Jim Acosta

[Belsnickel]

(11-08-2018, 05:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course this has to be a "false equivalency" if not you would have to admit to being hypocritical. She felt forced. You can claim it's different, but it is not and I think it you were being forthright you would concede the point.

Definitely not. I can think of several other actions that could've potentially been taken that didn't involve physical contact.

(11-08-2018, 05:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Each person is responsible for their actions. That doesn't change to fact the Acosta forced the contact by failing to follow protocol. The intern was forced to try to take the mic from him because he wouldn't surrender it willingly.  

Again, there were many options other than what happened. I think she believed she was making the right choice, but it wasn't the only one she had, so there was no force.

[ballsofsteel]

(11-08-2018, 12:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How very progressive of you.

Oops, I meant young lady. Thanks for pointing that out.
Nobody must of taught that young lady that she should keep her hands to herself.

If that was a male intern who tried that, Acosta would of knock him on his ass. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-08-2018, 05:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except the anthem issue was a dichotomy, there were likely a number of different potential options for shutting Acosta down. So you're trying to set up a false equivalency.


So this is one of those times where people are for personal responsibility for one's actions except for when it benefits their side. Gotcha.

Well Acosta is a well known repeat offender in being a very confrontational individual. This is just merely another example, do we really need to wait for him to actually hurt an intern? I say we remove him for everyone's safety.


You guys are killing me in your defense of Acosta!

[GMDino]

In 2009, the Obama administration tried to exclude Fox News from the press pool. They backed down after strong protests from the rest of the press, who saw it as unjust, and defended Fox News. It’s very telling that we see no conservative news entities defending CNN today.

— Seth MacFarlane (@SethMacFarlane) November 8, 2018

Has there been any kind of defense from the rest of the media?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-08-2018, 06:19 PM)GMDino Wrote:

In 2009, the Obama administration tried to exclude Fox News from the press pool. They backed down after strong protests from the rest of the press, who saw it as unjust, and defended Fox News. It’s very telling that we see no conservative news entities defending CNN today.

— Seth MacFarlane (@SethMacFarlane) November 8, 2018

Has there been any kind of defense from the rest of the media?

A rather significant difference being that CNN is not being excluded, just Acosta.  CNN can send anyone else they choose that could pass the background check.

[GMDino]

(11-08-2018, 06:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A rather significant difference being that CNN is not being excluded, just Acosta.  CNN can send anyone else they choose that could pass the background check.

But has anyone stood up for *him*?

Edit: A few did.

https://fox61.com/2018/11/08/reporters-condemn-white-house-decision-to-bar-cnns-acosta/

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2018, 06:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Definitely not. I can think of several other actions that could've potentially been taken that didn't involve physical contact.


Again, there were many options other than what happened. I think she believed she was making the right choice, but it wasn't the only one she had, so there was no force.

Well I was wrong, apparently you do want to debate the meaning of forced. 

I can think of several other actions that you could have potentially taken that didn't require you to stand for the Anthem. You just believed you were making the "right choice".

I get you don't want to blame Acosta for the confrontation getting physical; I just don't get your reasoning. 

[Griever]

(11-08-2018, 06:39 PM)GMDino Wrote: But has anyone stood up for *him*?

Edit: A few did.

https://fox61.com/2018/11/08/reporters-condemn-white-house-decision-to-bar-cnns-acosta/

Dude from nbc did after the intern put her hands on him and it was his turn

[Belsnickel]

(11-08-2018, 06:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I get you don't want to blame Acosta for the confrontation getting physical; I just don't get your reasoning. 

Because he isn't the one that chose to make the confrontation physical.

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2018, 06:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because he isn't the one that chose to make the confrontation physical.

Sure he did. He chose not to surrender the mic when simply asked to do so. Believe it or not: If you are in close proximity of POTUS and don't do willingly as instructed, someone may help you out and it is 100% your fault, not theirs for doing their job. 

He made the conscious decision to not end the line of questioning simply when asked to do so numerous times.

Usually when someone only quotes a portion of my response I assume they've conceded the other.

Did you have other options besides standing for the anthem?

Were you forced to stand?

[Griever]

(11-08-2018, 06:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure he did. He chose not to surrender the mic when simply asked to do so. Believe it or not: If you are in close proximity of POTUS and don't do willingly as instructed, someone may help you out and it is 100% your fault, not theirs for doing their job. 

He made the conscious decision to not end the line of questioning simply when asked to do so numerous times.

Usually when someone only quotes a portion of my response I assume they've conceded the other.

Did you have other options besides standing for the anthem?

Were you forced to stand?

It’s his job to get answers

Why can’t trump give a clear answer to anything?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-08-2018, 06:45 PM)Griever Wrote: Dude from nbc did after the intern put her hands on him and it was his turn

(11-08-2018, 06:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because he isn't the one that chose to make the confrontation physical.

