What's new

White House pulls CNN correspondent Jim Acosta's pass after contentious news conference

MenInG

PakPassion Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Runs
217,988
In a stunning break with protocol, the White House said Wednesday night that it's suspending the press pass of CNN's Jim Acosta "until further notice."

The move came just hours after Acosta, CNN's chief White House correspondent, drew the ire of President Donald Trump and his allies by asking multiple questions at a post-midterms news conference. Trump insulted Acosta and called him a "terrible" person.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders announced in a statement that Acosta would be stripped of what's known as a "hard pass," which gives him access to the White House grounds.

CNN said in a statement that Acosta has the network's full support.

The revocation of his pass "was done in retaliation for his challenging questions at today's press conference," the statement said. "In an explanation, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders lied. She provided fraudulent accusations and cited an incident that never happened. This unprecedented decision is a threat to our democracy and the country deserves better. Jim Acosta has our full support."

In the 7 p.m. hour on Wednesday, Acosta was stopped at the White House's Pennsylvania Avenue gate where reporters usually enter. He was heading back to the White House for a live shot on "Anderson Cooper 360."

"I've just been denied entrance to the WH," Acosta tweeted. "Secret Service just informed me I cannot enter the WH grounds for my 8pm hit."

Acosta posted a video of a Secret Service officer removing his pass.

"I was just told to do it," the officer said on the recording.

"I am now giving my hard pass to the Secret Service," Acosta said.

Reporters who regularly cover the White House are routinely granted "hard passes" to ease entry and exit to the grounds. It is unclear whether Acosta will be granted some other sort of entry pass for his work. But on Wednesday night, he was turned away at the gate.

The removal of his pass is a sharp escalation of tensions between the Trump administration and CNN. It immediately stirred concerns within the White House press corps.

Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times, said on Twitter: "This is something I've never seen since I started covering the White House in 1996. Other presidents did not fear tough questioning."

The White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA), which advocates for the press corps, issued a statement soon after Acosta was denied entry, calling the revocation of his access "unacceptable."

"Journalists may use a range of approaches to carry out their jobs and the WHCA does not police the tone or frequency of the questions its members ask of powerful senior government officials, including the President," the association said. "Such interactions, however uncomfortable they may appear to be, help define the strength of our national institutions. We urge the White House to immediately reverse this weak and misguided action."

Elisabeth Bumiller, the Washington bureau chief for The New York Times, said that "the president should not pick and choose who covers him, and he should certainly not force out a representative of one of the country's leading news organizations, one that tens of millions of Americans depend on for their news."

Acosta has been one of the most aggressive reporters on the Trump beat, winning him huge numbers of fans but also huge numbers of critics.

During Wednesday's news conference, many people on social media thanked Acosta for trying to hold the president accountable for his words and deeds.

But others condemned the correspondent. Some Trump boosters said Acosta's credentials should be revoked. And pro-Trump media outlets ran stories alleging that the reporter had mistreated the White House aide who tried to take a microphone away from him at the news conference.
Sanders repeated this assertion in her statement.

"President Trump believes in a free press and expects and welcomes tough questions of him and his Administration," she said. "We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable."
CNN producer Allie Malloy responded to Sanders via Twitter: "This is a complete lie. The woman grabbed Jim's arm repeatedly. He never once touched her. In fact at one point @Acosta tells her politely 'pardon me, mam' as she's yanking on his arm."

Acosta also tweeted that Sanders' description of the incident was a "lie."

At the news conference, Trump snapped at the press corps, called reporters "rude" for asking questions, and made baseless claims about political polling.

"Such a hostile media. It's so sad," he said, keeping up his years-long campaign against the people who cover him.

Trump's most contentious exchange was with Acosta. Immediately afterward, CNN said in a statement: "This President's ongoing attacks on the press have gone too far. They are not only dangerous, they are disturbingly un-American."

"While President Trump has made it clear he does not respect a free press, he has a sworn obligation to protect it," CNN added. "A free press is vital to democracy, and we stand behind Jim Acosta and his fellow journalists everywhere."

The news conference was shown live on CNN and all the other cable news channels and broadcast networks. Media critics and Democrats said Trump's combative streak — telling reporters to "sit down" and insulting some of them — might be part of a strategy to deflect attention from Democratic victories in the midterms.

"Trump wants to make the story him vs the media not him getting his *** kicked in the House. This press conference is playing right into that narrative," former Obama aide Tommy Vietor tweeted.
Acosta was one of the first reporters Trump called on. "Thank you, Mr. President," he said. "I want to challenge you on one of the statements that you made in the tail end of the campaign."

Trump leaned into the mic and said, "Here we go" — seemingly relishing the confrontation.
Acosta brought up the migrants traveling from Central America toward the US southern border, and the racist ad referring to them that the Trump campaign released last week.

