Utopia Talk / Politics / CNN Doubles Down on Retardation

Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:07:53 "HURRRRR DURRRRR 1A means full access to daily briefings and revoking a pass is legal action" CNN has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for revoking correspondent Jim Acosta's press credentials, the network said in a statement on Tuesday. "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," a statement from CNN reads. The network filed the suit in a Washington, D.C., district court, according to the statement, saying they have asked for "an immediate restraining order requiring the pass be returned" to Acosta. Listed as defendants in the suit are Trump in addition to White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, Deputy Chief of Staff Bill Shine, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, and the U.S. Secret Service and its director Randolph Alles and an unnamed Secret Service agent. On Tuesday, Sanders responded to the suit, saying that CNN has nearly 50 other pass holders and that "Acosta is no more or less special than any other media outlet or reporter with respect to the First Amendment." “We have been advised that CNN has filed a complaint challenging the suspension of Jim Acosta’s hard pass. This is just more grandstanding from CNN, and we will vigorously defend against this lawsuit," Sanders said. The lawsuit says that Acosta and CNN have been favorite targets of the administration, adding that they intend this suit to "ensure that the press remains free to question the government and to report the business of the nation to the American people." A number of derogatory tweets and comments made by Trump about CNN are mentioned in the suit. The suit noted that Trump retweeted "a video depicting him tackling and punching a man with a CNN logo superimposed on his face, adding the comments '#FraudNewsCNN' and '#FNN.'" Several historic court rulings are cited in the suit, including Sherrill v. Knight, which determined that content-based criteria for press passes violate the First Amendment, according to the American Bar Association. Acosta has covered the White House for CNN since 2012 and has had press credentials, called a “hard pass” since 2013. In a statement from White House Correspondents’ Association President Olivier Knox, the organization said it supported CNN’s lawsuit. “Revoking access to the White House complex amounted to disproportionate reaction to the events of last Wednesday. We continue to urge the Administration to reverse course and fully reinstate CNN’s correspondent,” the statement read. Trump’s reasoning for removing the pass was that Acosta failed to “treat the White House with respect,” according to the suit. In a contentious back-and-forth with Trump during a press briefing on Wednesday, the president called Acosta "a rude, terrible person" as the correspondent tried to ask him a question. Sanders claimed that Acosta's attempt to "monopolize the floor" did a disservice to the other reporters in the room. Acosta tweeted Wednesday night that he had been denied access to the White House as he attempted to enter and showed video of him as he handed over his credentials to a Secret Service agent. Sanders claimed in a statement that Acosta put "his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern" during the confrontation with Trump. A video of the exchange does not appear to support that accusation. http://www...tion-over-jim-acosta-s-n935621
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:09:44 No more retarded that trump having a fit and then having a intern assault reporters
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:14:00 ^lol, someone is as retarded as Sarah Huckabee. Probably moreso, because she at least is being publicly manipulative with butthurt claims of assault
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:20:01 Your post makes no sense. But should be a given considering this thread. And if course many other instances of your retardation.
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:21:49 'Of course
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:26:26 The post makes plenty of sense, to a non-retard, as it mocks your shrill claims that taking a mic from a disorderly reporter amounts to assault. It draws a parallel to butthurt contard claims that Fake News Acosta's attempts to keep the mic were instead assault. No assault occurred, unless you're a butthurt, retarded hack.
