Jim Acosta

[Dill]

(11-09-2018, 05:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So at the press conference, Acosta hadn't even finished his question before Trump was interrupting an dismissing his question. While Acosta's previous behavior doesn't help him any, it is definitely two tangoing there.

This being the first time I ever watched one of Trump's pressers, though, I can say I understand the frustration Acosta and any other reporter may have. The inability of Trump to actually answer a question is more than I had thought previously. When that is combined with his constant double speak at the podium the job of the press pool has to be tremendously difficult.

Thanks for bringing that up.  Though I would add that it is unwillingness as often as inability which creates all the tension at these pressers.

And yes, the constant double speak and gaslighting--followed by cries of "foul" and demand for respect when it is pointed out. "The press is attacking us (when we don't give straight answers) so we have to fight back!"

Not just Trump, either. Others in the administration have been equally dismissive of legitimate questions. Tillerson is gone now, but he was especailly bad at simply ignoring the press.

[Griever]

(11-09-2018, 03:33 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Right, Obama got hammered no where near as much in 8 years as Trump has been in just 2 years.
Quit trying to play stupid.


That's stupid, Why does one of the most powerful men in the world have to show a reporter any respect?

He's already earned the respect that comes with the title POTUS. You show the POTUS respect and maybe he will show you respect back.

That's the problem with many of these snowflakes today. Take take take.

Your boss deserves your respect before you expect him to respect you right?

Trump has to earn the people’s respect, seeing as he works for the American public

[ballsofsteel]

(11-08-2018, 07:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 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. 

True, but it wasn't a real Potus, it was the pu**y grabber Trump.

[GMDino]

Well this cleared everything up.  

Quote:Kellyanne Conway over the weekend defended the White House for sharing what appeared to be an edited video which incorrectly appeared to show CNN correspondent Jim Acosta assaulting a White House staffer.


During a Sunday interview, Fox News host Chris Wallace confronted Conway for the decision to tweet the “clearly altered” video.


“What do you mean by edited or — as others are saying — ‘doctored’ video?” Conway replied. “He put his hands on her and grabbed the mic back or he did not — and he clearly did.”

“No!” Wallace interrupted. “He clearly did [keep the mic] but the video was altered and there are experts who have looked at it to make it look speeded up.”



“But that’s not altered,” Conway sighed. “That’s sped up. They do it all the time in sports to see if there’s actually a first down or a touchdown. So I have to disagree with the, I think, overwrought description of this video being doctored as if we put somebody else’s arm in there.”

“He should have apologized to that young aide,” Conway said of Acosta. “You have to show respect to the White House, to the presidency, the president. And I think what Acosta did was very unfair to the rest of the press corps.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.

  
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/kellyanne-conway-incoherently-defends-doctored-video-cnns-jim-acosta-time-sports/#.W-hK4c9ua7Q.twitter

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-09-2018, 04:52 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Trump described their behavior as disrespectful. Their behavior has been asking tough questions. 

That's an Opinion, not fact. Fact is Trump answered a lot of questions from other reporters. Acosta's "questions" are thinly veiled accusations or not questions related to the Pressers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The only thing he's interested in, is trapping Trump and running with some half-ass baked story that's not entirely true, but Trump said "ALL Mexican's are Rapists" and then some of you on here continue to repeat the lie.

So my quick question for you is, how long should a reporter get to ask his question? You know the topic ahead of hand and have time to prepare your questions. Would you agree that 30-40 seconds should be enough time? if so whey why did Acosta have to hang on to the mic for just over 2 minutes?

(11-09-2018, 05:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So at the press conference, Acosta hadn't even finished his question before Trump was interrupting an dismissing his question. While Acosta's previous behavior doesn't help him any, it is definitely two tangoing there.

This being the first time I ever watched one of Trump's pressers, though, I can say I understand the frustration Acosta and any other reporter may have. The inability of Trump to actually answer a question is more than I had thought previously. When that is combined with his constant double speak at the podium the job of the press pool has to be tremendously difficult.

