no ability to hear what is going on.

                      This is a clear violation of Florida law – and we have just filed a lawsuit.

                      Both Broward and Palm Beach Counties have failed in their duty to follow Florida law which requires that vote by mail and absentee ballots are accounted within 30 minutes of polls closing. Further, Palm Beach County has failed to update the Department of State since 10:19 am yesterday. This is in complete violation of Florida law which requires updated reports every 45 minutes until results are completely reported.

                      We’ve all seen the incompetence and irregularities in vote tabulations in Broward and Palm Beach for years. Well…here we are again. I will not sit idly by while unethical liberals try to steal this election from the people of Florida.

                      Senator Nelson hired one of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers from D.C., and the first thing he did was tell reporters that he is here to win the election. He did not say that he wants a full and fair election or even an accurate vote count. Here are some other things he has said.

                      In 2010: When his democratic client in Minnesota was leading by 8,000 votes, he said the lead was ‘insurmountable.
                      In 2014: When his democratic client in Virginia was leading by 12,000 votes, he said there was ‘no precedent’ for a successful recount. He also said that recounts ‘really only happen where you are talking about dozens or a few hundred votes separating the candidates.
                      In 2013: When another one of his democratic clients in Virginia was leading by only 165 votes, he said that recounts ‘do not tend to change the results.
                      In 2016: When his democratic client in North Carolina was leading by 10,000 votes, he called it a ‘close but significant margin’ that would be ‘insurmountable.’ He also called on the opponent to ‘graciously concede’ rather than waste taxpayer money on a deficit that could not be overcome.
                      Again in 2016: When his client Hillary Clinton had lost the presidential race, he wrote an article highlighting that the margin of 10,704 votes in Michigan quote ‘well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.’

                      Now, he is here to try to steal the election, and to try to thwart the will of the voters of Florida.

                      Every day since the election, the leftwing activists in Broward county have been coming up with more and more ballots out of nowhere. We all know what is going on. Every person in Florida knows exactly what is happening. Their goal is to keep mysteriously finding more votes until the elections turn out the way they want.

                      And when that fails, they will file a bunch of lawsuits in order to try to overturn the will of the voters.

                      There are 67 counties in Florida, only these two counties are involved in these shenanigans. There are NO OTHER COUNTIES – REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT- that are trying to steal this election, or who are still finding ballots.
                      Some believe that this is simply rank incompetence. THAT IS CLEARLY TRUE.

                      BUT it would also be naïve to not realize that they could be trying to overrule the will of the voters of Florida.

                      Tonight, I am asking the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate this immediately and I am considering every single legal option available.

                      No rag tag group of liberal activists or lawyers from D.C. will be allowed to steal this election from the voters in the state of Florida.

                      I am proud to be the next Senator from the State of Florida and look forward to going up there and making Washington work for all Americans.”

                      Rick Scott

                    2. Recount Update: Day 2 – From Rick Scott Campaign

                      You would think someone who’s spent 45 years writing laws (or at least trying to) would believe that laws apply to him. But not so with Bill Nelson. Here’s a quick summary of all the ways Bill Nelson seems to think the law should not apply to him:

                      Nelson is requesting ballots which have already been considered and declared not legally cast instead be counted. This will be heard in court later this week.
                      Bill Nelson and his campaign argued that 22 ballots that the Broward County SOE admitted were unlawful should be counted anyway.
                      During the Canvassing Board meeting in Palm Beach County last Friday night, lawyers for both Bill Nelson and Andrew Gillum OBJECTED to Palm Beach officials rejecting a ballot from a non-U.S. citizen.
                      When the Broward County Canvassing Board continued counting ballots more than an hour after Saturday’s noon deadline – a clear violation of state law – the lawyer representing Bill Nelson’s campaign stood up and stated that their campaign is “not objecting” to the illegal activity.
                      Bill Nelson also requested to halt last Saturday’s deadline for county canvassing boards to submit unofficial results of the election to the Florida Department of State. United States District Judge Robert Hinkle effectively denied this request.
                      It’s clear that our lead is mathematically impossible to close without fraud…so Nelson and his DC lawyers are doing their best to count fraudulent ballots, laws be damned.

                    3. “this is to “when I’m losing, I just change the subject” allen / allan”

                      It appears Mark M. that I have responded to you and your citation. All we learned was that you didn’t know what the citation said. Pretty bad for a legal assistant and worse for an attorney. Even the file clerk should be expected to do a better job.