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:30:57 You're right no assault did occur which was precisely my point with a smartass remark to a retarded subject started by you. It's like you want to push the false narrative that the intern was assaulted but video clearly shows she was the one that forced themselves upon the reporter. And lulz at "disorderly" no more disorderly than any other reporters in a setting like this over the many years such as this. Only because cnn is highlighted shows the gumption of peoples retardation including yours. But then again you are the author of this thread, so that is a measure.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 10:31:39 Probably won't be too hard to prove targeting here. Trump gives plenty of court ammo.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:38:50 "You're right no assault did occur which was precisely my point with a smartass remark to a retarded subject started by you. It's like you want to push the false narrative that the intern was assaulted but video clearly shows she was the one that forced themselves upon the reporter." "then having a intern assault reporters" vs. "No assault occurred, unless you're a butthurt, retarded hack." lulz retard "And lulz at "disorderly" no more disorderly than any other reporters in a setting like this over the many years such as this." Sure. Revoke any other passes as well. The WH could immediately cease daily briefings, and expel all journalists, and there would be no 1A violation. They can get their news from the sidewalk. Would be awesome to see a return of investigative journalism over the soundbyte pedestal bullshit, peddling for Facebook mobile clips. "prove targeting" Pretty easy to prove he violated decorum.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 10:43:11 "Pretty easy to prove he violated decorum." And yet he's the only one to have received a punishment. You've already agreed that other people have acted in similar ways. Pretty obvious targeting if one person receives punishment for an action when nobody else does. You're retarded.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:47:07 And yet it doesn't matter, because it is not legal action. There is no legal right to a WH press pass. It would be great to see grandstanders universally lose their pass, but there is no requirement for it. You're retarded, and you sound butthurt. But you're always like that, so
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:47:49 ""then having a intern assault reporters" vs. "No assault occurred, unless you're a butthurt, retarded hack." lulz retard" Good job ignoring; "no more retarded.." indicating that this is all stupid and as stupid as it being presented that the reporter was assaulted as well as being presented as the intern was assaulted. Point is: the ridiculousness of the entirety of the situation. But damn anyone thinking you would have the comprehension skills to be able to use inductive reasoning. But get all butthurt because your hero Trump was mentioned and criticized.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:50:22 Perhaps you meant to frame it as an asinine claim. That's not what you said: "then having a intern assault reporters" I'm happy to infer your reasoning on a constructive response, but it would be fairly silly to assume the opposite of what you typed, unless you're issuing a clarification. "But get all butthurt because your hero Trump was mentioned and criticized." Oh nevermind, guess that's par for the course
Jack Cafferty Member	Tue Nov 13 10:51:00 Oh shines my dawgs! Forwyn on the prowl trying to be a legal expert as he ignored the case cited in the very article that supports the reasoning behind it. "Legal expert" forwyn Kek
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:52:47 Yes retired, if you splice up or dissect every little word or phrase, it can be seen how you won't understand the context of what is said. Dumbass.
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 10:53:41 Retard* Autocorrect on phone is annoying especially replacing my fucks with ducks.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 10:56:14 "No more retarded that trump having a fit and then having a intern assault reporters" Look dude, there's no splicing or dissecting required, any reasonable person reading this sentence would infer that the person who wrote this believes the intern in fact did assault one or more reporters. They would not assume that the meaning of the sentence is to imply the complete opposite.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 13 10:58:43 Just send a different reporter. The courts are not going to go along with an argument like this. They can argue they have the right to "A" reporter being allowed in. Not this reporter specifically though.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 11:06:20 "There is no legal right to a WH press pass" Did you read your own article? There is established court precedent that targeting (content based) a reporter for revocation of a press pass violates the Constitution. "you sound butthurt." For offering a 1 sentence, apathetic opinion and then pointing out that you're a fucking moron with no logical ability is butthurt? What does that say about the person actively making threads and engaging anyone/everyone? I sense since shrill, womanly shrieking.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 11:06:41 Fucknuts. Sense some*
Sam Adams Member	Tue Nov 13 11:07:13 Agree with aeros.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Nov 13 11:15:34 Aeros' solution doesn't work, they could just keep banning reporters til they got one they like from an outlet (dictator Trump already tossed out the idea of banning April Ryan just on personality) probably will come down to whatever the official rules for microphone possession are
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 11:16:04 "There is established court precedent that targeting (content based) a reporter for revocation of a press pass violates the Constitution." That's relevant how, exactly? A district court ruled that it was unlawful to revoke a pass based on content (hint: it wasn't). Did they issue a ruling on revoking a pass over a temper yantrum? "For offering a 1 sentence, apathetic opinion and then pointing out that you're a fucking moron with no logical ability is butthurt?" Look, UP Acosta, "REEEE YOU'RE RETARDED" is a little shrill. Sorry buddy. I gave a pretty cordial response.