"As you know, Mr. President, the caravan is not an invasion," Acosta said. "It's a group of migrants moving up from Central America towards the border with the US--"

Trump, sarcastically, replied, "Thank you for telling me that, I appreciate it."
Acosta: "Why did you characterize it as such?"

"Because I consider it an invasion. You and I have a difference of opinion."
"But do you think that you demonized immigrants?"

"No, not at all. I want them to come into the country. But they have to come in legally."

That's what the migrants are trying to do — they say they intend to seek asylum.

Acosta called out the misleading ad and said: "They're hundreds of miles away, though. They're hundreds and hundreds of miles away. That's not an invasion."

"You know what? I think you should," Trump started to say, pointing at Acosta. "Honestly, I think you should let me run the country. You run CNN. And if you did it well, your ratings would be much better."

"Okay, that's enough," Trump said as Acosta tried to ask another question.

A White House staffer hurried over to grab the mic and carry it to the next reporter Trump chose, NBC's Peter Alexander.

"If I may ask one other question, are you worried--"

Acosta tried to point out that other reporters had also asked multiple questions.

"That's enough," Trump said.

The White House staffer tried to grab the mic from Acosta, but he held onto it.

"Pardon me, ma'am," he said, as she looked toward Trump, then ducked out of camera view.
"Peter, let's go," Trump said, trying to move on to Alexander.

"If I can ask, on the Russia investigation," Acosta said, "are you concerned that you may have indictments coming down--"

"I am not concerned about anything with the Russian investigation because it is a hoax," Trump said, "That is enough, put down the mic."

Trump backed away from the podium for a moment, signaling he was done, while Acosta asked the question again and then let go of the mic.

While Alexander started to ask his question, Trump said, "I tell you what, CNN should be ashamed of itself, having you working for them." He pointed at Acosta: "You are a rude, terrible person. You shouldn't be working for CNN."

Then he turned to Alexander: "Go ahead." But he turned his focus back to Acosta: "You are a very rude person, the way that you treat Sarah Huckabee Sanders is horrible. The way that you treat other people are horrible. You shouldn't treat people that way."

"Go ahead," Trump said to Alexander. The NBC journalist then spoke up in Acosta's defense: "I've traveled with him and watched him, he is a diligent reporter who busts his butt like the rest of us."
"Well I'm not a big fan of yours either, to be honest," Trump said, prompting laughs in the room. He disparages NBC almost as often as CNN.

"So let me ask you a question," Alexander said, not missing a beat.
Acosta stood back up and spoke. His comments were not totally audible on live TV, but Acosta could be heard asking about the dangers of Trump's anti-media attacks, like the use of the term "enemy of the people."
"When you report fake news, which CNN does, a lot, you are the enemy of the people," Trump said, turning back to Alexander.

The press conference lasted 1 hour and 26 minutes.
Trump's treatment of the press varied from one minute to the next. As at prior news conferences, he showed contempt for reporters one minute, complaining about questioners "jumping out of their seats screaming questions at me," then suggested he was enjoying the back and forth.

"Should we keep this going for a little while?" he asked, one hour into the session, prompting some of the reporters to say "yes!"

When a reporter from a Japanese news outlet asked a question, Trump said, "Say hello to Shinzo," referring to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The news conference threw into stark relief the different styles of different White House correspondents. Some, like April Ryan, tried to ask questions without being explicitly called on.

"Sit down please," Trump said to her. "Sit down. I didn't call you, I didn't call you, I didn't call you."
Ryan was trying to ask about voter suppression concerns. In response, Trump falsely said that CNN's polls were a form of suppression.

Trump frequently condemns so-called "suppression polls," alluding to a conspiracy theory that claims news outlets distort polling results to discourage people from voting. He brought up the idea again later in the news conference, despite a lack of evidence for the idea.
Toward the end of the event, Yamiche Alcindor, a correspondent for PBS "NewsHour," asked Trump about the widely shared view that his rhetoric has emboldened white nationalists.

"That's a racist question," Trump said repeatedly in response.
Social media lit up with outrage about Trump's dismissiveness. Alcindor, who is black, moved on.
She tweeted later: "I followed up the president calling my question "racist" with a policy question about his proposed middle class tax cut because that's what journalists do. We press on. We focus on the privilege of asking questions for a living. We do the work."

Here is the full White House statement:

"President Trump believes in a free press and expects and welcomes tough questions of him and his Administration. We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable. It is also completely disrespectful to the reporter's colleagues not to allow them an opportunity to ask a question. President Trump has given the press more access than any President in history. Contrary to CNN's assertions, there is no greater demonstration of the President's support for a free press than the event he held today. Only they would attack the President for not being supportive of a free press in the midst of him taking 68 questions from 35 different reporters over the course of an hour and a half -- including several from the reporter in question. The fact that CNN is proud of the way their employee behaved is not only disgusting, it is an example of their outrageous disregard for everyone, including young women, who work in this Administration. As a result of today's incident, the White House is suspending the hard pass of the reporter involved until further notice." -- Sarah Sanders

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/07/media/trump-cnn-press-conference/index.html
 
Trump answered 68 questions from 34 reporters for over an hour and a half.