                      Run away again Mark. In battle you only show your back and that is because your feet are running as fast as they can. Keep using those “ineffective and infantile tactics” that you talk about.

      1. The article didn’t mention Rupert Murdoch, or any Murdoch even though Marry might believe it did. I believe the Murdoch son that now runs Fox is a leftist.

  4. One benefit CNN probably perceives is that this controversy can serve as a way to boost viewership without having to perform much legwork. I’m sure there is also an element of hubris as well.

  5. It’s a far more fundamental question: does that orange person with a pompadour who calls himself POTUS have the right to throw a hissy fit when a reporter refuses to be bullied, and then bar him from WH access in retaliation? The answer is: No. Acosta was persistent, not rude, but Trump behaved like the immature child he is. Acosta doesn’t kow tow and never will, which is why he’s an “enemy of the people”. Agent Orange tried to force Acosta to shut up because he had no valid, non-racist response when questioned about his absurd rhetoric that South American migrants, hundreds of miles away on foot constitute an imminent threat to the United States. Now that the midterms are over, we don’t hear about this terrifying threat any more. We all know why. The midterm results show that this racist and xenophobic pandering isn’t working. 10 million more votes were cast for Democratic candidates than Republicans.

    The function of the press is to speak truth to power, which is what Acosta was doing. The POTUS does not have the right to only answer questions he likes and only about topics that make him look good, and only when asked by people he likes.

    1. “It’s a far more fundamental question: does that orange person with a pompadour who calls himself POTUS have the right to throw a hissy fit when a reporter refuses to be bullied, and then bar him from WH access in retaliation? The answer is: No. “******************
      Well, okay then. Who needs a court?

      “The function of the press is to speak truth to power, which is what Acosta was doing.”
      ***************

      Yeah, the Constitution makes the press the fourth co-equal branch of government and our advocates. Self-appointed? Who cares. They say they have the right to “speak truth to power” so it must be true. Far be it that they just report the news fairly and objectively!!

      And more importantly, who cares if they foment civil war, they’re our guys (or so they say) but somehow we don’t know it:

      https://zogbyanalytics.com/news/875-the-zogby-poll-voters-feel-the-mainstream-media-is-also-to-blame-for-the-spread-of-hate-and-misunderstanding-voters-say-the-mainstream-media-divides-people-along-racial-gender-and-political-lines-a-majority-of-democrats-agree

  6. In some tribal societies they pass around a “Talking Stick” (could also use an Egg Plant or Squash). One can only talk while holding the Talking Stick. After they are finished speaking they pass the stick (or Egg Plant) to another speaker. You are not allowed to interrupt one holding the wood or vegetable Talking Stick. Maybe the WH Press Room could use a wireless microphone instead of wood or Egg Plant?

  7. FYI Trump supporters: “Update: NBC WILL BE JOINING AMICUS BRIEF SUPPORTING CNN: CNN

    * * *

    Fox News said it is supporting CNN’s lawsuit to regain White House reporter, Jim Acosta’s, press credentials, and has filed an amicus brief in the case, Bloomberg reports citing an emailed statement from Fox News president Jay Wallace.
    “FOX News supports CNN in its legal effort to regain its White House reporter’s press credential. We intend to file an amicus brief with the U.S. District Court.

    Secret Service passes for working White House journalists should never be weaponized. While we don’t condone the growing antagonistic tone by both the President and the press at recent media avails, we do support a free press, access and open exchanges for the American people.”

    see Zero Hedge

    Partisans never get the point that giving power to “their” guy eventually comes back to bite them later. It’s “your guy” (or more accurately, you are under the impression that he’s your guy) now but it won’t always be “your” guy. That’s what all the Obama supporters thought and look where where their impression and lack of principle got them.

    1. The “power” here is the power to hold a press conference with a modicum of civility and decorum. Frankly, I would love it if the press, and selected members of the public could bring rotten fruit to pressers, for any President, and then hurl the material as they desire.

      BUT, that is no way to conduct a presser, and would get out of hand. So, when a jerk refuses to shut up and pass the mike, and then sexually assaults the female intern, then I say “Out with his sorry a$$!”

      Does that really seem like overdoing it to you? To toss out a rude jerk?

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. In my next appellate argument, I’m going to refuse to leave the lectern when my time expires as I have one more argument left and then turn my back on the court’s deputy when he tries to get me to leave. I gots rights, ya know!! No court would sanction me.

        Okay, Alice in Wonderland time over.

        1. You are equating Trump with a sitting appellate judge, and a press conference with an appellate argument? What planet do you occupy, anyway?