Delude Member	Tue Nov 13 11:16:08 "Look dude, there's no splicing or dissecting required, any reasonable person reading this sentence would infer that the person who wrote this believes the intern in fact did assault one or more reporters. They would not assume that the meaning of the sentence is to imply the complete opposite." A retard like you may not. Reason being: take a look at your title Clearly you are defining the actions taken by CNN are retarded because they are filing a lawsuit based upon legal grounds and they are unfairly targeted. Fine. Your prerogative. I stated no more retarded than trump throwing a fit. Which indicates that I find him retarded with his response and also just as retarded that the idea of an intern assaulted Acosta or vice verse. Which would summarily...probably mean that the entire situation was stupid. But knowing how hypersensitive you are when it comes to Trump, it goes without saying. Dude.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 11:20:45 "REEEE YOU'RE RETARDED" is a little shrill." You're the only person adding any attitude to it. I believe the concept here is projection. You should stop seeing in me what you hide about yourself. And because it is standard by now in any interaction with you, you're retarded. Still.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 12:32:24 @Delude: Okay. So you want me to splice and dissect, and discern meanings not in yours sentences. Fine. Perhaps another ten paragraphs to define your preferred outlines. "You're the only person adding any attitude to it. I believe the concept here is projection." Right. In a vacuum, I would simply be adding attitude that wasn't present. But we aren't operating in a vacuum. You're consistently the most butthurt poster here, with the hyperbolic Cuckhat and TC excepted. Everyone who disagrees with you is retarded and/or Seb and/or a shill. Not ten comments in, but right out of the gate. You're shrill. Still.
Jack Cafferty Member	Tue Nov 13 12:35:18 Anyone want to count the times forwyn has wrongly gave legal explanations or the "muh *insert topic*" or "reeeeeeee reeee"? Lost count have you?
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Nov 13 12:48:23 "The only grounds for revoking the pass are, is the person a danger to the physical security to the president or his family? Obviously -- Acosta may have been an irritant to the president -- but he was hardly a danger to him" ~Judge Napolitano, Fox's non-insane judge
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 13:20:28 Hot rod, Seb, forwyn. Maybe you're overreacting because you're in the group of people too fucking stupid to bother with faux politeness? It's just pattern recognition. I know that there is literally no point in ever bothering to argue with seb or hot rod or forwyn. So i really just don't bother. I'll make my point, assert that you're retarded, and be on my way. Or, either when you inevitably get sandy vaginas over it or I'm bored at work and continue for the small amusement factor, I'll continue to entertain your delusional assumption that this is a conversation of peers by responding (I.e. continuing to point out that you're wrong and stupid). The moment I'm not entertained or at work? You'll notice I get a good bit quieter. I understand that you want to feel like you're more important than you are. You'll have to look elsewhere for validation. Note to less sandy vaginas: by peers I mean someone I am willing to engage with in actual conversation. But that's far less insulting than suggesting forsebrod is potentially subhuman.
Rugian Member	Tue Nov 13 13:24:47 Why so angry, Hood.
RugianLovesTheCock Member	Tue Nov 13 13:28:04 Need your cock sucked? I'm here
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 13 13:39:41 Jim acosta was a twat who forgot his job was to ask questions not to preach truth to power. He should have saved that for when he was on air rather then in the same room as the President. That video was pure cringe. The idiot was literally trying to get into a moral debate with Trump. He didn't ask "why are you calling this an invasion" He made a speech about why it's not an invasion and then demanded to President answer why he did not see it the way that He, jim Acosta, saw it.
The Sentinel Member	Tue Nov 13 13:44:41 Aeros is right, asking questions impedes the truth.
Randal Graves Member	Tue Nov 13 13:49:12 JA: "why did you characterize it as such?" Aeros: "he didnt ask..." Way to pay attention.
hood Member	Tue Nov 13 14:12:03 "Why so angry, Hood." I WILL UNSCREW YOUR HEAD AND SHIT DOWN YOUR NECK!
