Posted on 11/22/2018 12:36:42 AM PST by JonnyFive
Was this her first question? Wat is the context of her question on that occasion?
Later when Mrs. Spokeshave cut the TV power cable with a pair of scissors it became "I have the mouth"
All of this
The WH could afford multiple mics and could pull the plug
So why not
Or just stop having press conferences
Few or no real conferences are conducted with that chaos
Like Acosta will ever be called on to answer another question in the next 2 to 6 years.
THAT will never happen. They are all paranoid babies.
“No comment” or “I can’t comment on that” has long been an accepted press conference response. (And good that he understands that is the best answer in this situation.) This, just a more efficient variation thereof, as it also makes clear he’s not allowing a follow-up for it either.
They should insert, “A journalist yelling out a question without having been called, or otherwise disrupting the press conference, will be immediately ejected and his press pass revoked”.
I remember April Ryan giving Sarah Sanders a hard time about “what she heard” in re: Pres. Trump’s budget proposal.
Sarah said that what she heard was false and that his budget proposal was posted on the Wh.gov website as adminstrations have been doing for years.
Like hello? Is anybody there?
If journos would hate it, it must be good for us.
They have become the Press-titutes, they do it for the money. (see the Fusions GPS model)
Why not take questions via the internet. Start out with decent journalists and then if someone acts up, pull the plug.
Better yet, start out with regular Americans. If the pros find their way to asking decent questions again, switch the order.
What we are seeing here is the codification of polite behavior and manners that we used to be taught at home and in school.
These adolecent “journalists” obviously were never instructed in the importance of good manners to a civil society, so rules must be enforced.
I was out driving around the other night and am reception was iffy but a local station had Dana L. On clear enough to listen to. She said she spoke to a reporter who us often in the room w/ Acosta on a personal matter, however the subject came up. Her reporter friend told her he sucks all the O2 out of the room and I am not quoting this reporter here but the flavor of what was said, you get the impression that other reporters might consider him a Richard Cranium. PDJT did the press core a huge favor...
These were always the unspoken rules of conduct amongst the press. I think it was Helen Thomas who first nudged the red line. Acosta has flat out decimated it.
These were always the unspoken rules of conduct amongst the press. I think it was Helen Thomas who first nudged the red line. Acosta has flat out decimated it.
We have been living in a Mediacracy for at least 50 years.
The Media chose what candidates were acceptable, what Supreme Court justices were acceptable, what issues were important, what was a scandal, and what was not.
The Media controlled most of the information flow of the nation.
They acted as one because they shared the same Progressive ideology, which developed into a group think.
The NYTs, the Washington Post, AP, and a few other set the ideological tone.
By this means, the Media controlled the nation by controlling most of the people in the government.
That era is ending. President Trump is showing the way.
These rules should have been in force from day one. Most followup questions are just lectures.
So Simple:
We’ll start questioning:
“We’ll start with Jim Acosta.”
Sarah the President was rebuked by Chief Justice John Roberts for attacking the Judiciary. Doesn’t the President need to stop lashing out every time a ruling doesn’t go his way?
“Thank you for the question. I’ll answer and there will be NO follow up. You can be seated.”
SARAH should then wait until he is seated and has relinquished the microphone if there is one before answering.
“UNFORTUNATELY, and despite what the Cheif Justice said, there are too many activists presiding over courts more interested in legislating from the bench instead of interpreting the law. It’s curious to see WHERE the suits against the Executive branch are always filed. A fair and objective conclusion would be they are invariably brought to a court stacked with activist liberals appointed by an liberal Democrat President.”
NEXT QUESTION from Jim Roberts of Fox.
So simple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.