          1. Yes I am. The branches are co-equal. You accost a judge in the parking garage and ask for a statement, and you see what happens.

            1. Anonymous:

              “You are equating Trump with a sitting appellate judge, and a press conference with an appellate argument? What planet do you occupy, anyway?”
              ***************************
              I’m carrying your crazy first amendment argument to its logical conclusion in another and congruent context. I’m a citizen who, by virtue of my law license, is invited to participate in the appellate judge’s limited public forum. The judge is a government official. I have something to say and am not letting some “fascist” judge take away my mic conveniently attached to my lectern. To Hell with his bailiff. Hence it’s my “I am Acosta” moment, a la Corey Booker. Logical extrapolation is a blast. You should try it sometime.

              And on your second inquiry, I live on an Earth more than half-populated by those who shouldn’t be in the argument business.

      2. Squeeky,

        If you want to know what I really think, I’ll tell you. This is just a B.S. PR stunt on both sides. Gets their base to support what is not supportable on either “side”. (Unless you are a murder groupie in which case you will love our president and the press who supports his war crimes.)

        However, this govt. is so depraved that if someone took a dump in the WH oval office I think that’s totally appropriate. I think things are do disgusting and so evil and so out of control that doing a dump hardly begins to make a much needed statement to the powerful! (And this applied to the govt. under Obama and Bush and Clinton and so on.)

        If he assaulted a woman he should be taken to court over that.

        1. What does our government being out of control have to do with kicking some rude bum out of the press pool? FWIW, it would not have hurt my feelings if Bush Jr. had been locked up for war crimes, for his unwarranted attack of Iraq. IMHO, no different than Hitler invading Poland. And Obama and Hillary for trying to oust Ghadaffi militarily.

          But that has nothing to do with Acosta.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky,

            You guys are going to have to show me how he was rude and engaging in sexual assault. I just don’t see it. What I see is Trump who clearly thinks of himself as a dictator, telling a reporter to shut up and stop asking him questions. Trump could not respond to even the question. Instead, he simply tried to shut Jim up.

            I further did not see any type of behavior which would qualify as sexual assault. Neither rudeness or sexual assault by Jim is in that video.

            The far scarier thing is seeing a president shut up a reporter for asking questions. Of course, Trump is trying to kill Assange, (but hey, that’s probably o.k. w/Trump supporters by now!) so this is certainly better than ordering a show trial for fake “treason”.

            Citizens should quit the worship of “leaders”. A president may not shut up a reporter because he can’t answer the question. Trump was rude to Jim rather obviously because he had no response to give to the question. He could answer the question but Donnie didn’t. It’s scary that
            Trump’s people think this behavior is o.k. It will come back to haunt you when a Democrat does the same thing to a reporter you like. I know people never see that until it’s too late but that’s what the precedent will come to in time.

            We live in a dictatorship and right now, you are supporting that.

            1. Jill, I realize no one successfully tells you to shut up in meatspace and more’s the pity. However, time in press conferences is rationed. He simply has no legitimate claim to appropriate White House property or cut into other reporters’ time.

              1. You are saying something happened which didn’t happen. He asked Trump a question. Trump couldn’t answer the question. Trump then behaved like a snowflake and told Jim to shut up. Jim asked him another question. Again, Trump became the classic snowflake and couldn’t deal w/it. This whole exchange took very little time. A lot of time was spent by Trump in full snowflake.
                mode!

                It’s very telling that you would like me to shut up because I’m telling it like it is. Don’t be so afraid of the truth and reality! That’s the very essence is being a snowflake!!!! Jeesh!

                1. He asked no informational question at all. He tried to bait the President and was told to relinquish the microphone.

                  It’s very telling that you would like me to shut up because I’m telling it like it is.

                  Everything you say is an expression of your disordered emotional life. None of it is true. None of it is perspicacious. None of it is decent.

              1. Paul,

                The question asked was what is happening w/the migrants. We have the military violating the law along the border right now because the Republicans and Democrats needed to whip up their base respectively and the oligarchy wants to see how stupid people in the US really are that they would allow the military to act in US civilian space. Guess what, we really are stupid!

                If you are a Constitutionalist, you don’t want the military in civilian space even if baby Donnie puts them there. After the election the “migrant invasion” disappeared off the news. Didn’t you even wonder who benefited from all that fear? Now, it’s back on because it’s time to whip up the rubes into enough fear that we will cement the give away of our rights.

