In a victory for the media, Judge Timothy J. Kelly has ruled that CNN’s Jim Acosta must be given back his access to the White House.  However, it is not an entire victory.  As we discussed earlier, the court recognized some basic procedural protections and required the White House to state clearly the grounds for revoking the clearance.  The court expressly said that he has not found a violation of the First Amendment and has not determined that Acosta cannot be eventually barred from the White House.  He wants further information from the White House if it intends to continue to bar Acosta.

It is careful not to oversell this opinion.  Kelly said that this is “limited” ruling and offers only temporary relief.  This was a predictable ruling on the due process elements in forcing a more detailed explanation and notice on the action.  The court clearly did not view a tweet as notice and further noted that it was not even clear who made this decision. In other words, the White House failed to establish a proper foundation — a recurring problem with this Administration.

Thus, the White House could revoke again but take the time to lay a foundation and offer an objective standard. Once again, I fail to see why this Administration just stumbles into these fights and undermines its own case by failing to lay a proper foundation.  In the end, the court indicated that it would bear a burden under the first amendment in excluding individual journalists.  It is difficult to predict how the court would rule on a proper record since the White House failed to create one – much as it did in the first rendition of the travel ban.

I have repeatedly warned that this could be an example of a bad case making bad law if it goes to the merits.  On the media side, a ruling against CNN could radically curtail the rights of journalists vis-vis the White House.  Conversely, a ruling against the White House could significantly curtail the power to control access and conduct in the White House. Given those dangers, this would be a good stage to simply resolve the case with a stern warning and resumption of access for Acosta.


  1. Post the rules by the door. In writing. That should lay a foundation. The White House has the right to eject a journalist who hogs the mic, brushes off the intern, and won’t let anyone else speak.

      1. No, it’s not. A news conference belongs to the American people. It’s an opportunity for the press to carry out their duties that are guaranteed by the Constitution. It is not another Donald Trump vainglory opportunity for free publicity.

        1. nonsense. it’s just a communications opportunity. the POTUS doesnt have to do his job the way you like. You don’t like his conferences then don’t go and dont listen.

          1. Well, see, because Trump constantly lies, and because he isn’t very smart and can’t think on his feet (even he knows it), he primarily communicates via Twitter. Hit and run mouth, so to speak. He can’t even avoid getting into trouble with Twitter: yesterday, he claimed to have knowledge of the “inner workings” of the Mueller investigation. He’s either lying, which is quite possible, or Whitaker has been feeding information to him, which will yield him a charge of obstruction of justice.

            How many times has he gotten himself into trouble by shooting off his mouth when speaking to a reporter? Example: he admitted to Lester Holt that he fired Comey to try to stop the Russia investigation. He isn’t doing his job, but on the rare occasions of an actual press conference, he doesn’t get a free pass to avoid people and subjects that make him look bad.

            1. BUT, BUT, BUT…he’s a stable genius and he alone can fix it, and he only hires the best people the best………….

        2. except that’s how every public official handles press conferences, that is, opportunities for free publicity. duh. the local dogcatcher views them that way too. and everyone in between. youre super unrealistic

        3. Except the press isn’t carrying out their duties and hasn’t carried out their duties for a long time. The current press (i.e., CNN, NBC, etc) are a self-entitled dinosaurs.

    1. Karen, Honey, here are some rules: 1. POTUS is accountable to the American people, so when he lies about homeless refugees 900 miles from the American border constituting an imminent threat, just to pander to his racist, xenophobic base right before an election, he can expect to be questioned about this; 2. He doesn’t get to only answer questions he likes, answers to which he thinks make him look good and only from people he likes; 3. He doesn’t get to evade questions about how he is using American resources, such as deploying the American military on U.S. soil, where they have no power or jurisdiction, and right before theholidays, so they’re forced to be away from their families just so he can grandstand for the deplorables who constitute his base; 4. POTUS cannot bully a reporter into shutting up when the reporter is respectfully persistent after not receiving a topical response to a question; 5. An intern who tries to grab a microphone from a reporter who refuses to be bullied must be fired. If she doesn’t have sense enough to know better, she needs to go; 6. When a press secretary lies about an encounter between a member of the media and a WH intern and produces a doctored video that attempts to make a case that a reporter inappropriately touched the intern, she needs to be fired. POTUS is liar enough for the entire Administration.