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 13 15:19:34 Forwyn's posts are getting as bad as Hot Rod. Knee-Jerk emotional interjections throughout. Sad.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 15:27:31 What is the WH saturation point for legal battles? Endless legal challenges is one way to deal with the twitter-in-chief.
kargen Member	Tue Nov 13 16:10:12 Jim Acosta is still free to write or say whatever the hell he wants. CNN is still allowed access to the White House. Arguing the first amendment is stupid on the part of CNN. It might give them five more viewers though.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Nov 13 16:32:34 have any legal experts said CNN has no case? ('judge' jeanine doesn't count)
kargen Member	Tue Nov 13 16:59:49 Stuart Karle says the white house has to show he wasn't removed because of his reporting. Because CNN is still allowed access to the briefings they might have a tough time claiming first amendment issues. He also said traditionally the white house nor the president gets to tell news outlets what people they send to the briefings. So while they might not win going the first amendment route they still might have a case.
obaminated Member	Tue Nov 13 22:35:46 Cnn will fail. This is like a defendent demanding to be able to pick his own public defender. You have a right to an attorney, you dont have a right to any attorney you want.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Nov 13 22:49:36 I would hope everyone agrees the White House needs legitimate grounds. We already know Trump has no respect for truth, and feels the press should be 'on his side', and that they owe him for giving them ratings, and all sorts of other concerning views.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 13 23:09:55 I would think The White House has the right to pull the pass on an individual that is disruptive and/or fails to follow the rules. Decosta has done both numerous times with Sarah Huckabee. However, this time he did it to The President of The United States of America. That was going too far. IMHO The White House had every right to pull his credentials. CNN should reassign Acosta to a new job, my suggestion would be to a combat zone, but that is just me. Then they could put up someone with the manners appropriate to a White House reporter. Problem solved and everyone is happy but me, no way they will assign him to a combat zone.
obaminated Member	Tue Nov 13 23:32:17 I don't think reporters have a right to ask the white house questions. Bad PR aside for the white house to ban reporters they don't like. Not a legal issue.
hood Member	Wed Nov 14 07:14:07 The sheer number of willfully retarded people ignoring that there is legal precedent for this is boggling.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 07:17:02 And that would be?
hood Member	Wed Nov 14 07:19:29 It was literally in the OP article. Read once in your life.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 07:26:42 "Several historic court rulings are cited in the suit, including Sherrill v. Knight, which determined that content-based criteria for press passes violate the First Amendment, according to the American Bar Association." "In a statement from White House Correspondents’ Association President Olivier Knox, the organization said it supported CNN’s lawsuit." Are these what you meant or did I miss something?
hood Member	Wed Nov 14 07:29:30 The first one, yes. CNN will have to prove that their reporter was punished based on content, but it's a valid reason for action. And arguments saying that the WH could just ban everyone aren't relevant. Sure they could, but that isn't what happened.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 08:13:46 "And arguments saying that the WH could just ban everyone aren't relevant." I certainly agree with that. it would be silly to ban them all. However, The White House certainly has the right to discontinue press conferences. That is basically what has happened since Sarah was accosted (no pun intended) in that restaurant and, AFAIK still requires a Secret Service detail. Another case where the mob has deprived the American People of a privilege. But, back to your point. It does not say which courts arrived at that conclusion. My thinking is if it were an upper court they would have mentioned it. The same if an upper court had reversed it. As I said earlier, "I would think The White House has the right to pull the pass on an individual that is disruptive and/or fails to follow the rules. Decosta has done both numerous times with Sarah Huckabee." "disruptive and/or fails to follow the rules." You can't have the press room jumping up and down like a room full of monkeys. It is certainly an aggressive environment, but I have watched a number of them. What I took away was that everyone shouted for attention but when one reporter was chosen they were allowed two questions and if they wanted a third they would ask for it. It was usually given unless it was a real heavy news day where just about everyone had