                He asked a question about the migrants. That’s not a yes or no answer. A truthful answer is, I work for my MIC/IC/Bankster masters and they told me when I can whip people up, when I should shut people up and when I’ll be whipping them up again. Or, he could just lie and say they’re coming to eat your baby and I’m going to stop that from happening!!!!

                1. Jill – his question about illegal immigrants was clearly answered and then he went on and on and on. He was like a jumping jack. He gave up the mic when it looked like Trump was either going to leave or take it from him himself. Then he interrupted another reported who had just defended Abilio.

            2. Look at the video and compare the number of questions he asked to the numbers asked by others. The mic was to be passed on to another but Acosta didn’t permit it. When the Intern tried to remove the mic he pushed his hand down on the Intern’s arm and turned away. He didn’t brush her. He used force. I don’t think anyone is complaining that the force he used was all that great but it was totally inappropriate. That type of action should not be permitted and removing his press pass was appropriate. It would probably have been returned at a later date if the news media didn’t wish to use this incident to sell papers.

              1. in china reporters definitely dont push xi jinping around. i can just see putin and xi getting a laugh riot out of how pathetically disordered American society is.

      3. Squeakee, there’s a delineated process for revoking a reporter’s White House press pass. The court (DC Court of Appeals, I believe) has ruled that the White House can not just yank a reporter’s press pass.

        1. Wally, trying to read the law correctly is more difficult than using common sense. Do you realize that there is no Constitutional mandate for the President to provide this type of news conference.

          That is what makes all of this a lot of bull. Presidents at various times have limited the access of the press to various things. You should realize that both the President and the reporters want this type of discussion to continue, don’t you? Do you really think this President will let White House staff or himself be bullied?

          The only reason so much attention is paid to this incident is because it sells newspapers and mass media advertisements. Many are Googling information and in the process are providing Google and others with product to sell to advertisers and the like

        2. The court (DC Court of Appeals, I believe) has ruled that the White House can not just yank a reporter’s press pass.

          Wouldn’t matter. The executive is a co-equal branch of government and the DC Circuit cannot legitimately assert that they ration the president’s time. They are properly ignored if they even attempt it.

      4. Squeeky, where was the assault alleged against the woman? There were multiple witnesses present as well as Secret Service and none of them have said Acosta committed a crime.

        No arrests have been made and no lawsuits have been filed against Acosta for assault.

        If the White House wants to allege he should be expelled for assault, they should prove it in court.

        This is why Republicans supported Kavanaugh because the allegation against him wasn’t proven.

        1. I am using the Michelle Fields standard of sexual assault. Under that “legal” standard, all the elements of the crime are:

          1. The vic is woman;
          2. The perp is a man;
          3; The press is there;

          No actual physical assault has to take place for a man to be guilty under this standard.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky – on any college campus on the east coast, Abilio Acosta would be expelled for life for what he did to that poor intern and she would have her tuition paid for life.

      5. You mean the rude jerk known as Trump? See, unlike you Trumpsters, most Americans see him as a petty tyrant who refuses to be accountable for his partisan and racist rhetoric, and who becomes incensed when someone like Jim Acosta won’t submit to bullying.

        1. No. You are just presuming that your infantile and immature rantings are what “most” people believe. You have to believe that. It’s cognitive dissonance at its best. Scott Adams nailed goobers like you COLD:

          —–

          This brings me to the anti-Trump protests. The protesters look as though they are protesting Trump, but they are not. They are locked in an imaginary world and battling their own hallucinations of the future. Here’s the setup that triggered them.

          1. They believe they are smart and well-informed.

          2. Their good judgement told them Trump is OBVIOUSLY the next Hitler, or something similarly bad.

          3. Half of the voters of the United States – including a lot of smart people – voted Trump into office anyway.

          Those “facts” can’t be reconciled in the minds of the anti-Trumpers. Mentally, something has to give. That’s where cognitive dissonance comes in.

          There are two ways for an anti-Trumper to interpret that reality. One option is to accept that if half the public doesn’t see Trump as a dangerous monster, perhaps he isn’t. But that would conflict with a person’s self-image as being smart and well-informed in the first place. When you violate a person’s self-image, it triggers cognitive dissonance to explain-away the discrepancy.

          So how do you explain-away Trump’s election if you think you are smart and you think you are well-informed and you think Trump is OBVIOUSLY a monster?

          You solve for that incongruity by hallucinating – literally – that Trump supporters KNOW Trump is a monster and they PREFER the monster. In this hallucination, the KKK is not a nutty fringe group but rather a symbol of how all Trump supporters must feel. (They don’t. Not even close.)