Again, first 2 times she held out her hand and he pushed it away. So Yes he did chose to make it confrontational by not giving up the mic.
Her hand was above his on the mic, she only touched him as he was refusing to give up the mic and karate chopped her arm.
Was this enough on it's own to get him kicked from Future Conferences? No, but his aggressive behavior has been noted multiple times now and that is more than enough to have him banned. Him being physical (intentional/unintentional) with the intern is just icing on the cake.

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2018, 07:09 PM)Griever Wrote: It’s his job to get answers

Why can’t trump give a clear answer to anything?

It's his job to follow protocol while in the presence of POTUS. He chose not to do so and forced a confrontation. 

Because he's now a politician. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-08-2018, 07:09 PM)Griever Wrote: It’s his job to get answers

Why can’t trump give a clear answer to anything?

Maybe, the focus on the presser was supposed to be on something else? But regardless, if the POTUS says no, not answering that one, then ask a different question. It's not complicated.

Or maybe his questions are all trick questions and no matter what you say, he's going to make sure he slimes you enough to make it a bad thing that you said, You know that bias thing that I can't remember which of you keeps referring to??

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2018, 07:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Again, first 2 times she held out her hand and he pushed it away.  So Yes he did chose to make it confrontational by not giving up the mic.
Her hand was above his on the mic, she only touched him as he was refusing to give up the mic and karate chopped her arm.
Was this enough on it's own to get him kicked from Future Conferences? No, but his aggressive behavior has been noted multiple times now and that is more than enough to have him banned. Him being physical (intentional/unintentional) with the intern is just icing on the cake.

It's amazing what issues become partisan in this forum. Anyone can watch the video and see the intern was directed to take the mic from him. She tired twice by simply reaching out for the mic, both times Acosta did not give it up willingly. So the 3rd time she attempts to take the mic from him and he deflects her arm (karate chop may be too severe).

You can further see after Acosta "puts her in her place". She simply kneels down. It's not like she came flying out of the audience and grabbed the mic, dude knew exactly why she was there and chose to escalate the situation.

[Dill]

(11-08-2018, 06:05 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Well Acosta is a well known repeat offender in being a very confrontational individual. This is just merely another example, do we really need to wait for him to actually hurt an intern? I say we remove him for everyone's safety.
You guys are killing me in your defense of Acosta!

What!?!?!?   When did you go liberal on us?

DESTROY A GOOD MAN'S LIFE OVER SOME WOMAN'S COMPLAINT?!?!?!

[fredtoast]

Jim Acosta?

More like Jim Accoster.

[Belsnickel]

(11-08-2018, 06:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure he did. He chose not to surrender the mic when simply asked to do so. Believe it or not: If you are in close proximity of POTUS and don't do willingly as instructed, someone may help you out and it is 100% your fault, not theirs for doing their job. 

He made the conscious decision to not end the line of questioning simply when asked to do so numerous times.

And she made the conscious decision to make physical contact. That was her choice, not his.

(11-08-2018, 06:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Usually when someone only quotes a portion of my response I assume they've conceded the other.

Did you have other options besides standing for the anthem?

Were you forced to stand?

I stopped engaging in this conversation because at most it is a false equivalency and at least it is a failure to recognize your own cognitive dissonance. Unless you're like me and just argue points you don't necessarily agree with from time to time.

(11-08-2018, 07:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Again, first 2 times she held out her hand and he pushed it away. So Yes he did chose to make it confrontational by not giving up the mic.
Her hand was above his on the mic, she only touched him as he was refusing to give up the mic and karate chopped her arm.
Was this enough on it's own to get him kicked from Future Conferences? No, but his aggressive behavior has been noted multiple times now and that is more than enough to have him banned. Him being physical (intentional/unintentional) with the intern is just icing on the cake.

While I was watching the live feed, and from what I saw in videos after, he didn't push her away but leaned away from her. They made contact with each other at the same time. She grabbed his hand and his hand, which was out stretched already, made a movement to push her arm off of his hand.

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2018, 08:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And she made the conscious decision to make physical contact. That was her choice, not his.


I stopped engaging in this conversation because at most it is a false equivalency and at least it is a failure to recognize your own cognitive dissonance. Unless you're like me and just argue points you don't necessarily agree with from time to time.

I did notice you didn't answer the 2 simple questions posed; just trotted out the terms false equivalency and cognitive dissonance.

So let's try is again and maybe you can help me further understand those impressive terms:

Did you have other options besides standing for the Anthem?

We're you forced to do so?


But to extend an olive branch I'll give you a term to use instead of answering the question "behavioral decisions".  

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-08-2018, 08:05 PM)Dill Wrote: What!?!?!?   When did you go liberal on us?

DESTROY A GOOD MAN'S LIFE OVER SOME WOMAN'S COMPLAINT?!?!?!

This one doesn't matter if she can't remember the exact date or how she got home.
It's clearly on video. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the word? We refer to this term as EVIDENCE

Calm down calm down, I'm messing with ya

(11-08-2018, 08:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Jim Acosta?

More like Jim Accoster.

 
Don't care which side you're on, that's a good one!