  2. Until the deep state attack on the Trump Administration, every President enjoyed the minimum respect for the the President allowing for an informal understanding about manners and press decorum. Since the entire Media-Academic-Legal-Industrial-Intelligence complex is hostile toward Trump, a set of guidelines should be created. This was clearly a conduct issue with Acosta demonstrating misconduct and disrespect for the Office of the President. To the extent that the judge, in this case, basically requested clarification on process, it is a good decision. I hope that they create a set of clear rules and that Acosta gets banned for future misconduct under those rules.

    1. Me, too. If any good will come of this then it may be the creation of the rules for the press corps, which of course they will immediately sue as infringing upon the rights of the press.

      1. that’s why the rules don’t matter.

        the article III can’t tell article II what to do in its wheelhouse.

        this is a federal judge overstepping his bounds, but he’s it’s a good opportunity; he makes an easy win in a constitutional crisis up for DJT. DJT should engage fully, take it to the mat, choke them out and put the issue to sleep for good.

        this is a warmup. if DJT doesn’t look strong on this, then he won’t be strong against an impeachment attempt. this one is an easy match for him.

      2. It’s a harder argument than with public speech. It is a privilege not a right to be a WH press correspondent. At a minimum, equally applied standards of conduct could be enforced. Even with public speech limitations of time, place and manner apply.

    2. This ominous-sounding “deep state” entity which you have uncovered is a serious threat to all god-fearin’ “mericans. It’s apparent that through your indefatigable sleuthing, you have revealed a nefarious cabal of ne’er-do-wells, seemingly hell-bent on eradicating the ‘merican way of life and our love of apple pie and mom, while fluoridating our precious bodily fluids, or some such other dastardly deed. Well done detective.

      this is to “Inspector Clouseau, at your service” froggy

        1. About the “deep state”: It’s easy to dismiss it, but one shouldn’t:



          Mike Lofgren, a former Republican congressional aide, claims to have first coined the term in an essay for BillMoyers.com published in February 2014.

          Here, Mr Lofgren anatomised it as “a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process.”

          He subsequently wrote a book expanding on the subject, The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government (2016).

          Appearing on talk show The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow on March 2017, Mr Lofgren outlined it as, “The emergence and the culmination of illiberal elements and tendencies in our supposedly liberal democracy.”

      1. The NPC Marky Mark Mark runs the Deep State script. How boring it Is for all of us.

  3. If I understand JT’s analysis, the WH has to give the Court an objective standard in writing that Jim Acosta factually violated. The President being a common sense guy probably thinks, “the Judge watched the press conference antics of Acosta on TV…that’s our proof”, not understanding the formality of having to enter facts into the Court Record in writing.

  4. Stop the press briefings altogether or never call on the grandstander again.
    Funny I recall President Obacala telling a reporter “this is my house” and all the MSM cheering.

    CNN reported: Obama shuts down White House heckler: ‘You’re in my house!’

  5. If they are smart the White House will make Abilio go through a new background check before they issue the pass. By the time that is done they will have grounds to deny it in writing. Actually, they have grounds on tape.

    Plus, they need to reseat CNN in the back row and not call on them.

    1. Trump is great at asymmetrical conflict. He may just pick this molehill to make a mountain of himself.

      I would now push this all the way to the top and claim they have the right to bar anybody on private business at any time, full stop.

      Journalists are private citizens. They are not our vaunted overlords. They have no sovereign authority at all. So it’s time for them to quit acting like they are the aristocracy.

      The laws are kept by public officials. The press are there to communicate, inform, and even question them. the press are not their to pretend to be the bosses of the elected officials themselves.

      It’s time for a major correction of their audacity.

  6. No, Jonathan Turley, Trump should not make Acosta go on time out for a few minutes, and then let him back out to play with the other kids. Because Acosta is the type of kid who will just do it again once he realizes that he isn’t going to get a spanking.

    There is nothing wrong with a President telling a rude jerk NO! And meaning it. Quit being so darn squishy. There are literally thousands of other people who can come in and do Acosta’s job without being rude and obnoxious and bullying. One monkey don’t stop no show.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  7. The White House should simply ignore the order. If Judge Kelly wants it enforced, he can pack heat and try it himself.

    1. that’s right. somewhere there was a federal marshal asking himself in the privacy of his own mind, “HOW THE HELL DOES THE JUDGE THINK WE’RE SUPPOSED TO ENFORCE THAT KIND OF ORDER? AM I SUPPOSED TO GO UP THERE AND TELL POTUS MYSELF?”