          In a rational world it would be obvious that Trump supporters include lots of brilliant and well-informed people. That fact – as obvious as it would seem – is invisible to the folks who can’t even imagine a world in which their powers of perception could be so wrong. To reconcile their world, they have to imagine all Trump supporters as defective in some moral or cognitive way, or both.

          https://blog.dilbert.com/2016/11/12/the-cognitive-dissonance-cluster-bomb/
          ——
          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

        2. you have no idea how far “trumpsters” would in fact let trump go.

          take a look at how much slack Dutuerte has and you may get the idea

    2. Throwing Acosta out is not giving power to “your guy”. It is throwing an abusive jerk out so the rest can have their turn to speak.

      What does Jill want? A press room full of abusive jerks?

      1. I want citizens to consider this: “Each side of the political divide looks to the “other side” and shake their head in disbelief that anyone could fall for the antics of such frauds. The same people who have profile pictures of Obama throw hay makers at Trump supporters for being gullible sheep. Likewise, the same folks who once used to bash Obama loyalists for being unthinking robots can’t see the irony that they have become Trumpeting bots. Few dare look in the mirror and cop to being hoodwinked.

        This goes beyond just politics though, our social conversation at large is being led by charlatans and demagogues who have financial motives to keep us in strife. There is a lot of money to be made and status to accumulate by slicing and dicing America into cauldrons of identity and ideologies. Divide and conquer has been monetized as opinion leaders and pundits across the political spectrum push deceptive talking points while pretending to be uttering truths. What they are seeking is not truth but ratings, the easiest way to do that is to cater to our fears and vengeance instead of speaking to our better angels.” (from The Ghion Journal)

        What you see here is a con job. Acosta and Trump hold many of the same values in common as they are both members of the oligarchy handmaiden club. It is difficult to see this because we are a deeply propagandized people. There is only one way out and that is to have a real set of ethics and apply those ethics to everyone, friend or foe alike.

        1. I can make a lot of arguments that Obama very significantly weaponized various agencies of the federal bureaucracy. We could start with the IRS. We all have a lot things that we don’t like in our leaders that we voted for but why don’t you provide the significant things Trump did that are the equivalent of weaponizing various agencies against the people and various opponents. I don’t mind criticism of Trump. I do it myself but I am not interested in conspiracy theories or complaints that are absent adequate facts.

  8. Off topic: polls and bias

    40% of polls were wrong mostly with Democratic bias.

    Here are the rankings of the polling firms by their accuracy and their partisan bias:

    Quinnipiac: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 2.0
    Gavis: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 2.5
    Trafalgar: Average Error: Pro-Republican 2.7
    Emerson: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 2.8
    CNN: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 3.0
    Harris: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 3.5
    CBS: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 4.0
    Fox News: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 5.0
    NBC/Marist: Average Error: Pro-Democrat 6.8

    This list is compiled by comparing the final polls by each company in each race with the actual outcome and then averaging their margin of actual error.

    1. Allan, if that many polls have a ‘pro Democrat’ bias, it means that Republicans aren’t admitting they’re Republicans when talking to pollsters. And, or, it means that a lot of Democrats identify to pollsters, then dont bother voting. I suspect it’s a combination of both.

      1. “Allan, if that many polls have a ‘pro Democrat’ bias, it means…”

        Peter, the one’s doing the polls are supposed to take all the variables possible into account. What this is telling us is that the pollsters aren’t doing so and are very inaccurate. That means we shouldn’t listen to them and you quote them all the time when you paraphrase an article that included some type of “pollster” information. Don’t blame the people, blame the pollsters.

        You should learn how to read scientific studies. It makes it easier to discern truth from fiction.

          1. Squeaky, I don’t think Peter has the intellect or the training to understand these things. You need one or the other, preferably both. He has chosen a team to root for, therefore the umpire is wrong if he rules against his team despite what the video shows. His proof is the brainless excuses provided by the rest of those rooting lock step with his team.

            1. I think he has the intellect, but lacks the desire to think clearly about things if they don’t conform to his own preexisting biases. Plus, I think he is a shill who just repeats what others say, like you said.

              I wish he would do what another Dem here implies, and marries a minority. Preferably, a ghettopotamus with 4 b*st*rd children, a red velvet cake hair weave, and an inability to articulate much beyond some Ebonic dribble. I hope he marries her, moves to the hood, and puts her on his credit cards and bank account.

