General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsunderpants
(182,767 posts)still_one
(92,131 posts)amendment, but the arbitrary nature of it
Crutchez_CuiBono
(7,725 posts)Decorum...that's rich.
AJT
(5,240 posts)LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,582 posts)SHS, look in the mirror!
Maeve
(42,279 posts)Raven
(13,889 posts)ProfessorGAC
(64,995 posts)She isn't exactly guiltless when it comes to nastiness.
unblock
(52,196 posts)i rather doubt that anyone was asserting an "absolute" first amendment right to access to the white house, but in any event, the judge has yet to opine on the first amendment question:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/11/16/cnn-white-house-credential-court-case/2023035002/
But Kelly said he hasnt considered at all yet whether the White House violated Acostas First Amendment rights. More arguments are expected Tuesday.
Miles Archer
(18,837 posts)?
Verified account
@Jordanfabian
In reality, Judge Kelly did not make a final ruling on whether Acosta's First Amendment rights were violated in this case.
9:52 AM - 16 Nov 2018
Link to tweet
unblock
(52,196 posts)not only did they not win on first amendment arguments (no decision yet), they lost on fifth amendment issues, which of course the statement completely ignores.
they make it look like they're being good guys and giving acosta his pass back out of the kindness of their hearts (ha!), when in fact they're doing it in response to a direct court order.
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)in the press room?
C_U_L8R
(44,997 posts)don't yank microphones out of reporters' hands in a feeble attempt to evade questions you don't like !!!
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)The entire charade was planned, down to the stomping and scowling and the specific woman sent to try to take the microphone from Acosta. Trump was making TV.
It was a set-up so they could pull his pass, intimidate the remainder of the WHPC, and titillate the Trumpanzees.
C_U_L8R
(44,997 posts)Kinda blew back in their faces. Dumbshits.
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)he's "working the refs" constantly. always complaining, always wheedling, always whinging. he gets his way because people get sick of dealing with him, like with a stubborn child.
remember, he went over a year without a real press conference, then did a lot of driveway/tarmac availabilities on the run up to the election. then this big fight in a formal presser, then nothing since except interviews with friendly media. he'll come out and fight with the legitimate press in a year or so when he ramps up his run for re-election.
will the press in general then adopt a less adversarial tone when questioning his ignorant ass? will he ever call on Acosta again? TBD.
jcgoldie
(11,631 posts)They always are exactly the opposite of reality. Wasn't today's ruling specifically to protect 1st amendment rights to WH access?
sheshe2
(83,737 posts)Tweet tweet.
winstars
(4,220 posts)R B Garr
(16,950 posts)and a President not calling people liars for asking questions. Stuff like that,
malaise
(268,921 posts)Ah STFU - you and the vile MAGAcretin should never use that word.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Will President Trump actually answer questions instead of calling any question he doesn't like "stupid"? I know that Sarah Sanders doesn't talk about a lot of stuff with the president, so she's rarely in a position to answer any questions, but maybe she could get back to the media on this one point?
TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts).
?quality=80&w=807
.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)He said he was making NO ruling on the first amendment grounds. That's for later. This putrid administration can't tell the truth about ANYTHING.
llmart
(15,536 posts)Golden Raisin
(4,608 posts)"decorum" is defined as, "Lie like a mother-f*c#er 24/7."
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)As injunctive relief, the decision was based on a likelihood of success on the merits, which will be decided down the road.
The court did not even rule on whether CNN/Acosta was likely to succeed on the 1st amendment merits, because it was so clear he would prevail on 5th amendment grounds.
Due process is a much easier call. CNN/Acosta had a property right in the pass - and revoking it impacted a first amendment right. That's a pretty easy case to make, since they provided CNN/Acosta no process at all prior to terminating the interest.
Disorder in the press conference (to the extent there was disorder) has nothing to do with due process.
Gothmog
(145,129 posts)Vinca
(50,261 posts)to drop the case because it was likely she'd lose.