CNN is fake news.
 
CNN is going to go full antiTrump now.
 
Trump and American media have such a co-dependent relationship.
Trump has been very good for American media's bottom lines.

Anyway, as someone originally from a 3rd world country and hearing all about how less corrupt, more upright ,more civilised and more respectful of law and order the first worlders are and then seeing them elect someone like Donald Trump as the leader of the most powerful country in the West is rather interesting.
 
9fVfsKG.gif
 
Did I miss something?

apparently thats "laying hands on an intern"

thats the offical reason they gave to get rid of him


Imagine if Obama did that to a fox news reporter. I remember when he would seat Fox news reporters at the back of the room, and everyone lost their crap, even CNN started protesting in favour of Fox News at a time when the latter were saying Obama wanted to put people in FEMA camps.

The hypocrisy we see now is stunning
 
apparently thats "laying hands on an intern"

thats the offical reason they gave to get rid of him


Imagine if Obama did that to a fox news reporter. I remember when he would seat Fox news reporters at the back of the room, and everyone lost their crap, even CNN started protesting in favour of Fox News at a time when the latter were saying Obama wanted to put people in FEMA camps.

The hypocrisy we see now is stunning

You didn't.

It is just perfect example of either desperation or trolling.

That is pathetic.

He just didn't yield the Mic.
 
That is pathetic.

He just didn't yield the Mic.

If you watch the video with volume, Acosta said "Pardon me mam". He was being a gentleman.

Only Trumpet would Trumpet around loudly the lie and false narrative, as you can see in this thread.
 
He was creating a nuisance when told that The President will not be taking any more questions from him. If he was really that brave should have tried it with Putin or MbS.

Or Modi.

But this is US, so I do not understand trying to create correlation?
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is a video that Infowars made. They sped it up so that it seems more violent than it is. <a href="https://t.co/FH1tsGSSaU">https://t.co/FH1tsGSSaU</a></p>— Nicole Goodkind (@NicoleGoodkind) <a href="https://twitter.com/NicoleGoodkind/status/1060392145562017792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 8, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
If any GOP member even spoke to a women loudly, then it would be stretched in the media for days on end. But no point stooping to their level and calling this an assault.

Regardless of the reason, it is high time this happened. Acosta has a lot of other issues.
 
If any GOP member even spoke to a women loudly, then it would be stretched in the media for days on end. But no point stooping to their level and calling this an assault.

Regardless of the reason, it is high time this happened. Acosta has a lot of other issues.

Do you listen to trumpet with ear plugs on?
 
Do you listen to trumpet with ear plugs on?

Now, now, don't get upset. I understand that it hasn't been the best day for you because Ginsburg is going to retire and Trump will get to appoint yet another justice.
 
Forget PM, imagine a top Indian politician openly taking tough questions (not prepared/tutored ones) from all sections of the press, nah not happening in my lifetime. As a democracy, long long way to go for us.
 
Now, now, don't get upset. I understand that it hasn't been the best day for you because Ginsburg is going to retire and Trump will get to appoint yet another justice.

Tell me where and when did my question suggested I am upset?

I replied to your comment

If any GOP member even spoke to a women loudly, then it would be stretched in the media for days on end. But no point stooping to their level and calling this an assault.

Regardless of the reason, it is high time this happened. Acosta has a lot of other issues.

In above comment you made an assumption and try to portray Trump as someone who would care about anyone's rights, so I made an assumption that you have only listen to Trump with your ear plugs on because that is the only explanation for someone to post a comment that is filled with assumption and not factually backing it up.

About Ginsburg. Understand how Judges are elected in Supreme court.
I am sure being a Trump supporters doesn't stop you from using 'google'.
 
Tell me where and when did my question suggested I am upset?

I replied to your comment



In above comment you made an assumption and try to portray Trump as someone who would care about anyone's rights, so I made an assumption that you have only listen to Trump with your ear plugs on because that is the only explanation for someone to post a comment that is filled with assumption and not factually backing it up.

About Ginsburg. Understand how Judges are elected in Supreme court.
I am sure being a Trump supporters doesn't stop you from using 'google'.

It was not an assumption, it has happened many times. For example, Hatch was maligned in the media for a while just for not listening to some women protestors. https://www.businessinsider.com/orrin-hatch-elevator-video-protestors-grow-up-2018-10
 
If any GOP member even spoke to a women loudly, then it would be stretched in the media for days on end. But no point stooping to their level and calling this an assault.

Regardless of the reason, it is high time this happened. Acosta has a lot of other issues.

Really? I understand you are a Trump fan but are you actually going to deny that he has disrespected woman on several occasions? I mean there is a literally a YouTube compilation of him demeaning and insulting woman.
 
Forget PM, imagine a top Indian politician openly taking tough questions (not prepared/tutored ones) from all sections of the press, nah not happening in my lifetime. As a democracy, long long way to go for us.