              If that don’t make him “woke”, nothing will.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. “I think he has the intellect,”

                Let’s consider Peter’s intellect dormant at best. A lot of people do not have the intellect to understand how to evaluate numbers and statistics unless they are trained to do so. Others instinctively have the intellect.

        1. Allan, pollsters cant polygraph random members of the public. They can only go by what people tell them. A lot of of younger Republicans identify as ‘Libertarians’ but they dont say that to pollsters. Instead they might say they’re ‘Independent’, but on Election Day they’ll vote Republican. And again, a lot of Democrats just dont show up on Election Day. These factors can alter political polls. But it sounds like you’re invested in this ‘bias’ claim because it makes conservatives into ‘victims’.

          1. Caravan of illegal migrants arrives at border and scales fence, Peter rejoices! More future Democrat ballot box stuffers make landfall.

          2. You don’t get it Peter do you? Polls are supposed to provide accurate and useful information. If they can’t do it they they shouldn’t be done at all. It is up to the pollsters to figure out how to get reasonable poll data.

            We didn’t ask the pollsters to tell us what party people were members of. We asked them how the vote would turn out and they were wrong over and over again. So are you when you paraphrase or quote from news articles that have drawn conclusions instead of reporting the news.

            Learn how a study is supposed to be done and stop blaming the people rather than those that report the news. It is the news that is so incredibly innaccurate.

      2. Peter’s future Americans from the migrant caravan, arrive at border fence and scale wall.

        Democrats cheer!

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwdR0SkuxDc

        Behold those who are replacing you, white racist crackers! They’re coming to take your stuff!

        Mark Hamill says women should rule America, they’ll be just the thing we need to let in more of these oppressed third world future scientists and engineers! Hollywood commands you to submit!

        https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2018/11/14/mark-hamill-time-to-let-women-take-charge-completely-of-government/

      3. Peter did you respond to the videos of the migrant caravan scaling the border fence yet or you got that on ignore?

        1. Kurtz, are you serious????

          I’m supposed to care about the caravan??? How stupid can you get!!!!

          This just illustrates how right-wing media dumbs people down. Every stupid Trump supporter thinks that so-called liberals want the migrant caravan to enter this country.

  9. The Framers of the Constitution wanted to make clear that America doesn’t have a dictator or emperor. Congress – closest to the voters – is listed first under Article I. Presidents are listed second under Article II. American presidents were only supposed to be powerful enough to correct the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. American presidents have never had the authority to subvert the powers of the co-equal branches (Congress and the courts). The White House Press Room belongs to us, not Trump.

    1. “The White House Press Room belongs to us, not Trump.”

      Really? Federal property belongs to “us”, but that doesn’t mean you have the ability to move in. Did you ever try and walk into the White House without a pass? Tell us why that pass is needed.

  10. Anyway, that narcissistic twat, Jim Acosta, has merited an Irish Poem from me!

    He Rude The Day???
    An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm

    There was a reporter named Jim
    Who thought it was all about him!
    He acted the fool,
    Got the boot from the pool!
    Poor Jim, he got gop-smacked. Ahem. . .

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  11. CNN is just suing for the theatrics of it. They know full well that the WH is within its rights to boot the bum out.

    But, OHHHH the theatre of it! Noble CNN out there fighting Mean Old Trump for the rights of the press! And for the chillllllldrrrrren!

    Only dumb a$$ Democrats would find the whole schmear anything other than pure crap.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  12. “As such, the Trump administration is threatening to step over a never-crossed line – applying the secret documents provision of the Espionage Act to journalistic practices, according to the EFF, which last year condemned the threats of prosecution against WikiLeaks and Assange.”

    Jim Acosta is perfect for a press pass at the WH. He won’t say a word about what Trump is doing to Assange. Why not give him the pass back? He has been such a good and loyal courtier! You’d almost think Trump and CNN were on the same side of things where it really counts and they are only making a show to profit from it. They each rile their base w/such things while the crimes of empire go ignored.

  13. Sort of like when Trump intruded into Hillary Clinton’s space during the Presidential Debates? Or when Trump physically shoved a foreign head of state around at an International summit? What about Trump bragging about grabbing women by their private parts? Acosta was meek compared to Trump.

  14. As I have said from the outset, I strongly oppose the move by the White House, even though I feel that Acosta went too far in the press conference.

    Once again Turley you do not explain why you strongly oppose the move. If in your opinion Acosta went too far, then clearly you believe he violated some measurable standard of conduct. You act as though we heard Acosta yelling don’t taze me bro’! Acosta turned his privileged press credential into a heckler’s pass. And I don’t believe the White House is obligated to issue passes to hecklers for their White House press briefings. What the White House has done is removed the heckler while CNN still retains the privilege of having a reporter at the briefings.