questions and there just was not the time to accommodate all of them. This was the good manners expected from the press corp and every bit as fundamental as standing as they asked their questions. Acosta had violated that expectation a number of times and she had every right to be offended and she duly expressed herself on a number of occasions, especially when accosted (no pun intended) by Acosta. Personally, I thought his credentials should have been taken long ago. BUT, and this is a very big BUT. He totally crossed the line the other day. It is one thing to be rude to a press secretary. But, the way he acted towards The President of The United States of America was totally unacceptable. Personally, I would not have objected had The President called the Capitol Police and had him escorted from the grounds there and then. And yes, I would have felt the same had the President been Obama or Woodrow Wilson. IMHO the two worst American Presidents in history. It does not matter who is POTUS, the Office requires the utmost decorum when dealing with him/her face to face. Acosta crossed that line, I hope this goes to The Supreme Court. I honestly believe they will agree with me. There is nothing more to be said.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 09:09:59 "Office requires the utmost decorum when dealing with him/her face to face" Compelled by a subpoena to provide the contents of the White House taping system to the House Judiciary Committee in April 1974, President Richard Nixon ordered transcripts of the tapes to be prepared. After a cursory inspection of the transcripts, Nixon, shocked at viewing several profanity-laced discussions amongst the White House's inner-circle, ordered that every use of profanity be replaced by "[EXPLETIVE DELETED]."[1] The transcripts were published in The New York Times and elicited shock in much of the country, given Nixon's generally staid public image and the fact that contemporary media coverage of politicians did not usually report candidates' profanity use. As Nixon biographer Jonathan Aitken noted, Nixon had a rather broad view on what constituted profanity, and had ordered comparatively minor outbursts like Christ and hell to be replaced as expletives. Seeing the jarring phrase repeatedly within the transcripts seemed to give the public the impression that the words used were far harsher than what actually appeared on the tapes.[2] The phrase entered the public imagination to the point where protesters outside the White House held up picket signs reading, "IMPEACH THE (EXPLETIVE DELETED)!" In later years, the phrase became commonplace as an ironic expression which indicates that a profanity has been omitted and passed into general usage as a convenient linguistic figleaf. The term expletive is commonly used outside linguistics to refer to any bad language (or profanity), used with or without meaning. Expletives in this wide sense may be adjectives, adverbs, nouns or, most commonly, interjections, or (rarely) verbs. Within linguistics, an expletive always refers to a word without meaning, namely a syntactic expletive or expletive attributive. In this technical sense an expletive need not be rude.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 09:39:41 And far worse has been said and done in The White House and even in The Oval Office. But, that is not the problem. Any and all Presidents are not on the trial here. The way a President is treated is the subject. That includes any and all Presidents.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 09:42:17 "the Office requires the utmost decorum when dealing with him/her face to face" Disproven.
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 09:47:39 "It does not matter who is POTUS, the Office requires the utmost decorum when dealing with him/her face to face." A good starting place would be for the wailing cheeto to show decorum. Because no matter what your retarded delusions tell you, that is a foreign concept to him.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 09:50:35 Why? Because one President used some profanity in The White House 40 years ago? That has absolutely nothing to do with how a member of the press treated a President last week.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 10:15:44 It demonstrates that outmost decorum is not required when dealing with president's face to face. WoO has a point. If Trump want to raise the bar, then he should raise it personally.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 10:47:42 "Because one President used some profanity in The White House 40 years ago?" Jesus. Then what do you suggest we do with Wilson and Obama and FDR, and Clinton and Johnson and Kennedy for that matter. Each has made serious transgressions while in office. Should we start a movement that strips each and every one of them of any manners when it comes to them? While we are at it let's remove all of their statues and public images and, of course, remove them from the history books You people have no idea what you are talking about.