      Understand folks, here is how this works. Donald tells secret service and whomever else runs the points of entry to the White House: JIM ACOSTA DOES NOT COME INSIDE. Then they follow orders.

      Then what happens? Jim Acosta complains and runs back to the federal court. Who kicks it upstairs. Same result? then Wash, rinse, repeat.

      Then let’s say the SCOTUS disagrees too. Tells the POTUS who to let into the White House and who not to let in. POTUS can just say no. Exactly how will SCOTUS get Marine, or any Secret Service agent, or any civilian security contractor. to go up there and try and do what, arrest the President?

      Do you know who is the boss of the Federal Marshall Service? Ooops, it’s actually NOT the SCOTUS– it’s the AG. AG takes orders from, who? That’s right, POTUS.

      end of story. At some point an article III judge will understand that this is not a tenable ruling for the judiciary and back down before they embarrass the hell out of themselves and discredit article III branch for overstepping once again.

      Some people who post a lot on this blog exemplify the kind of ignorance that pervades the mind of a person who has never had to take an order from anybody, let alone a person that has never actually tried to enforce a judicial order of any kind even one from the lowest T&M court in the country. Learn a little before you presume to speak with such self assured confidence, perhaps.

  8. Too bad in a way-I see both sides however Acosta is highly unprofessional. At one time I owned several newspapers and the man would never have held a job with our organization.

  9. “a stern warning” as to what? When Agent Orange doesn’t want to give a straight answer a question when he knows a truthful answer makes him look bad, just shut up? Cower when he goes on a rant and hand off the mic to someone else? Don’t follow up when you get a Kellyanne Pivot or an answer that is nonresponsive? Stand there and be bullied?

    Agent Orange does not enjoy the privilege of only answering questions that he thinks make him look good and only when asked by people he likes. Again, all of this goes back to his malignant narcissism and need for affirmation.

    1. actually he enjoys EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE and can’t just be compelled to answer anybody’s questions.

      that privilege may not go as far as Richard Nixon wanted it to go, but it definitely covers this tempest in a teapot

    2. In this press conference, the President answered Jim Acosta’s question, starting with “We have a different view…”, and going on to saying “I want immigrants to enter the country legally” ..and “and to follow the process” (which means not lying in order to establish a claim of asylum). The President was calm and measured in his response, and no mistruths were spoken.

    3. I question your use of the word “rant”. The rules are clear. When you ask your question give the mic back to the WH employee. He didn’t do that and behaved like a child. Then physically pushing the woman away. When the President is taking the press conference it’s viewed all over the world. Acosta should have been physically removed. I would love watching the daupily without Acosta.

  10. Here’s my prediction from two days ago:

    November 14, 2018 at 5:07 PM
    My prediction: Judge Kelly is a big firm kinda guy in a high profile judicial job. He’s in a pickle of a case since it’s a free speech right being claimed by a jerk. No judge likes that. It’s a nose holder call. He’s a Trump appointee with a year under his belt on the court. I’m betting he wants a middle ground decision that remands the case for a due process hearing for Acosta on the issue of his behavior and a written decision. We all know how that will turn out by the WH, so given that inevitability, Kelly will probably side with Acosta and stay his order on appeal and let guys above his pay grade make the call.

    On the other hand, he’s an Irishman who just saw what the press did to Kavanaugh. There’s a 25% chance he say “nyet” to the press and lets ol’ Jimmy watch the proceedings through the window like that wild Office episode where Michael is banned from Phyllis wedding but decides to jump up to peer through the window.

    I’m on the beam so far.

    1. Perhaps setting a penance time (six months) for Mr. Acosta. Calling on Acosta should be Sarah Sanders prerogative. Continuing the requirement of requesting a pass with seating in the back. Whatever is decided, when the President is taking questions Acosta should not be called on.

    1. yes our nation’s leader is mocked by a twit with a big mouth.
      and a lifetime tenure federal judge orders disorder

      I wonder, will he send a federal marshall up to the white house to enforce the order?

  11. This has been a very bad day for Trump and his legion of brainwashed supporters.

    In fact, Trump has been having a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day since the Democrats took the House and he realized that he was up shit creek without a paddle.