    So go ahead Turley, explain why you oppose the Acosta timeout.

    1. Olly, good post. I too wish Professor Turley would provide more content to his opinion so it would have reasonable substance. It’s a simple question of unacceptable behavior. Acosta clearly crossed the line more than once. I credit the President for not throwing him out sooner.

  15. It’s amazing how blind to reality and truth haters of Trump can become. They are actually creating their own “reality.”

    1. That is the very substance of cognitive dissonance. Real Reality doesn’t comport with one’s beliefs, sooo they simply opt out for an alternative reality which does.

      Like J H Kunstler said, the Democrats used to be the thinking party. Not any more.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. JHK’s last post

        “It warmed my heart to read in The Wall Street Journal that Hillary Clinton is preparing to re-enter the Washington DC swamp from her deluxe exile in the woods of Chappaqua, New York, and make another run for the White House — though it’s hard to calculate how many porters in sandals and loincloths will be required to lug all her baggage around the campaign trail. Will hubbie hit the hustings with her? That would be rich. I can just imagine the pussy-hatted legions shrieking #MeToo at every stop. Surely there is no better way to put the Democratic Party out of its misery.

        The post-election melodramas in Georgia and Florida grind on, despite the various rules and laws about deadlines for certifying ballots and accounting for their origin. What is a ballot after all but a mere scrap of paper, easily reproducible, and interchangeable. Sometimes, they make strange journeys out of election headquarters in trucks and SUVs, seeking fun and excitement, and they have been known to mysteriously turn up by the hundredweight in broom closets where they retreat to caucus. Only one thing is certain: the ballot fiasco is a billable hours bonanza for DC lawyers arriving on the scene to sort things out — which they may not manage anyway.

        If the vote count somehow remains in favor of the provisional winners — Republicans Rick Scott, Ron DeSantis (Fla), and Brian Kemp (Ga) — you can be sure we’ll be in a frenzy of sore loserdom that will make the Medieval ergot outbreaks of yore look like episodes of Peewee’s Playhouse. If the provisional votes get overturned, the attorneys billable hours will quickly exceed the national debt, and we’ll find ourselves in a new era where the free citizens of this republic can‘t be trusted to the simple task of counting ballots, or even holding elections in the first place.

        This epic confusion is of a piece with a prediction I made about what happens to government in The Long Emergency: it becomes impotent and ineffectual, and can no longer be depended on to carry out the simplest tasks. The process goes from the top down. At each step, the public loses faith that government can accomplish anything. The Trust Horizon shrinks away from distant authorities… the DC Swamp, the state capitals, and soon the people don’t believe anything or anyone they can’t reach by throwing a rock.

        And so we enter a new stage of collapse. It will be made very much more emphatically worse as the money issues underlying this American malaise unravel in the months ahead. The reason that nothing will be done is that nothing can be done about the country’s intractable technical bankruptcy. The wealth we assumed was there is a fiction and will be expressed in plunging asset values, especially stocks and real estate. And any attempt to “fix” that by the Federal Reserve and its TBTF handmaidens moving to stop losses will only redirect the destruction to the currency itself. When citizens trust neither government nor their money, really bad things happen.

        This polity is too far gone in lying to itself for official corrections to avail. Sometimes the only corrective is sheer failure. At least it presents the option of starting over. Of course, Mr. Trump made the fatal mistake of claiming ownership of a “miracle” economy that is about to get stranded on the beach like a dying grunion. His inclination, I’m sure, will be to pretend loudly that nothing is wrong — even as the new model pickup trucks gather dust unsold on the car lots, and the “for sale” signs multiply on lawns everywhere, and the pink slips land at the cubicle work-stations, and the skeleton crews of waiters stand around the empty Olive Gardens and Chipoltles playing liar’s poker with their depreciating dollars.

        Meanwhile, the new Democratic majority congress prepares to ramp up its longed-for multi-committee inquisition against Trump and Trumpism, and the Republican Senate will counter-punch with binders of criminal referrals against the superstars of the Resistance. C-Span will be livelier and more colorful than the WWE Wrestlemania round-robin, midget division.”

  16. What about a 14th Amendment case? Once we have a White House system of accountability to the Press – WH Press Briefing – can the government then discriminate practicing “unequal” treatment of 1st Amendment rights? The Constitution also doesn’t mandate public education or public emergency services (police, fire, EMS), but once that taxpayer funded service is available, doesn’t it have to treat everyone equally under the 14th Amendment?

