Jim Acosta

[hollodero]

(11-19-2018, 12:33 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well I mean someone does.  Not every journalist in the country gets access.  Unless it's actually CNNs pass and they can give it to whomever they want.  

I'd guess it's CNN's call whom to send? Then I'd also guess there's a brief background check, and then the person the media organization wants to send to the WH gets accredited.
But of course, I do not know. However, I never heard of any (western, non-authoritarian) political office demanding a journalist to be replaced because (s)he says or asks things said office doesn't like.

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 12:33 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well I mean someone does.  Not every journalist in the country gets access.  Unless it's actually CNNs pass and they can give it to whomever they want.  

The majority of journalists don't cover the WH.

When I was a sports reporter, a press pass generally got you into a game. But if it was a state tournament, some colleges, some regional tournaments, or similar type events, you had to be on a pre-approved list. It saves a lot of time and headache for everyone, especially since those types of events set aside room just for reporters/photographers. 

CNN can send whomever they want to cover the WH. The POTUS doesn't have to hold press conferences. But if he does, he can't just ban people he doesn't like.

[*bfine32*]

(11-17-2018, 01:24 AM)Benton Wrote: It's ok. Obama mixed up free press and unfettered press, too. 

Cnn wasn't suing to be unfettered, they were suing for access. The difference is significant and relevant.

So it's your stance that Acosta and/or CNN could not access the Whie House without his hard pass? 

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 12:10 PM)jj22 Wrote: Because the WH is the peoples house. Not a place for a President to play Politics and allow who can cover it and who can't based off of who reports positive news about them etc. It's really that simple.

Folks would have slammed Obama for this and rightfully so. Not sure why they feel Trump is different.

Not sure I've seen too much "defending Trump". I did so he was right to call out Acosta for being an asshole and failing to return the mic voluntarily. 

In that instance he demonstated a propensity to ignore White House protocal to fulfill his selfish needs. My only stance is that he forced the physical contact, POTUS and his staff deemed him unworthy of the unfettered (or use whatever word besides unfettered for the lax restrictions granted with the hardpass) access that comes with the hard pass and removed it. Were the "right" in doing so? At least one Federal Judge thinks they were not; however, that doesn't change my stance that someone can sue for and obtain (or use whatever word besides unfettered for the additional/lax access granted with the hardpass) access. 

To me it matters not who the POTUS is.

[GMDino]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/19/jim-acosta-suspension-possibly-permanent/2053073002/

Quote:The Trump administration plans to again revoke CNN correspondent Jim Acosta's White House press credentials after a restraining order imposed Friday by a federal judge expires, CNN reported late Sunday. 



The White House pulled Acosta's credentials after a Nov. 7 news conference during which President Donald Trump called the reporter a "rude, terrible person" when Acosta persisted in asking Trump a question about Russia.


In response, CNN filed a lawsuit – backed by several media outlets, including USA TODAY – demanding the return of Acosta's credentials. On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, granted the request and ordered Acosta's pass restored while the rest of the case plays out. 


Kelly said the White House had violated Acosta’s Fifth Amendment right to due process by suspending his press badge without explanation or a chance for CNN to appeal.


More: CNN reporter Jim Acosta heads 'back to work' after judge orders White House to restore his press credential

"Reliable Sources" host Brian Stetler said in a post Sunday that "White House officials sent Acosta a letter stating that his press pass is set to be suspended again once the restraining order expires." 


In response to the letter, CNN's attorneys on Monday requested an emergency hearing on their motion for an injunction in the case. In the court filing, the lawyers attached the letter sent to Acosta on Friday from White House press secretary Sarah Sanders and deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine.  


More: Donald Trump says he may revoke press credentials for other reporters, not just CNN's Jim Acosta

The letter says the White House made a "preliminary decision to suspend" Acosta's "hard pass" due to his "conduct" at the Nov. 7 news conference. According to the letter, Acosta violated "basic, widely understood practices" for presidential press conferences by refusing to surrender the microphone after his question was asked and answered. 


More: White House shares edited video to justify revoking press pass of CNN's Jim Acosta
The letter tells Acosta he had until 5 p.m. Sunday to submit a written response to the suspension. It says a final decision on his credentials would be made by 3 p.m. Monday. 