    1. MMATV:

      Dream on. Trump’s richer, smarter and prettier than you and has a fabulous family. He doesn’t need the job nor any affirmation from the likes of you. He could walk away tomorrow having done more for the country than most Presidents and retire gracefully playing golf and snickering at the Dems who tried their damndest to undercut him and failed as they so often do. Self-declared victories are the most fleeting kind.

      1. As usual mespo, all that matters to you is your champion, Trump. You care nothing of America, morals, common sense, respect, honor, or the future of the US. Hitler was a big winner too, at first.

        1. Hey, Newsflash!

          We think you think we lack morals, concern for future of America, common sense, respect, honor, too.

          If you think calling people names will do the trick anymore, it won’t. Spare your breath.

        2. Isaacsacanuck:

          If you wanna riding the losing horse and claim virtue in doing so have at it. We’ll miss you in the winners circle.

        3. Issac, Trump wasn’t elected to be our “moral leader” and on what planet could you ever refer to Hillary and Bill Clinton as “moral leaders” had she won and been our sitting president? She’s got no “morals” whatsoever. Plus she’s incompetent and corrupt to the core. So we got Trump. And we’re dam lucky we did.

          Please don’t tell us that the Democrat leaders of today “care about America, morals, respect or honor”….what planet are you living on? Did you see what they pulled at the Kavanaugh hearings?

          But hey, what goes around comes around. MAGA now stands for: Michael Avenatti Got Arrested.

          The Democrats shouted “We Believe All Women!” And now Avenatti is out there defending himself against accusations and desperately telling us that he is a good and decent man who would never assault a woman and the accusations against him are not to be believed. LOL. Suddenly presumption of innocence matters again?

          Karma bites hard. MAGA!

        4. I:
          You’re Canadian and naive which gives you exactly the same things you accuse me of. Blow away. We’ve git enough undereducated migrants as it is.

    2. MMATV – Where have you been. There is so much infighting with your Demsocialist party they don’t have a clue what their doing. How about your darling Ocasio & company holding up in Pelosi’s office. They have no agenda for Americans other then resist and open boarders.

      1. What infighting? Whoever wins the speaker’s gavel will have the party united behind him.

        Ocasio-Cortez is simply trying to bring attention to an issue she thinks is important.

        The leadership isn’t fighting her about it.

        If nothing, Democrats learned from 2016 that the party needs to unify quickly instead of having 6-month-long primaries.

        In my state of CT, the Democrats are much more unified than Republicans are and won a legislative seat in Greenwich, which has been in GOP control for over 100 years.

        1. @MMATV – Oh yes the Dums in CT are really unified. Connecticut ranked fourth among states with the highest percentage of outbound moves. They just love that unification. Amazing how they vote for the Dums then when the problems start they want to move to conservative states.

        2. “What Democrat infighting?”

          Infighting like Marcia Fudge calling Pelosi an uber wealthy “elitist” who hangs out with very rich people and James Clyburn accusing Democrats of being “racist” and using “dog whistles” to oust him from leadership, and Ocasio Cortez praising the protestors camping outside Pelosi’s office and essentially talking about how we need to “control the means of production” when Amazon moves to her district, etc. Good times.

      2. They’re not socialists. They are leftist pawns of a capitalist plutocracy and are played like the fools they are.

        A socialist wants a strong government that reigns in private interests. One that elevates the interests of society as a whole over private interests.

        Do Dems really want that? No only one that squashes down the interests they don’t like. Whomever that may be at the time.

        Overall, i would argue, Democrats usually are on the side of making the government weaker in this country not stronger. Maybe stronger in petty bureaucratic and inefficient ways that interfere with regular folks; but not in the big ways that could reign in the real plutocracy.

        Now, FDR was a real socialist. At a time when exigent circumstances probably required a real measure of socialism. Some would differ on that. But he was the high water mark.

        LBJ may have been too, in that he broke the teeth of remaining Southern statehood opposition with the Civil Rights measures. But that was a net strengthening only of the central government, which came at the expense of the strength of the state governments. It was a net sideways move in overall government power seen from the long term view of the overall power of government as a whole over private interests and individuals.

        Mostly Dems have just increased budgets and bureaucracies, just a lot of petty increases in government. A lot of what the Dem party as a whole has done, has increased perceived “liberty” in a way that has harmed society as a whole. this fracas is today’s example. One might point to many other things but this is already too long.