First get a press which doesn't pretend to be impartial and openly states its leaning and agenda. Most of the indian media is full of people who could neither get science or commerce, and could not clear any competitive exam, so not exactly the brightest minds. just some dented and painted faces who got in with their connections. first clean this rotten media before expecting indian politicians to answer them.
 
It was not an assumption, it has happened many times. For example, Hatch was maligned in the media for a while just for not listening to some women protestors. https://www.businessinsider.com/orrin-hatch-elevator-video-protestors-grow-up-2018-10

First anybone tiny brain knows Acosta neither assaulted her nor disrespected her nor put her down in anyway.

Trying to compare Acosta, a journalist with a member of Senator of a US reeks of desperation.

Hatch with words and his gesture disrespected a female.

Now, no one with clear vision can say with absolute certainty that Acosta did not assault her nor disrespected her.

Trumpet supporters are some of the dumbest supporters, not all, but there are quite a few and you fell into that category of you are trying to equate both action with each other.

An example of pure and epic desperation.
 
CNN really is a joke.

It doesnt matter whether they have a correspondent there or not since they make up their news reports anyways
 
CNN really is a joke.

It doesnt matter whether they have a correspondent there or not since they make up their news reports anyways

Sure!

Probably every news outlet had lied once.

But when government try to discredit news by making up false allegation and try to prevent them from reporting then that is a problem.
 
Sure!

Probably every news outlet had lied once.

But when government try to discredit news by making up false allegation and try to prevent them from reporting then that is a problem.

The government have not banned CNN they have banned Acosta, and even though Acosta thinks he is the media there are hundreds of other news organisations that dont seem to have any problem with getting news from the government.
 
The government have not banned CNN they have banned Acosta, and even though Acosta thinks he is the media there are hundreds of other news organisations that dont seem to have any problem with getting news from the government.

When did I say government has banned CNN.

“Prevent” and “banned” has two different meaning.

But I’m sureTrump and their supporters would like to ban any news outlet that isn’t FOX
 
When did I say government has banned CNN.

“Prevent” and “banned” has two different meaning.

But I’m sureTrump and their supporters would like to ban any news outlet that isn’t FOX

I'm all ears, go ahead and explain how the government is preventing any news organisation from reporting the news.
 
What’s the definition of prevent?

You made the accusation "try to prevent them from reporting then that is a problem." so it really gets back to you and what your definition is.

My definition would be that preventing someone from reporting would be to withholding something so they cannot report on it, so all I ask is for you to put some substance behind your claim and provide an example.
 
When did I say government has banned CNN.

“Prevent” and “banned” has two different meaning.

But I’m sureTrump and their supporters would like to ban any news outlet that isn’t FOX

I am also intrigued to know how the trump govt preventing CNN?
 
I am also intrigued to know how the trump govt preventing CNN?

What do you call it when you stop a reporter from entering White House based on made up accusation using doctored video as an evidence.


Obviously Government isn’t going to be successful in preventing CNN from reporting.
 
What do you call it when you stop a reporter from entering White House based on made up accusation using doctored video as an evidence.


Obviously Government isn’t going to be successful in preventing CNN from reporting.

So they did not prevent CNN only a reporter that chopped down on the arm of a intern, I'm willing to watch a video that shows he did not do this.

But getting back to preventing the media from getting information would you class this as preventing the media.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration in its final year in office spent a record $36.2 million on legal costs defending its refusal to turn over federal records under the Freedom of Information Act, according to an Associated Press analysis of new U.S. data that also showed poor performance in other categories measuring transparency in government.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/obamas-final-year-u-s-spent-36-million-foia-lawsuits
 
So they did not prevent CNN only a reporter that chopped down on the arm of a intern, I'm willing to watch a video that shows he did not do this.

But getting back to preventing the media from getting information would you class this as preventing the media.

Do you have an evidence where he chopped down an arm of intern ?

And why do you think I would support any US democratic government preventing media from reporting?

Do you support when Trump call media outlet the enemy of the people and openly support people who body slam reporters?

You are trying too hard to defend the politics of bigotry, fear, racist, ignorance and white nationalism. This is America, that kind of politics won’t last.
 
Last edited:
So they did not prevent CNN only a reporter that chopped down on the arm of a intern, I'm willing to watch a video that shows he did not do this.

But getting back to preventing the media from getting information would you class this as preventing the media.

Two wrongs don’t make a right

Left wing people are generally the first to point out that Obama was incredibly repressive against whistleblowers especially post Snowden. We don’t here this mentioned a lot because you think the republicans are against that?

The most comparable thing to the Acosta situation is when Obama put Fox News in the back of of press room but then relented when all the other media including cnn critized him. Keep in mind this is the same Fox News that had people questioning his birth, saying he wants to intern people in fema camps and that he was planning on invading Texas (jade helm)
 
If Fox had done this to Obama, we would not hear the end of it from the liberals.