First time you saw his interactions with Acosta? and you're fast to judge. Acosta has been after Trump since day 1.
Did you watch the full 87 minutes or just the Acosta part? Trump answered over 60 questions and if you look it up, you won't find much about those other questions as all the focus is on Acosta-Trump.

(11-09-2018, 06:12 PM)Griever Wrote: Your boss deserves your respect before you expect him to respect you right?

Trump has to earn the people’s respect, seeing as he works for the American public

Yes, you don't have to like or respect your boss, but if your boss wants something done and defines the parameters for getting it done. What happens if you ignore those parameters and try to do it your own way? Do you remain employed for much longer or does your boss start looking for an excuse to fire you?

I don't think that's the answer you were looking for.
COMMON SENSE.



For everyone, be honest, don't look it up.
What was this WH Press Conference supposed to be about?
What was Jim Acosta's original "question" about? Did he have a follow-up Question? What was it if he did?
Are they related to what the Press Conference was about?

[BmorePat87]

(11-12-2018, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: That's an Opinion, not fact. Fact is Trump answered a lot of questions from other reporters. Acosta's "questions" are thinly veiled accusations or not questions related to the Pressers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The only thing he's interested in, is trapping Trump and running with some half-ass baked story that's not entirely true, but Trump said "ALL Mexican's are Rapists" and then some of you on here continue to repeat the lie.

So my quick question for you is, how long should a reporter get to ask his question? You know the topic ahead of hand and have time to prepare your questions. Would you agree that 30-40 seconds should be enough time? if so whey why did Acosta have to hang on to the mic for just over 2 minutes?

So he's being banned for someone's opinion of him. 

I don't think there's a set time. When someone begins to insult you rather than answer your questions, I can see why someone would keep asking. I don't think this will be a problem after 2020.

[Benton]

(11-12-2018, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: For everyone, be honest, don't look it up.
What was this WH Press Conference supposed to be about?
What was Jim Acosta's original "question" about? Did he have a follow-up Question? What was it if he did?
Are they related to what the Press Conference was about?

Generally, that doesn't matter.

It's fairly common — especially for people who are difficult to get an audience with — for press conferences to be used as a way to get questions answered that aren't generally what the conference is about. Generally, out of respect, media members with questions not pertaining to the meeting wait until towards the end. You don't always expect it to get answered, but that's your opportunity to ask it.

I work in a community with two prisons. Corrections worker pay is a big deal here. Whenever the governor is in the area — usually for a ground breaking or some other type of event — I always ask him if he plans any more initiatives to increase their pay (which Bevin has been supportive of). It's generally unrelated to what he's speaking on, but he always answers the questions. If was asking something more controversial, he might ask to keep it "on topic" as I've seen him do before.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-12-2018, 04:41 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So he's being banned for someone's opinion of him. 

I don't think there's a set time. When someone begins to insult you rather than answer your questions, I can see why someone would keep asking. I don't think this will be a problem after 2020.

He was insulted cause he's a repeat offender and wants to argue.

What was the presser about and what was Jims question about?
Related or not?

And it's now officially no longer a problem as of Now, no need to wait til 2020.

You call a Parent-Teacher conference, the Goal: help the kids learn in class and at home.

This one parent always asks you about your sexual preference at every meeting.

Do you feel obligated to answer that parent?
If you do, then you are allowing the focal point to shift from what's best for students to about your sexual preference and nothing gets accomplished or do you take control and steer the questions back to the subject matter? What if that one parent starts yelling over the top of you while you are moving on?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-12-2018, 05:08 PM)Benton Wrote: Generally, that doesn't matter.

It's fairly common — especially for people who are difficult to get an audience with — for press conferences to be used as a way to get questions answered that aren't generally what the conference is about. Generally, out of respect, media members with questions not pertaining to the meeting wait until towards the end. You don't always expect it to get answered, but that's your opportunity to ask it.

