That article is exactly right. The result of all this is going to be a set of published rules that reins in the entire group of fake journalists that attends those press briefings. And I don’t thing most of them are going to like that.
“Make sense?”
Not at all.
It’s still ridiculous — the judge had enough info to slap down CNN and Acosta, hard. This is the sort of case that does not merit such prolonged attention or public resources.
The 5th amendment reads as follows
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
How does this apply in this case in any way?
Perhaps I'm stupid, but no, it doesn't.
Is this one of those 3D chess things?
She could plagiarize the behavior standards from a kindergarten and they still wouldn’t follow it.
Crazy. No jurisdiction. Only the White House can decide who does and does not get a pass. Period. Acosta is not reporter, he is an activist.
“...Acosta was not provided with “sufficient notice or explanation before his credentials were revoked or been given sufficient opportunity to respond before they were.”
—
Which is utter bullshit. He was told REPEATEDLY by Trump to sit down, shut up and hand over the mike. He refused. In what sane world is this considered acceptable behavior that should NOT be responded to by taking away his press pass?
“just like in any elementary school across America, the rules for behavior will be written up”
Sad statement on the media’s childishness.
The President can be capricious and arbitrary IMO. There is no due process involved.
But no big deal.
bmp
I know the author of the article used the word "childish" for dramatic effect, however a young pack of jackals are innocent animals. Acosted is not young and he is not innocent. He is a full grown-@$$ed adult who should know better.
I think if after President Trump produces his Rules of Conduct, he should stipulate that for every lamestream journalist who acts contrary to the established rules, he will remove them and bring in a real journalist of his own choosing in their place.
There are lots of Trump-supporting guys like us out here.
Why are rules required? Where is this in the Constitution? “Rules of decorum”?! This is silliness dictated by the judiciary. This is precisely what needs to stop!
Good, this should take 1-2 days at most and then execute the new rules starting Monday.
Just end the whole thing ! The WH Briefing is an anachronism! Let everyone ask questions through the WH website. Assign a number, rank order them by relevant topic, then answer the 1st 100 in a day or so & make it downloadable available to all. Breaks the MSM monopoly, ends the silly notion they’re something special. The networks can have shows where those preening pinheads can agonize over the questions & answers. The real question is, ‘ Will anyone watch?’.
Tell the Judge to buzz off. This is a separation of power issue and surly who the President invites onto White House property is in his control alone. It’s like who the owner of a House allows inside his own home. Silly to even think anybody else has any say over that
The judge knows that Trump is right on the merits, but does not want Antifa outside his front door threatening his wife and children. The reason that Dims resort to mob rule is that it works. The rule of law be damned. We are on a slippery slope.
I think Acosta’s behavior is escalating, like that of those HS students who eventually make national headlines.
Good explication. But the fake news won’t stop reporting this as a major victory and a blow to POTUS’ position regarding the MSM and fake news.
“Make sense?”
No.
Does the author think this makes sense: “All the plaintiffs in the case against the White House this morning was an injunction in which...”
He can’t write a coherent sentence nor understand the case is about Acosta accosting a woman doing her job, not press freedom.
So he does not make sense on two levels. Literally he make sense and his logic makes no sense.
Memories of being in grammar school when the teacher would just wait until the troublemaker would stop their antics. Then she would keep the whole class in for that amount of time during recess.