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 10:52:49 Actually, it's you that is the delusional retard. While each President has had his moments where they were unprofessional, those instances were mostly isolated and wouldn't be considered a constant characteristic of their tenures. Trump is continually unprofessional in just about everything he does. But hey, just keep eating up his bullshit with a giant grin - it's about the only thing you've ever been good at.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 11:03:28 "And far worse has been said and done in The White House and even in The Oval Office." Not a 40 year old isolated incident.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 11:21:07 "Trump is continually unprofessional in just about everything he does." So what? You don't like it when he talks back to people that attack him or to those that deserve it. Why the fuck do you think 62,984,828 hired him. I don't give a shit how he acts. He did an exceptionally fine job of dealing with Acosta last week. Wilson - Segregated the army after Blacks have proved themselves in combat in every war they were in. Obama - reduced the military to a point they were barely able to function. Every service person that died because of poor equipment I hold him personally responsible. FDR - His policies extended the country's Depression and recovery well beyond the time needed for wiser policies to fix the problem. Did you know he set the price of gold before he got out of bed in the morning? Clinton - He was fucking everything that would lift a skirt right there in The Oval Office. Johnson - He lied to rachet up a bogus war that we never should have been in. 58,318 KIA, Thanks Johnson. Kennedy - He nearly blew us off the face of the earth. Plus, he was the one that initiated the Vietnam War. Every President does shit that is horrendous and causes American deaths. So Trump talks like a construction worker, so what? It does not give Acosta the right to treat the office of The President the way he did. If any of you think otherwise then you should leave the country because your belief has no right in our way of doing things.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 11:24:16 you have no choice but to be aggressive w/ these people... Sarah moves to the next questioner immediately as she's finishing her nonresponsive or bullshit answer to the current question. and if not aggressive w/ Trump, you get a Fox 'News' 'interview'... he says his made-up bullshit, and they nod and go along with it.
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 11:25:26 lol, struck paydirt with that one. Look at that rant. lmfao "I don't give a shit how he acts." And that sums you up extremely well, Hypocrite Rod.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 11:42:32 talking "like a construction worker" is not Trump's problem Trump lying with every word that comes out of his mouth is the problem... Trump falsely smearing every person & institution that points out that he lies with every word that comes out of his mouth is the problem... and Trump not reading any of his briefings, instead getting all of his information from Fox News entertainment shows & internet rumors is the problem... Every aspect of Trump's character is the problem.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 11:45:16 actually that's not the problem... that people actually believe him is the problem... he makes it SO OBVIOUS yet his fans don't see it he is a walking insult to intelligence & truth
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 11:51:40 Another Antifa g heard from.
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 12:09:28 Hypocrite Rod is broken.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 12:12:01 did Fox Business back up this claim? ... did anyone? : "The prospect of Presidential Harassment by the Dems is causing the Stock Market big headaches!" a classic example of his self-serving made-up bullshit... he's lying right to you, that's directed to you, his loyal fan... a total made-up lie i'll be offended on your behalf as you won't be
Borthas Member	Wed Nov 14 12:22:11 Damnit... what will the fascist trumpians think now that Fox News supports CNN? https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/fox-news-jim-acosta-cnn-lawsuit-white-house-ban.html
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 12:39:44 I think FOX News is totally wrong. This has nothing to do with freedom of the press. CNN is not banned from The White House press conferences, just Acosta. CNN does not have the right to force Acosta on The White House.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 12:42:58 CNN should win the case then pick someone else
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 12:52:11 CNN should send an attractive female to Trump events, and maybe a Jesus look-alike to Sarah Sanders events... although her supposed christianity is in question given she's a lying piece of shit working for the most disgusting fraud imaginable
Paramount Member	Wed Nov 14 13:34:21 The media should boycott the White House and Trump. Ignore them.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 14:19:37 "The President and White House possess the same broad discretion to regulate access to the White House for journalists (and other members of the public) that they possess to select which journalists receive interviews, or which journalists they acknowledge at press conferences" ~from White House's court filing so we could soon have press briefings w/ only Fox Newsish Trumpettes
delude Member	Wed Nov 14 14:25:25 "I think FOX News is totally wrong. This has nothing to do with freedom of the press. " HR would totally be a loyalist back in the day as he spits on the founding fathers the rebellion against the crown