"Of course, you will continue to maintain your hard pass while the Temporary Restraining Order issued on November 16, 2018, remains in effect," the letter concludes. 


"The @White House is continuing to violate the First and Fifth amendments of the Constitution," CNN said in a statement posted to Twitter. 
"These actions threaten all journalists and news organizations. @Acosta and CNN will continue to report the news about the White House and @realDonald Trump." 

Quote:
[/url]CNN Communications

@CNNPR




The @WhiteHouse is continuing to violate the First and Fifth amendments of the Constitution. These actions threaten all journalists and news organizations. @Acosta and CNN will continue to report the news about the White House and @realDonaldTrump https://www.axios.com/trump-white-house-media-jim-acosta-cnn-lawsuit-584e82aa-a295-48fc-a40b-3992a96810b9.html …

6,349
8:50 AM - Nov 19, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Trump targets Acosta ouster — again
Press access to the White House is grounded very much in tradition rather than in plain-letter law.
axios.com

Sanders said the White House plans to "further develop rules and processes to ensure fair and orderly press conferences in the future." With a more clearly defined code of conduct, the administration believes it will have better legal standing if it punishes a reporter for breaking the rules. 


In an interview with "[url=https://www.foxnews.com/shows/fox-news-sunday]Fox News Sunday" that was taped on Friday, Trump said his staff is currently drafting those rules in response to Kelly's ruling restoring Acosta's credentials. 


"And if he misbehaves, we’ll throw him out or we’ll stop the news conference," Trump said. 


The letter from Sanders and Shine gives some clue to what the administration believes the "code of conduct for journalists participating in presidential press conferences" should be. 


It consisted of two basic principles: 

1. "A journalist called upon to ask a question will ask a single question and, having received a response, will yield the floor." 
2. "When a journalist has had his or her question(s) answered, is expected to yield the floor and, when applicable, physically surrender any microphone the journalist is using to White House staff." 
   

Sanders initially defended the suspension of Acosta's credentials on the grounds that the reporter wouldn't hand over the mic when a White House intern tried to take it from him. 


She said the administration can "never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job." Later, she shared a video on Twitter that played a close-up at high speed of Acosta pushing the intern's arm away. The effect was to make what appeared to be a gentle push in real time, look more like a karate chop. 


But after CNN sued to restore Acosta's credentials, the White House shifted to a justification focused on how Acosta's refusal to hand over the microphone was unfair to other reporters. 


In the letter from Shine and Sanders, Acosta was again admonished for "refusing to physically surrender the microphone to an intern who had come to collect it." 



"No other reporter at the press conference made physical contact with our intern in that fashion or refused to yield the floor as you did," the letter said. 

Besides the usual pettiness from Trump and his WH, besides the usual changing of reasons when faced with reality, I really like that thei "new rules" will ban follow up questions.

Sound exactly up Trump's alley.  He can't get caught if they can't ask what he means.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-19-2018, 12:10 PM)jj22 Wrote: Because the WH is the peoples house. Not a place for a President to play Politics and allow who can cover it and who can't based off of who reports positive news about them etc. It's really that simple.

Folks would have slammed Obama for this and rightfully so. Not sure why they feel Trump is different.

I guess, from my understanding as well, Trump can hold conferences from Trump Tower and Acosta can be blocked from entering, or did I mis-read that part?

If I'm correct then in the end, it's a win-win for Trump, cause now he has a good excuse to hold pressers from TT and make a little money in the process, of which course all of you will *****, but it was courtesy of Acosta.

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 02:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So it's your stance that Acosta and/or CNN could not access the Whie House without his hard pass? 

Access the White House, as in a general sense?
Well, yeah, I guess he could enter the public portions of the WH the same as any tourist.

Access to press briefing areas so he could do his job?
No. 

You do realize, I hope, that the hard pass isn't just a magical ticket to the White House. You don't get to just walk around everyone. It allows you extra access to some areas where you can attend press briefings as outlined by the WHCA, or areas where you might have a chance to ask an off podium question of someone.

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 06:35 PM)Benton Wrote: Access the White House, as in a general sense?
Well, yeah, I guess he could enter the public portions of the WH the same as any tourist.

Access to press briefing areas so he could do his job?
No. 