I presume you mean CNN

When Obama put Fox News in the back row of the press room, CNN lost their shiit.

I really dislike all the main American media, but CNN has some tiny slither of deceny.

What I will grant you is that the only reason they go after trump is because he goes after them.

Otherwise their critiques on policy have been horrendous as normal. Each time Trump has blown some people up in the Middle East we have the usual “this is when he became president”
 
Do you have an evidence where he chopped down an arm of intern ?

The only videos that I have watched clearly show him chopping down on the intern arm, your defense of Acosta is that the video is edited, as I said before I'm willing to watch any unedited video that you may have or watched (any link). I believe I have watched unedited clips of the incident.

And why do you think I would support any US democratic government preventing media from reporting?

That was more about evidence of the government preventing the media from getting information, you did ask what is the definition of preventing so I used that as an example, I'm also willing to look at any evidence you have of the Trump government preventing the media from getting information. I'm interested if you agree with me that Obama did in fact prevent the media from getting information and if that fits under your definition of preventing.

Do you support when Trump call media outlet the enemy of the people and openly support people who body slam reporters?

I'm ambivalent to Trump calling the press the enemy of the people, the media or parts thereof signalled their intentions to go after Trump the minute he nominated for president. They have attacked him, his family, his staff and supporters from the very beginning and in my opinion it is because they have put themselves in a position where if they back off from attacking him they would see it as accepting that they were wrong about his ability to be president. Trump has contributed to the deplorable situation that he and the media find themselves in but the media are not blameless here.

You are trying too hard to defend the politics of bigotry, fear, racist, ignorance and white nationalism. This is America, that kind of politics won’t last.

I'm no defender of Trump, there are people that find it useful to use words like you have thinking that it gives them some sort of moral superiority but all it shows is that they lack the ability to discuss issues in a measured and controlled manner.
 
The only videos that I have watched clearly show him chopping down on the intern arm, your defense of Acosta is that the video is edited, as I said before I'm willing to watch any unedited video that you may have or watched (any link). I believe I have watched unedited clips of the incident.

Lie

That was more about evidence of the government preventing the media from getting information, you did ask what is the definition of preventing so I used that as an example, I'm also willing to look at any evidence you have of the Trump government preventing the media from getting information. I'm interested if you agree with me that Obama did in fact prevent the media from getting information and if that fits under your definition of preventing.

Agree

I'm ambivalent to Trump calling the press the enemy of the people, the media or parts thereof signalled their intentions to go after Trump the minute he nominated for president. They have attacked him, his family, his staff and supporters from the very beginning and in my opinion it is because they have put themselves in a position where if they back off from attacking him they would see it as accepting that they were wrong about his ability to be president. Trump has contributed to the deplorable situation that he and the media find themselves in but the media are not blameless here.

Criticize him for the politics of lies, bigotry, racism, xenophobia and fear.

I'm no defender of Trump, there are people that find it useful to use words like you have thinking that it gives them some sort of moral superiority but all it shows is that they lack the ability to discuss issues in a measured and controlled manner.

All you have done in this thread and other thread is defend the Trumps Republican Party and it’s politics of fear, racism, xenophobia, and bigotry
 
So back to the original question, did Acosta chop the hand of the intern or did as Acosta has claimed not touch her at all.

There are plenty of original recorded video's of this incident but I'm yet to one where he did not actually touch her, you can see her body get pulled in close to Acosta as his hand chops down on her forearm and her shoulder twist.

So the Whitehouse stance is “We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable.”

And Acostas stance is"I didn’t put my hands on her or touch her as they’re alleging. It’s unfortunate the White House is saying this," Acosta said on CNN.

CNN have stated that Acosta never touched her.

Is there a middle ground or do you see someone not telling the truth here.
 
Another I dont have anything to counter his argument so I will attack the messenger.

Ironic considering you haven’t responded to any of my substantive points, obviously you are under no obligation to but it’s telling


In regards to o really It’s about credibility and hypocrisy. Putting aside his lies about being on the falkands and his lies about the witnessing key moments of the jfk assaination, putting aside the fact that the sexual assault allegations against him were so numerous that even Fox News had to take action, putting all that aside this is not a man that can be taken at face value regarding media behaviour.

Their are numerous examples of this such as when he would shut down Ron Paul saying “ we don’t need a history lesson” when the letter brought up the US overrthrow of mossedeq. The worst though was when O Reilly spent close to a year calling Dr Tiller, who provided late term abortions (legally) “tiller the baby killer”. Week in week out he would say “ Tiller the baby killer” and when finally some lunatic went into the clinic and blew the doctor away with a gun, O Reilly was offended that anyone would suggest his actions could possibly have partially contributed to the murder.

So no I won’t take the words of this man seriously. There are others who i disagree with almost everything like Tucket Carlson that I may, because as far as media standards go he isn’t an outright liar or scumbag.
O Reilly though is a shamed fraud, even hannity has more credibility.
 