        There are a lot of things that are not as they seem and hard to perceive accurately. The press is actually the arm of the strongest financial interests in America and they pursue their agenda on a daily basis

        The press may not realize that, or maybe they do,. they are like actors. They are reading scripts handed to them from above.

  12. I think Trump is an ass. I think Acosta is an Ass. 2 Asses do not equal an Ass, it equals a complete and total F— U-.

    The White House is way more than a trump. The press corp is way more than an acosta (unfortunately most of the press corp don’t believe that). Hopefully the WH will get their act together and give reasonable reason why a filibustering reporter should be barred from the white house press room. A judge has no business saying who can and who cannot be in the WH press room.

    1. Judges decide how the laws are applied to individuals and corporations, so they absolutely have the right to decide who can report on the White House.

      The White House is going to learn it needs to follow due process if it wants to revoke press rights, which are protected by the Bill of Rights.

      If a reporter is violating the law, he needs to be arrested and convicted of crimes before he can be denied access to public White House facilities. That’s what due process is about.

        1. Where was i wrong?

          DC Circuit judges have jurisdiction over Washington DC, and decide cases over violations of constitutional rights that occur there.

          Last i knew, the White House was in DC.

          If SCOTUS refuses to take the case on appeal, the circuit court decision stands.

    2. Earlier presidents tolerated Sam Donaldson’s disruption. Why should this stupidity be allowed to continue. it actually interferes with the first amendment freedoms of all, to let one mouthy jerk hog the mic

      IMO the federal judge can say what he likes but he has no remedial authority nor power to order the president to do anything like let anyone in or give anybody a pass. he’s way out of school on this.

      if Congress wanted to toss someone from their building they could do it too. This is equivalent to the POTUS telling a federal marshall to ignore a judge. In a courthouse, that would be ignored.

    1. So they can show their bias. They hate trump, Anything, anything at all, that makes trump look bad they will exaggerate. Anything he might do right is ignored or given credit to someone else.

      We live in very sad times for how our main stream press operate. Of course it was not much better when FDR could have his wheelchair photoshopped out of the pictures and when JFK could have multiple encounters with any female that came within arms reach. The press did their duty to not report on such non presidential issues as that. Not anymore.

    2. they fear this trend that’s why.

      one thing that is also never reported by the press: how they serve financial interests

      if there is any arm of capitalism in this country it’s the “free press”

      the presume not only to watch the watchers; they presume to command the commanders.

  13. It’s a start.

    However, no journalist w/any personal dignity and having as their purpose to inform the public, would even bother going to a WH press briefing. They can pick up their talking points from the transmission belt in their e-mail for that.

    Every actual journalist should hold up a shoe to Trump and walk out. Then they can resume investigative reporting.

  14. The POTUS was NOT going to be bullied by ‘this Rude, Argumentative Little Twit, with the BIG MOUTH.” He Hogged the mic, and thus stopped OTHERS from questioning the President…including Other CNN reporters.” I am surprised the Judge who ruled on this(partially) did NOT see what everyone else did with Acosta, in how he DID try to stop the Intern who was doing her job…he DID PUT HIS HAND UP TO HER UPPER ARM THEN DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM. YOU NEVER touch a woman in this manner, especially again, when she was told by THE POTUS to TAKE THE MIC, HE WAS HOGGING AND WOULD NOT TURN OVER TO HER. I am surprised that Fox joined this “Acosta Show, as the President DID answer for over 1 1/2 hrs. of questions, but you cannot expect him to be screamed at, and treated so Rudely. Obama did the SAME THING, and the Hypocrites after HE had a reporter removed, APPLAUDED OBAMA…

    1. The reporter Jim Acosta wasn’t arrested and found guilty of assault, so they cannot say assault was the reason for expelling him.

      If they want to deny press access to White House press facilities, they need to prove the reporter committed an objective wrong, not a subjectively bad action.

      Seth Abramson just released his book, where he lays out the facts in the Trump/Russia case.

      He argues it is essentially a bribery case: Russia bribed Trump in exchange for favorable foreign policy worth billions of dollars, and the payoff took the form of money laundering through various parts of Trump’s holdings: Trump Org, his family, the Kushner properties, etc.

      I think this is incomplete. I absolutely suspect that Putin has been telling Trump there there’s a possibility that, with Putin’s help, Trump can become king-for-life of America. I think Putin has had plenty of opportunities to demonstrate how total his own control of Russia is, and he’s convinced Trump that “this could be you!”