You do realize, I hope, that the hard pass isn't just a magical ticket to the White House. You don't get to just walk around everyone. It allows you extra access to some areas where you can attend press briefings as outlined by the WHCA, or areas where you might have a chance to ask an off podium question of someone.

We'll just disagree that Acosta couldn't do his job without the Hard pass.

Of course I realize the Hard Pass does not give one unlimited use of the WH. Do you realize it grants ease of access? 

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 07:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We'll just disagree that Acosta couldn't do his job without the Hard pass.

Of course I realize the Hard Pass does not give one unlimited use of the WH. Do you realize it grants ease of access? 

How is he supposed to ask someone a question when he has no access to them?

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 07:30 PM)Benton Wrote: How is he supposed to ask someone a question when he has no access to them?

He's a reporter. He can report. 


When's the last time you interviewed Trump?

Have you ever shared your views on him and/or his actions? 

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 07:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He's a reporter. He can report. 

Report on what? Without the ability to get information, what exactly is he reporting?

There are still people who like to be informed, not just turn on the television and watch people read press releases or talk about cats doing funny stuff.

Quote:When's the last time you interviewed Trump?


Have you ever shared your views on him and/or his actions? 

And that's the problem with things. Sharing your views is not news, it's editorializing. It's commentary. It's not news.

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 08:05 PM)Benton Wrote: Report on what? Without the ability to get information, what exactly is he reporting?

There are still people who like to be informed, not just turn on the television and watch people read press releases or talk about cats doing funny stuff.



And that's the problem with things. Sharing your views is not news, it's editorializing. It's commentary. It's not news.

I'll just leave with you making the assumption that only Jim Acosta can obtain information. I was under the assumption that Press Conferences with POTUS were public information. Didn't realize you had to be in the room to obtain the information. I also didn't realize you had to ask the question to obtain info. I wonder what members of the press that don't get to ask questions report on? According to you, it can only be cats doing funny stuff. 

I get it, you're a journalist; you're going to side with the journalist. I simply have a problem with him choosing not voluntarily surrendering his mic when the staff asked him 3 times to do so. I think if you want special access to POTUS you should follow the rules. 

So you think if Acosta has his hard pass he won't share his views? You kinda lost me on that one. 

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 08:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'll just leave with you making the assumption that only Jim Acosta can obtain information. I was under the assumption that Press Conferences with POTUS were public information. Didn't realize you had to be in the room to obtain the information. I also didn't realize you had to ask the question to obtain info. I wonder what members of the press that don't get to ask questions report on? According to you, it can only be cats doing funny stuff. 

I get it, you're a journalist; you're going to side with the journalist. I simply have a problem with him choosing not voluntarily surrendering his mic when the staff asked him 3 times to do so. I think if you want special access to POTUS you should follow the rules. 

So you think if Acosta has his hard pass he won't share his views? You kinda lost me on that one. 

Conferences give reporters a chance to ask questions. Those questions aren't always about what the conference is about.  Some stories take weeks or months to put together. The windows for talking to elected officials and cabinet members or other people of that level, are very small. Press briefings are one of those windows, as is being in the general area, but that isn't an option if you're watching it remotely.

Personally, I think Acosta should have surrendered the mic. What he did was rude to his fellow journalists. But that doesn't permit the WH to ban him.


As to the last, no, that's not at all what I said. 

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 08:37 PM)Benton Wrote: Conferences give reporters a chance to ask questions. Those questions aren't always about what the conference is about.  Some stories take weeks or months to put together. The windows for talking to elected officials and cabinet members or other people of that level, are very small. Press briefings are one of those windows, as is being in the general area, but that isn't an option if you're watching it remotely.

Personally, I think Acosta should have surrendered the mic. What he did was rude to his fellow journalists. But that doesn't permit the WH to ban him.


As to the last, no, that's not at all what I said. 

As I said: We'll just disagree that Acosta could not do his job without the Hard Pass. But it reads better if you can sell the narrative that the WH denied his 1st Amendment Rights. 

[Benton]

(11-19-2018, 12:33 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well I mean someone does.  Not every journalist in the country gets access.  Unless it's actually CNNs pass and they can give it to whomever they want.  

The white house correspondents association has a big role in that. 

(11-19-2018, 09:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said: We'll just disagree that Acosta could not do his job without the Hard Pass.  