So back to the original question, did Acosta chop the hand of the intern or did as Acosta has claimed not touch her at all.

There are plenty of original recorded video's of this incident but I'm yet to one where he did not actually touch her, you can see her body get pulled in close to Acosta as his hand chops down on her forearm and her shoulder twist.

So the Whitehouse stance is “We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable.”

And Acostas stance is"I didn’t put my hands on her or touch her as they’re alleging. It’s unfortunate the White House is saying this," Acosta said on CNN.

CNN have stated that Acosta never touched her.

Is there a middle ground or do you see someone not telling the truth here.

Your spin of the whole situation may work on White Nationalist but it won't on people who believe inclusiveness.

White House can't come up with a better explanation to revoke hard pass of a reporter so they resorted to a childish excuse.

Dumbest excuse that would be believable by only ignorant Republican.

The person in-charge is known to put on hands on female forcefully and then lie about it.

Get outa here.
 
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION]

chopped down and Bill O'Reilly lol

You do know good old Bill was fired for sexual harassment.

And why do you have to defend Trump on every occasion? Let me ask you what did you make of Trump mocking a disabled person and being racist towards a judge?
 
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION]

chopped down and Bill O'Reilly lol

You do know good old Bill was fired for sexual harassment.

And why do you have to defend Trump on every occasion? Let me ask you what did you make of Trump mocking a disabled person and being racist towards a judge?
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION]

Any answers to the above?
 
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION]

Any answers to the above?

Its no good me talking to you, you do not have the ability to comprehend. I'm not defending Trump, I'm sick of telling you that. I see a lot of attacks on Trump that is pure rubbish and I point that out. As an example the video of Acosta was not doctored but because some left wing nutjob claimed it has been then fools cannot see the forest for the trees. If you dont like Trump that is fine by me but when you fall for the propaganda spewed out by the left then I point it out. If you dont like it the too bad.

Whatever Bill O'Reilly did or didnt do does not change the facts about Acosta. The guy is grandstanding and deserved to be banned from the WH, if you dont like then once again too bad. I'm sick of these circular arguments, whoever you dont agree with gets labelled a racist, bigot and whatever the latest buzz word is from the left.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its no good me talking to you, you do not have the ability to comprehend. I'm not defending Trump, I'm sick of telling you that. I see a lot of attacks on Trump that is pure rubbish and I point that out. As an example the video of Acosta was not doctored but because some left wing nutjob claimed it has been then fools cannot see the forest for the trees. If you dont like Trump that is fine by me but when you fall for the propaganda spewed out by the left then I point it out. If you dont like it the too bad.

Whatever Bill O'Reilly did or didnt do does not change the facts about Acosta. The guy is grandstanding and deserved to be banned from the WH, if you dont like then once again too bad. I'm sick of these circular arguments, whoever you dont agree with gets labelled a racist, bigot and whatever the latest buzz word is from the left.

Clearly you cannot get yourself to clearly condemn Trump on his racism and attacks against disabled people. You posted a video of O'Reilly, a guy who is not only seen as a sexual predator but a right wing racist nutjob. When you continuously support such people, its pretty obvious what your personal views are too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its no good me talking to you, you do not have the ability to comprehend. I'm not defending Trump, I'm sick of telling you that. I see a lot of attacks on Trump that is pure rubbish and I point that out. As an example the video of Acosta was not doctored but because some left wing nutjob claimed it has been then fools cannot see the forest for the trees. If you dont like Trump that is fine by me but when you fall for the propaganda spewed out by the left then I point it out. If you dont like it the too bad.

Whatever Bill O'Reilly did or didnt do does not change the facts about Acosta. The guy is grandstanding and deserved to be banned from the WH, if you dont like then once again too bad. I'm sick of these circular arguments, whoever you dont agree with gets labelled a racist, bigot and whatever the latest buzz word is from the left.

Wah je Wah.

A person who fell for propaganda accusing other to fell for propaganda.

Madam Sanders tweeted doctored video.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Republican logic: Jim Acosta apparently "chopping" this woman is terrible and deserves to have his accreditation removed but Trump saying Greg Gianforte who actually committed an assault by bodyslamming a reporter is "my kind of guy" is A-OK.
 
CNN sues President Trump and top White House aides for barring Jim Acosta

New York (CNN) - CNN has filed a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House.

The lawsuit is a response to the White House's suspension of Acosta's press pass, known as a Secret Service "hard pass," last week. The suit alleges that Acosta and CNN's First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the ban.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday morning. It was docketed and assigned to Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee. The judge has given the defendants an 11 a.m. Wednesday deadline to file responses to the suit. He has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday at 3:30 p.m.

Both CNN and Acosta are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. There are six defendants: Trump, chief of staff John Kelly, press secretary Sarah Sanders, deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine, Secret Service director Randolph Alles, and the Secret Service officer who took Acosta's hard pass away last Wednesday.