I work in a community with two prisons. Corrections worker pay is a big deal here. Whenever the governor is in the area — usually for a ground breaking or some other type of event — I always ask him if he plans any more initiatives to increase their pay (which Bevin has been supportive of). It's generally unrelated to what he's speaking on, but he always answers the questions. If was asking something more controversial, he might ask to keep it "on topic" as I've seen him do before.

And funny thing, When the Reporter from ABC was asking him about Kavanaugh, he said not now.

But he did eventually get back to them later in the conference when it was Open Question time and let them ask again and answered it.

Maybe you didn't hear about that one, cause it wasn't being asked by some confrontational fool who wants to make the pressers about him?

That's a perfect example of respect going both ways.

[BmorePat87]

(11-12-2018, 05:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: He was insulted cause he's a repeat offender and wants to argue.

What was the presser about and what was Jims question about?
Related or not?

And it's now officially no longer a problem as of Now, no need to wait til 2020.

You call a Parent-Teacher conference, the Goal: help the kids learn in class and at home.

This one parent always asks you about your sexual preference at every meeting.

Do you feel obligated to answer that parent?
If you do, then you are allowing the focal point to shift from what's best for students to about your sexual preference and nothing gets accomplished or do you take control and steer the questions back to the subject matter? What if that one parent starts yelling over the top of you while you are moving on?

the problem with this comparison is that there are decades of precedent for reporters to ask the president questions on any topic at press conferences, especially when the president in question holds very few of them.

As far as I know, the precedent for what you're describing is nearly non existent. 

[GMDino]

Acosta pushed too hard.  I think most of us agree on that.

That Trump still has supporters defending his reaction is a bit sad.

Trump is the POTUS.  After two years he should start acting like it or quit if he doesn't like being asked the same questions that he refuses to answer/lies about.

[Benton]

(11-12-2018, 05:15 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And funny thing, When the Reporter from ABC was asking him about Kavanaugh, he said not now.

But he did eventually get back to them later in the conference when it was Open Question time and let them ask again and answered it.

Maybe you didn't hear about that one, cause it wasn't being asked by some confrontational fool who wants to make the pressers about him?

That's a perfect example of respect going both ways.

I didn't hear about that one because I try not to watch Trump's non-scripted moments any more. It's painful to watch the leader of one of the most highly educated populations on the planet barely able to string together coherent thoughts consistently. That along with the dishonesty makes it difficult to watch.

[Belsnickel]

(11-12-2018, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: First time you saw his interactions with Acosta? and you're fast to judge. Acosta has been after Trump since day 1.
Did you watch the full 87 minutes or just the Acosta part? Trump answered over 60 questions and if you look it up, you won't find much about those other questions as all the focus is on Acosta-Trump.

I've seen clips of others and I have been consistent in my opinions of Acosta's behavior. Also, I watched most of that presser and the Acosta situation wasn't the only controversy. There has been plenty of discussion about Trump erroneously calling the one reporter's question about white nationalism "racist," and how that plays into the way Trump disproportionately has these negative interactions with minorities. There were also lots of discussions about him flip-flopping in the presser from one moment to the next, his deflection of the Sessions question, etc., etc.

You see, when you pay attention to actual news sources there tends to be conversation about many things that occur in a press conference, not just the sensational things.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-12-2018, 06:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've seen clips of others and I have been consistent in my opinions of Acosta's behavior. Also, I watched most of that presser and the Acosta situation wasn't the only controversy. There has been plenty of discussion about Trump erroneously calling the one reporter's question about white nationalism "racist," and how that plays into the way Trump disproportionately has these negative interactions with minorities. There were also lots of discussions about him flip-flopping in the presser from one moment to the next, his deflection of the Sessions question, etc., etc.

You see, when you pay attention to actual news sources there tends to be conversation about many things that occur in a press conference, not just the sensational things.

Oh I agree, I don't get my news from the one source everyone here accuses me of getting it from, I typically use BBC and google some others for a different set of eyes.

And it is racist to say White Nationalist, and Trump never claimed he was a White Nationalist, just a Nationalist which is not racist.

Oh and by the way, if you know so much, why didn't you answer what the presser was about and what Jim's question(s) were?