Average Ameriacn Member	Wed Nov 14 14:36:42 Cancelled my Fox news subscription.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 14:41:13 "Wow, you are all correct about Fox News - totally biased and disgusting reporting." ~Trump http://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/708045086135881728
kargen Member	Wed Nov 14 14:54:11 From what I have been reading probably the White House will have to give him his hard pass back. Not because of first or fifth amendment violations but because news agencies get to pick who they send to the White House not the president. What they can do and probably will do is just ignore him and other CNN reporters until CNN decides to remove Acosta from covering the White House on their own. There is nothing at all saying members of the White House have to acknowledge the press in any way. So he and other CNN reporters can sit in the room and take notes while reporters from other news agencies ask questions.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 15:01:41 they've basically phased out press briefings anyway they consider Trump tweeting made-up nonsense & going on Fox News to spew made-up nonsense to be sufficient transparency to the public
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 19:21:16 The reason they gave up the almost daily press conferences is the mob that attacked Sarah Huckabee and prompted a Secret Service detail. Blame your Antifa g brothers.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 21:01:32 where did you get that idea? Sarah doesn't have to do her job as one restaurant asked her to leave? they stopped because they don't like tough questions
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 14 21:13:18 The restaurant filled with a mob that was screaming at her so the restaurant told her to leave. She went home while her friends went across the street to another restaurant. The mob followed her friends and caused another disturbance there too. She was assigned a Secret Service detail for protection. LOL, people complain about me when you are ten times worse.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Nov 14 21:22:02 I have heard nowhere that that is remotely related... are you adopting Trump behavior and just making shit up? and if she can't do her job put someone else in
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 22:02:00 Yes, Hypocrite Rod appears to be making shit up again.
Wrath of Orion Member	Wed Nov 14 22:11:55 http://www...kabee-sanders-red-hen-protest/ lmfao@Hypocrite Rod's gullibility
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 15 00:20:35 tw, do you have any idea what you posted. woo, the most ignorant person who knows everything.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Nov 15 01:08:18 we are getting nowhere slowly... they are not holding briefings because it's very hard to defend what Trump says & does, end of story a judge is making a ruling on the Acosta thing tomorrow/today (Thursday)
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 15 02:01:29 tw, you are a fool that has no idea what is going on in your little corner of the world.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Nov 15 11:19:15 even if Sarah was too scared to do her job, do you think they'd put that out as the official reason? is that an acceptable reason to end briefings? they claim 'Trump gets his message out other ways' as if that's acceptable given his message has absolutely no basis in fact, ever
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 15 11:26:03 You can bet she did not request protection. You just find fault with everything the administration does.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Nov 15 11:29:35 i can bet she -did- request protection as all that happened was she was asked to leave a restaurant also, this has almost no bearing on anything at this point
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 15 11:33:11 It has bearing on another one of your lies.
Memory Lane Member	Thu Nov 15 14:21:10 I remember hot rod condones lying and has lied on the forums for most of his time here. I drink and remember things
Wrath of Orion Member	Thu Nov 15 14:31:15 "You just find fault with everything the administration does." Hey Hypocrite Rod, when remember how you found fault with everything the Obama administration did?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 15 15:03:51 "I remember hot rod condones lying and has lied on the forums for most of his time here." Wrong again drunkard. That was years ago I said that I don't do it anymore.
Memory Lane Member	Thu Nov 15 15:54:55 I remember hot rod saying he doesn't lie, but it hasn't been 72 since he lied about something. I drink and remember things
Wrath of Orion Member	Thu Nov 15 16:17:35 Hypocrite Rod continues to ignore his own hypocrisy.
Rugian Member	Fri Nov 16 09:46:09 The swamp protects its own: Judge orders Trump administration to restore CNN reporter Jim Acosta's White House press pass http://www...tas-white-house-press-pass.htm
Hrothgar Member	Fri Nov 16 09:56:48 24/7 cable news needs to be outlawed imo. Feeling pressured to fill 24/7 channel with infotainment to keep ratings high has been one of the lead - if not the biggest - contributor to how nasty politics are now days.
Average Ameriacn Member	Fri Nov 16 09:57:15 Fucking traitor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_J._Kelly On June 7, 2017, President Trump nominated Kelly to serve as a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Paramount Member	Fri Nov 16 10:15:14 Jim Acosta can keep his White House press pass, court rules http://www...costa-can-keep-his-press-pass/ CNN won. Trump lost again. lol
	show deleted posts