The six defendants are all named because of their roles in enforcing and announcing Acosta's suspension.

"This is not a step we have taken lightly. But the White House action is unprecedented," CNN Worldwide president Jeff Zucker said in an internal memo to staff.

Sanders responded to the suit by saying that CNN is "grandstanding" by suing. She said the administration will "vigorously defend" itself. (Read the White House's full response here.)

In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future.

"CNN filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration this morning in DC District Court," the statement read. "It demands the return of the White House credentials of CNN's Chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta.

The wrongful revocation of these credentials violates CNN and Acosta's First Amendment rights of freedom of the press, and their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. We have asked this court for an immediate restraining order requiring the pass be returned to Jim, and will seek permanent relief as part of this process."

The White House Correspondents' Association said it "strongly supports CNN's goal of seeing their correspondent regain a US Secret Service security credential that the White House should not have taken away in the first place."

CNN also asserted that other news organizations could have been targeted by the Trump administration this way, and could be in the future.

"While the suit is specific to CNN and Acosta, this could have happened to anyone," the network said. "If left unchallenged, the actions of the White House would create a dangerous chilling effect for any journalist who covers our elected officials."

Sanders pointed out that lots of other CNN reporters and producers have press passes. But to many journalists and press defenders, that's not the issue. Echoing the views of many journalists, the correspondents' association said the president "should not be in the business of arbitrarily picking the men and women who cover him."

Trump's actions and threats fly in the face of decades of tradition and precedent. Republican and Democratic administrations alike have had a permissive approach toward press passes, erring on the side of greater access, even for obscure, partisan or fringe outlets.

The ACLU, in a statement supporting CNN, said "it is un-American and unlawful for the president to expel a reporter from the WH briefing room for doing his job. It shouldn't take a lawsuit from CNN to remind the president of the First Amendment."

The legal battle
On CNN's side, CNN Worldwide chief counsel David Vigilante is joined by two prominent attorneys, Ted Boutrous and Theodore Olson. Both men are partners at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

Last week, before he was retained by CNN, Boutrous tweeted that the action against Acosta was "angry, irrational, false, arbitrary, capricious content-based discrimination," and thus a clear violation of the First Amendment.

In an interview on Tuesday morning, Boutrous said CNN tried to resolve the matter privately, but the White House was not responsive so "we really had no choice but to sue."

"We didn't want to have to go to court. We wanted to just report the news," he said. "Mr. Acosta wants to report the news. CNN wants to report the news."

CNN's lawsuit cites, among other precedents, a 1977 ruling in favor of Robert Sherrill, a muckraking journalist who was denied access to the White House in 1966.

Eleven years later, a D.C. Court of Appeals judge ruled that the Secret Service had to establish "narrow and specific" standards for judging applicants. In practice, the key question is whether the applicant would pose a threat to the president.

The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."

There are other guidelines as well. Floyd Abrams, one of the country's most respected First Amendment lawyers, said case law specifies that before a press pass is denied, "you have to have notice, you have to have a chance to respond, and you have to have a written opinion by the White House as to what it's doing and why, so the courts can examine it."

"We've had none of those things here," Abrams said.

CNN's suit makes the same point.

White House's shifting rationales

Acosta found out about his suspension when he walked up to the northwest gate of the White House, as usual, for a live shot last Wednesday night. He was abruptly told to turn in his "hard pass," which speeds up entry and exit from the grounds.

"I was just told to do it," the Secret Service officer said.
Around the same time Acosta was denied entry to the White House grounds, Sanders announced the decision and claimed that he had behaved inappropriately at a presidential news conference earlier in the day.

At first Sanders accused Acosta of "placing his hands" on an intern who was trying to take a microphone away from him. In reality, Acosta held onto the mic, said "pardon me, ma'am," asked a followup question, then gave up the mic.

On Twitter, Sanders shared a distorted video clip of the press conference that didn't show the complete back-and-forth. The same video had been posted by an InfoWars personality two hours earlier.

The White House's rationale was widely mocked and dismissed by journalists across the political spectrum. And Trump himself has cast doubt on the rationale: He said on Friday that Acosta was "not nice to that young woman," but then he said, "I don't hold him for that because it wasn't overly, you know, horrible."

In Tuesday's response to the lawsuit, Sanders did not repeat her claim about Acosta "placing his hands" in the intern. Instead, she accused Acosta of being disrespectful and unprofessional.

As for the argument that Acosta isn't respectful enough, that justification "is not sufficient as a matter of law," CNN's lawsuit asserts.

"The content and viewpoint of CNN's and Acosta's reporting on the Trump administration—not his interaction with the staffer at the November 7 press conference—were the real reason the White House indefinitely revoked his press credentials," the suit states.

Acosta is on a previously scheduled vacation this week. He declined to comment on the lawsuit. Since his pass was suspended, he has continued to do part of his job, contacting sources and filing stories, but he has been unable to attend White House events or ask questions in person -- a basic part of any White House correspondent's role.