It's as Benton said, you stay on topic til later in the Presser when the POTUS opens it up for all questions.

[Belsnickel]

(11-12-2018, 07:23 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And it is racist to say White Nationalist, and Trump never claimed he was a White Nationalist, just a Nationalist which is not racist.

No, it isn't racist to say white nationalist. It is an accurate description of certain groups that have been supportive of Trump and see his use of the term nationalist as him giving a nod to them. It wasn't a racist question, and it was entirely appropriate to discuss.

(11-12-2018, 07:23 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Oh and by the way, if you know so much, why didn't you answer what the presser was about and what Jim's question(s) were?

Did someone ask me those questions? Did you ask someone else and expect me to answer? I really don't know what you're talking about here.

[fredtoast]

(11-12-2018, 07:23 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And it is racist to say White Nationalist, and Trump never claimed he was a White Nationalist, just a Nationalist which is not racist.

Why doesn't he use the term "patriot" instead of "nationalist"?  He knows that White Nationalists love him, and he has laid out a lot of clues that would lead them to believe he is on their side.  He welcomed Confederate Battle Flags at his campaign rallies.  He lied about his relationship with David Duke.  He said that some of the white nationalist marching in Charlottesville were "good people".  He has lied about Mexicans immigrants (they are sending the worst) and Muslims (hundreds dancing in the streets of Jersey City when the towers fell) in order to incite hatred against them. And now for no reason at all he starts calling himself a "nationalist" instead of a "patriot".

It was a legitimate question.  Calling the reporter a "racist" for asking that question is just deflection.

Why do you think Trump has suddenly embraced the word "nationalist" instead of "patriot" at the same time that he is aware that white nationalist support him?  I think that is a very important question.  And I wonder why you do not.

[*bfine32*]

(11-12-2018, 05:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: Acosta pushed too hard.  I think most of us agree on that.

That Trump still has supporters defending his reaction is a bit sad.

Trump is the POTUS.  After two years he should start acting like it or quit if he doesn't like being asked the same questions that he refuses to answer/lies about.

So it's OK to say Acosta was an ass, but it's not OK that POTUS called him out on it?

[GMDino]

(11-12-2018, 08:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So it's OK to say Acosta was an ass, but it's not OK that POTUS called him out on it?

Its ok to say Acosta should have sat down...it's not ok to ignore what the POTUS said about multiple members of the press at a press conference.

[Griever]

(11-12-2018, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Yes, you don't have to like or respect your boss, but if your boss wants something done and defines the parameters for getting it done. What happens if you ignore those parameters and try to do it your own way? Do you remain employed for much longer or does your boss start looking for an excuse to fire you?

I don't think that's the answer you were looking for.
COMMON SENSE.



For everyone, be honest, don't look it up.
What was this WH Press Conference supposed to be about?
What was Jim Acosta's original "question" about? Did he have a follow-up Question? What was it if he did?
Are they related to what the Press Conference was about?

But Acosta does not work for trump

Trump works for the people, we are his boss

Trump just threw a fit because he doesn’t like acosta

[Dill]

(11-12-2018, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Yes, you don't have to like or respect your boss, but if your boss wants something done and defines the parameters for getting it done. What happens if you ignore those parameters and try to do it your own way? Do you remain employed for much longer or does your boss start looking for an excuse to fire you?

Strange analogy.  The president is not "our boss." He is supposed to work for the people, who value transparency.  A president who dodges important questions is violating that expectation.

You keep constructing his relation to the press as authoritarian--as if his proper address were "Dear Leader"--and presenting the press as an out-of-line adversary with trick or loaded questions. 

EVERY president has to deal with "loaded" questions, especially when the president's own policies and behavior have called them down upon himself. And till now--with the exception of the ethically challenged Nixon--they have chosen not to villify the press and generally opted to answer difficult questions, loaded or not.

Trump avoids difficult questions by claiming they are personal attacks and "fake news," and stonewalling or personally attacking reporters, or barring them from press conferences.   How could anyone who values liberal democracy be down with that?