      Dismantling the free press, and elevating propaganda shops like Fox and One America to replace the press, is a huge element of Russian-style autocracy.

      1. you’re full of garbage. this is a question of separation of powers, and remedies
        the lifetime tenured federal judges can order the president to give anybody a press pass….. and the POTUS can ignore them.

        time to brush up on “Remedies” oh wait you don’t know anything about that do you?

      2. Gee, you really drank the Kool Aid, didn’t you? Your Mexican husband needs to switch you over to margaritas for a while, and then straight Tequila with lemon and salt backers. Then, once your brain has been cleansed, you can maybe learn about REALITY!

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      3. ha you dont get it. all large media companies from Fox to any other have essentially the same liberal viewpoint shared by all publically traded companies Fox is just catering to a different customer base to service a different section of the advertising market.

        the only exceptions are those that are closely held like the Wapo. and those are closely held for a reason. so they can lose money indefinitely projecting the personal agenda of the ownership like the richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos, who is as much donald’s rival as Geo soros.

  15. I’m sure the judge in the spirit of his ruling will open all court proceedings to video recording. I’m certain he will never hold anyone in contempt for shouting down the judge or calling him a liar.😇

    1. yes gary you got it. the judge is a tyrant on his own premises but the POTUS has to take orders from somebody else on his premises. guess how this one ends.

      enjoy your fleeting victory, press & media fans of the arrogant jerk acosta.

      he may have been the bad apple that’s going to ruin it for you all

      maybe bit off more than you can chew. time will tell

  16. Throw ALL of them out. FDR used to invite select journalists from favorable publications into the Oval Office for “chats”…many times for “background” and off the record as well as quotable statements. Nowhere, as far as I know, is it required that the President of the United States or his staff hold wide open press conferences. And then, invite that idiot from CNN in for a “chat”. If he acts like the insulting, rude, bully he displayed in his last “press conference”, then end the interview and have the police escort him out….forever.

    1. Did you read the court opinion? There needs to be DUE PROCESS before a reporter can be denied a pass.

      Due process means an arrest for criminal conduct and then a court hearing to determine whether the arrest was warranted.

      It is incredibly disturbing that the White House says it can just restrict access by the press with no due process. The press is protected by the Bill of Rights to report on the White House and cannot do its job if the White House can throw them out whenever it wants.


      1. “Did you read the court opinion? There needs to be DUE PROCESS before a reporter can be denied a pass.”

        Oh, cause the DC Circuit says so? If I’m POTUS I take my legal direction from the SCOTUS and that’s it. That’s the co-equal branch of government not the 70s DC Circuit.

        1. Yes, the DC Circuit has jurisdiction over all laws in Washington DC.

          SCOTUS only hears what it wants to hear, so the DC Circuit is likely final unless SCOTUS agrees to take the case.

        2. next thing the federal judge will say the White House has inadequate potty facilities and order the White House to install more ramps or face a fine to the EEOC

          preposterous. this will make many good teachable moments in the law schools

          I would totally run with this as POTUS all the way up the ladder. No way anybody even the SCOTUS can make the president admit a clown who just wants to hog the mic.

          and if that is an impeachable offense then bring the articles and let the battle begin!

          1. Ya, it’ll please the 38% ers composed of gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make. How’s that work out in an election where normal people get to vote as well? Answer: Tick, tick, tick.

            pro tip: only caring about making wackjobs happy also makes the Democratic Machine happy.

            this is to “but all my old white bumpkin friends agree with me” kurtzie

      2. Lol article II due process is for the POTUS to decide not the article III judge

        separation of powers

        It’s funny isn’t it that Obama could order assassinations with no due process but donald trump can’t even revoke a press pass from a disruptive reporter without a federal judge gainsaying him? kind of shows you who the real stooge of the “powers that be” is (was)


        that anwar guy wasn’t in a position to make a big case of his own demise in federal court once obama’s drones blew him to bits, was he. some due process that guy received.

  17. LET ME SAY THIS! Leave it to CNN to F**! this all up. At this point I would proceed with the courts to bar access to Media anytime I wanted and blame CNN for that. I am soooo tired of CNN. STOP THEM NOW!

    1. Read Fox News or the Washington Times if you want examples of rabid biased journalism. They either don’t print it when the right gets hit or lie and make it look like a victory. The NY Times and the Washington Post are obviously left wing but they print ALL the news, even when Trump looks good.

Comments are closed.