"Relevant precedent says that a journalist has a First Amendment right of access to places closed to the public but open generally to the press. That includes press rooms and news conferences," Jonathan Peters, a media law professor at the University of Georgia, told CNN last week. "In those places, if access is generally inclusive of the press, then access can't be denied arbitrarily or absent compelling reasons. And the reasons that the White House gave were wholly unconvincing and uncompelling."

Last Thursday, according to the suit, Zucker wrote to Kelly and requested reinstatement of Acosta's credentials. Zucker's message said that "no complaints were raised with CNN and there was no attempt to reach anyone at CNN before taking this unlawful action."

The next day, CNN sent a formal letter to the White House repeating the request and warning of a possible lawsuit.

Over the weekend, Acosta reported on the president's trip to France. Ahead of Trump's planned visit to an American military cemetery, he requested and received a credential from the French government, but was denied access by the Secret Service.

Feist said "Jim's ability to cover a public event of historic international importance was completely blocked by the White House."

A high-stakes case

David McCraw, the top newsroom lawyer at The New York Times, said instances of news organizations suing a president are extremely rare.
Past examples are The New York Times v. U.S., the famous Supreme Court case involving the Pentagon Papers in 1971, and CNN's 1981 case against the White House and the broadcast networks, when CNN sued to be included in the White House press pool.

The backdrop to this new suit, of course, is Trump's antipathy for CNN and other news outlets. He regularly derides reporters from CNN and the network as a whole. But he also seeks out attention from CNN and other outlets.

During his presidential campaign, Trump told CNN that, if elected, he would not kick reporters out of the White House. But since moving into the White House, he has mused privately about taking away credentials, CNN reported earlier this year. He brought it up publicly on Twitter in May, tweeting "take away credentials?" as a question.

And he said it again on Friday, two days after blacklisting Acosta. "It could be others also," he said, suggesting he may strip press passes from other reporters. Unprompted, he then named and insulted April Ryan, a CNN analyst and veteran radio correspondent.

"The revocation of Acosta's credentials is only the beginning," CNN's suit alleges.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/13/media/cnn-sues-trump/index.html
 
Seems like the press are going to unite and launch a formal complaint.
 
A judge in Washington has ordered the White House to return CNN reporter Jim Acosta's press pass after it was revoked by the US Secret Service.

The judge's order says that the pass must be reinstated as a CNN lawsuit against Donald Trump continues.

The judge said the White House decision likely violated the journalist's right to due process and freedom of speech.

Speaking outside the court, Mr Acosta praised the decision and told reporters "let's go back to work".

The ruling forces the White House press office to temporarily return Mr Acosta's "hard pass", the credential that allows reporters easy access to the White House and other presidential events.

Mr Acosta's lawyer called the ruling "a great day for the first amendment and journalism".

In a statement, CNN said: "We are gratified with this result and we look forward to a full resolution in the coming days.

"Our sincere thanks to all who have supported not just CNN, but a free, strong and independent American press."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-c..._central&ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter
 
CNN on Monday called on a federal court to hold emergency proceedings after the White House said it would again revoke press access to correspondent Jim Acosta despite a temporary restraining order on Friday to reinstate him. Acosta’s credentials were revoked after Trump denounced him as a “rude, terrible person” during a November 7 news conference.

CNN challenged the move in court and on Friday won a ruling that temporarily reinstated Acosta while the court considers the news network’s lawsuit over the ouster. In a filing on Monday, CNN and Acosta asked for an expedited hearing next week after top White House communications officials told Acosta in a letter late on Friday that it had already decided to suspend his press once the two-week restraining order expires.

The White House opposed the request for an emergency hearing, writing in response to the court, “Not only is there no ’emergency’ right now, it is impossible to know at this point whether next steps are necessary, much less what those steps should be”. It said the White House expected to make its final decision on Acosta credentials on Friday.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders and White House communications chief Bill Shine had earlier told Acosta that it had made a “preliminary decision” backed by Trump. When US District Judge Timothy Kelly temporarily restored Acosta’s credentials, he said the White House had failed to provide due process. He did not address any alleged violations of free speech, protected by the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

Trump, who has long blasted the media and often targeted Acosta, said on “Fox News Sunday” the judge’s decision was “not a big deal” and that the White House would establish rules for the press. Asked what they would entail, he said, “We’re going to write them up right now … we’ll have rules of decorum, you know, you can’t keep asking questions.” Despite the filing, Acosta and CNN said they “remain hopeful” the dispute could be resolved outside of court, they wrote.

At the contentious news conference a day after Trump’s Republicans lost their majority in the US House of Representatives, Trump erupted into anger when Acosta questioned him about the investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and a migrant caravan travelling through Mexico.

https://indianexpress.com/article/world/cnn-white-house-iim-acostas-donald-trump-5454460/
 
Back
Top