It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CNN sues President Trump and top White House aides for barring Jim Acosta

page: 11
44
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

Also the white house brief did not list losing the security clearance as the reason for revoking the pass.
A stance the 1977 case actually supports.


Not sure what you are saying, but little known fact, the WH Press Pass IS EXACTLY A SECURITY PASS issued by the secret service after background check.




posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ErEhWoN




posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

The pass was not revoked for SECURITY REASONS.
The case sited by cnn supports the presidents right to decide who is in briefings.
The case sited by cnn was strictly for application denials and not revocations.
The cnn case is a stinky loser.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

I bet if Acosta sheepishly apologized for his behavior and vowed to not repeat it, he could have his press pass restored. Well, could have until CNN went all weepy eyed to the courts in a lawsuit instead of just plugging in another reporter.

And yep, even Obama had the power to tell secret service to get medieval on even me if the situation was the same. And still could since he still has a detail assigned. Pretty sure even Michele could make it happen as well. Now repercussions after the fact might come into play when I posed no threat. But that didn’t stop this hypothetical beat down did it?

I still say Acosta got lucky he wasn’t accosted.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   
The blinders many in this thread wear work amazingly well.

This has nothing to do with Acosta. ALL Presidents who have had to field questions from journalists have had to deal with the hard questions. Trump doesn't like it for a few reasons. One is his incredibly thin skin. Another is his utter lack of being able to take criticism without lashing out. And his denial of ever doing anything wrong. And yet another is he can't handle the hard questions, because he makes up a lot of crap as he goes, with any facts being derived from either his administration, advisors (who get fired if they make him look bad), or Fox and Friends.. sadly enough.

He has threatened to ban OTHER reporters. You know.. the ones who ask him annoying questions he doesn't want to deal with.


"How long are you going to leave Jim Acosta in the penalty box?" Trump was asked. "I haven't made that decision, but it could be others also."


Will it be a single reporter who supports Trump? No? ONLY reporters who align with networks that oppose Trump? Yup.

That is a massive issue. And it's ASTOUNDING how his constituents can utterly ignore freedoms and transparency in favor of their love affair for Trump. If he wants them gone, that's OK by them!

SAD!! .. as Trump would pathetically say.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

The pass was not revoked for SECURITY REASONS.


Correct. A security pass that was revoked for partisan purposes.
It was an ugly first with Brennan and others, but with the Press it becomes a constitutional issue.

Again..CNN has a GOP Attorney (the guy who argued Bush v Gore in favor of Bush) and they are appearing before a Trump Appointed judge and Fox News has signed on.

This aint a partisan debate, though I know everyone has been trained to think so.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

Trump is a man-baby snowflake looking to find a safe-space without consideration for the constitution. He comes first!

Hell, it is only his 2nd Press conference in two years and he couldn't even get through that without feeling traumatized and lashing out.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I just do not get this. Is CNN off the air? Did trump send secret forces in the night to kill all of their reporters?

CNN has 12 other reporters in the White House Press Corp.

So what is the f'n problem with removing someone who does not follow the rules?
edit on Novpm30pmf0000002018-11-14T14:35:00-06:000200 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
The blinders many in this thread wear work amazingly well.

This has nothing to do with Acosta. ALL Presidents who have had to field questions from journalists have had to deal with the hard questions. Trump doesn't like it for a few reasons. One is his incredibly thin skin. Another is his utter lack of being able to take criticism without lashing out. And his denial of ever doing anything wrong. And yet another is he can't handle the hard questions, because he makes up a lot of crap as he goes, with any facts being derived from either his administration, advisors (who get fired if they make him look bad), or Fox and Friends.. sadly enough.

He has threatened to ban OTHER reporters. You know.. the ones who ask him annoying questions he doesn't want to deal with.


"How long are you going to leave Jim Acosta in the penalty box?" Trump was asked. "I haven't made that decision, but it could be others also."


Will it be a single reporter who supports Trump? No? ONLY reporters who align with networks that oppose Trump? Yup.

That is a massive issue. And it's ASTOUNDING how his constituents can utterly ignore freedoms and transparency in favor of their love affair for Trump. If he wants them gone, that's OK by them!

SAD!! .. as Trump would pathetically say.
false.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

It is not hard questions. Acosta does not ask questions. He states facts or in this case he starts his statement with 'I challenge you'...he is an twit.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

none of which addresses the specific points I quoted from the 1977 case cnn used as a basis for their lawsuit.
the case sited states the presidents selection of venues or journalists is not up for challenge.
the case also states it is strictly for application denials not revocations.
you can dance all you like, it wont change what was stated in the sited case.
the sited case stated partisan purposes were legal with respect to whom the president chooses to be in his briefings.

cnn picked a stinker for what they are attempting
sorry you are an acosta fanboy



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

She should have slapped him.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I just do not get this. Is CNN off the air? Did trump send secret forces in the night to kill all of their reporters?

CNN has 12 other reporters in the White House Press Corp.

So what is the f'n problem with removing someone who does not follow the rules?


Left just needs stuff to whine about...



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

solar plexus
instep
nose
groin



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Like this gem of a news report that blames Trump and Sanders for Acostas actions...

www.politico.com...



Instead, Sanders and Trump regularly called on Acosta, counting on the likelihood that he would do that Acosta thing of speechifying and playing microphone hog as he attempts to turn a question into an extended back-and-forth. Sanders and Trump have pretended exasperation at Acosta’s posturing—posturing that hasn’t broken much news, by the way—but not so secretly they happily wallow in his pomposity. By getting Acosta to play the preening, self-aggrandizing, sanctimonious reporter and using him as the punching bag for the White House’s anti-press strategy, Sanders and Trump have created a unique public venue to exhibit their hatred for the “fake news” of CNN.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Yes!



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Its suppression of the press... I'll tell ya something else too, it'll be a very sad day for America if Trumps attempt of censorship over the "free" media is upheld in a court of law.

Land of the free?

I guess we'll have to wait and see what the courts decision is, to know whether those words actually hold any kind of substance.



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: notsure1
LMAO The cry babies over at CNN are suing the White house over Acostas credentials .

They are saying it is a violation of his freedom of the press and his constitutional rights.

LOL LOL LOL. Freedom of the press does not mean you get to just do whatever the hell you want and then act like a 3 year old toddler when you dont get your way.

When the POTUS tell you to sit down and STFU you sit down and STFU.


Cry babies lol.

www.cnn.com...


Personally....I'd just give him his pass back and never call on him. He would implode at some point.


and give him a pacifier





posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Uh the case sited by cnn clearly says it has nothing to do with the first amendment

openjurist.org...



The first amendment's protection of a citizen's right to obtain information concerning "the way the country is being run" does not extend to every conceivable avenue a citizen may wish to employ in pursuing this right.18 Nor is the discretion of the President to grant interviews or briefings with selected journalists challenged. It would certainly be unreasonable to suggest that because the President allows interviews with some bona fide journalists, he must give this opportunity to all.


potus has the right to extend his briefings to whom he chooses according to the case cnn is using to justify thier lawsuit.
cnn is daft.

nice try with the land of the free dig



posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

That argument has been debunk repeatedly by soberbacchus in this very thread.

Not much else I can really add... Except to say, it'll be an extremely slippery slope for the concept of freedom of the press, if this ban by Trump is accepted as legitimate by either the courts or the majority of citizens.
edit on 14-11-2018 by Subaeruginosa because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
44
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join