    1. doesn’t it have to treat everyone equally under the 14th Amendment?

      Sure. I double-dare other White House reporters conduct themselves in the same manner as Acosta. I guarantee they will receive equal treatment under the law.

    2. Democrats think everyone means everyone too, like all these future Democrats I mean honest “jobs americans wont do” employment position seekers I mean poor well intentioned human rights asylum seekers

  17. I do not think that Abilio Acosta has a God given right to be at Presidential press conferences. CNN has replaced him, so he is not irreplacable.

    1. There is already case law from the DC circuit court saying the press cannot denied access unless they pose a safety risk.

      That female intern who tried to grab Acosta’s mic was lucky I wasn’t in his place. I probably would have been banned for shoving her down hard for violating my personal space.

      She approached him, not vice versa. She was the aggressor in the situation.

      1. Marry – it is not Acosta’s mic, it is the WH mic. The flow is that reporters get a question and a follow up. POTUS had directed the intern to move the mic to the next reporter. Oddly enough, the next reporter defended Abilio and then Abilio interrupted him! How rude.

      2. Since when do you believe the right to speak at the press conference is based on Acosta’s desires?

        What do you think would happen if after an Acosta speech one member of the audience refused to give up the mic after asking several questions? Do you think that audience member would be permitted to prevent others from speaking?

      3. There is already case law from the DC circuit court saying the press cannot denied access unless they pose a safety risk.

        Thanks for the issue of your imagination. It’s been an education.

      4. Oh, FWIW, I am all in favor of Democrats marrying minorities, particularly white Democrats marrying up with black folks! I think the new couples should then move into predominantly black areas to raise their kids and send them to schools there!

        You have my blessing! Go to it!

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

          1. Mommy cat is fitting right in to things. She has holed up in the cat tree condo with the kittens, and comes out to eat and play. The kittens have not been out of it for about three days now. It is about a foot off the ground, and at first the little balck and white kitten would find her way out, but now she is just content to nurse and sleep.

            The tree is right across from the chair where I sit most of the day, so I can keep an eye on them.

            Thank you for asking! And your chow?

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            1. Squeeky – Chow is getting very friendly but is still untrained. I have to call groomers to see about bathing her this weekend. And have to decide when we introduce her to the vet. She is a barker and very protective.

        1. From what I read on Breitbart’s comments, the vast majority of Trumpies are staunchly opposed to interracial marriages because they say it will dilute the white race and cause it to eventually die out.

          The looks i get when i hold hands with my Mexican husband reinforce that view.

          1. A lot of blacks are opposed to interracial marriages, too. So what?

            I repeat what I said before. I hope white Democrats do exactly what you want, and marry minorities, especially marrying blacks. The lower class the black, the better! I am all for it! Let silly white people get an up close look at all those wonderful black people, and all that “black girl magic.”

            As far as me personally, I don’t really look at Mexicans as necessarily “non-white.” Some are, some aren’t, and some are just plain Indians. Or a mix thereof.
            If I had my druthers, I would send about 3/4 of our blacks down to Mexico, and swap them out for Mexicans any day of the week.

            But unfortunately, Mexicans would not be stupid enough to take them. Nor would any other country. American blacks are the jokes of the world, and get no real respect from anybody. Even white Democrats don’t think they have enough sense to get photo IDs to vote. IMHO, American blacks deserve every bit of disrespect they get. Geeesh, a 77% illegitimate birth rate, and they whine about racism being their problem?

            As far as you getting your opinions from Breitbart comments, it looks to me like you need to get out more, and meet some real conservative Republicans.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

          2. From what I read on Breitbart’s comments, the vast majority of Trumpies are staunchly opposed to interracial marriages because they say it will dilute the white race and cause it to eventually die out.

            You’re not reading that on Breitbart. The source of that is the gorgonzola filled space between your ears.

            I’m a participant in fora shot through with palaeo / alt-right types. Miscegenation is simply not a topic that interests them. There is one shrew-bore who rattles on and on about John Derbyshire having a Chinese wife who is told to get lost every thread she enters.

          3. Marry – according to the census, your Mexican husband is white. Get over your white privilege and his!!!

      5. She approached him, not vice versa. She was the aggressor in the situation.

        Her function is order maintenance. She’s supposed to be the aggressor when people are misbehaving. Are you this dopey in your mundane life?

Leave a Reply