 
You can disagree all you want, but a reporter who can't questions isn't able to do his job. And just giving his opinion on stuff doesn't make him a report, that makes him a commentator.

I get you're big on partisanship, but the letter behind someone's name shouldn't give them the right to disrupt anyone else's rights. 

[*bfine32*]

(11-19-2018, 10:45 PM)Benton Wrote: You can disagree all you want, but a reporter who can't questions isn't able to do his job. And just giving his opinion on stuff doesn't make him a report, that makes him a commentator.

I get you're big on partisanship, but the letter behind someone's name shouldn't give them the right to disrupt anyone else's rights. 

Noted: Only the reporters that get to ask questions of POTUS are doing their job. 

Actually, I don't get it. As I said: we'll just disagree. At least you have given me permission to do it all I want.

[GMDino]

(11-19-2018, 11:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Noted: Only the reporters that get to ask questions of POTUS are doing their job. 

Actually, I don't get it. As I said: we'll just disagree. At least you have given me permission to do it all I want.

Serious question:  How many press conferences have you attended as a member of the media?

Because, while you usually try to come off as having knowledge of almost everything you are doing this back and forth with Benton (who actually works in the press) very badly.

I've attended a few in my day in radio...not asking a question is the exact opposite of why they are there.  Sometimes, as Benton says, it is "off topic".  In this case with Trump and Acosta it was a general presser that covered a wide range of topics.  Trump doesn't have to answer, hell he doesn't even have to call on anyone...or even show up....but he like the attention and he likes to fight when he knows he has total control.

Did Acosta act the fool?  IMHO he did.

Has Trump made it worse than it had to be by a) pulling his hard pass b) lying about why and using a doctored video to "prove" it c) chaning "the rules" so reporters can only ask one question?  Yep.

Again, if Trump doesn't want to answer questions...don't.  He went a long time between press conferences his first year...he can do it if he wants.

[*bfine32*]

(11-20-2018, 12:54 AM)GMDino Wrote: Serious question:  How many press conferences have you attended as a member of the media?

Because, while you usually try to come off as having knowledge of almost everything you are doing this back and forth with Benton (who actually works in the press) very badly.

I've attended a few in my day in radio...not asking a question is the exact opposite of why they are there.  Sometimes, as Benton says, it is "off topic".  In this case with Trump and Acosta it was a general presser that covered a wide range of topics.  Trump doesn't have to answer, hell he doesn't even have to call on anyone...or even show up....but he like the attention and he likes to fight when he knows he has total control.

Did Acosta act the fool?  IMHO he did.

Has Trump made it worse than it had to be by a) pulling his hard pass b) lying about why and using a doctored video to "prove" it c) chaning "the rules" so reporters can only ask one question?  Yep.

Again, if Trump doesn't want to answer questions...don't.  He went a long time between press conferences his first year...he can do it if he wants.

I've attended 0 press conferences (as a member of the press); however, that doesn't mean I cannot disagree with the assertion that a reporter cannot do his/her job if they don't get to ask questions first hand. 

I'll take your unbiased opinion as to who is "coming off badly". 

Really, my stance has 0 to do with Trump. It has everything to do with Acosta, his actions, and the assertion he cannot be a reporter if he loses his hard pass for misbehavior. 

[GMDino]

(11-20-2018, 01:03 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I've attended 0 press conferences (as a member of the press); however, that doesn't mean I cannot disagree with the assertion that a reporter cannot do his/her job if they don't get to ask questions first hand. 

You can disagree...but you are wrong so you should stop disagreeing.

(11-20-2018, 01:03 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I'll take your unbiased opinion as to who is "coming off badly". 

Yeah, me saying both is totally biased.

(11-20-2018, 01:03 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Really, my stance has 0 to do with Trump. It has everything to do with Acosta, his actions, and the assertion he cannot be a reporter if he loses his hard pass for misbehavior. 

Your confusing of commentators with reporters is enough for you to stop.

If someone is wearing a blue shirt and says they are wearing a blue shirt and you say its red but you "agree to disagree" you are still wrong.

[*bfine32*]

(11-20-2018, 01:09 AM)GMDino Wrote: You can disagree...but you are wrong so you should stop disagreeing.


Yeah, me saying both is totally biased.  


Your confusing of commentators with reporters is enough for you to stop.

If someone is wearing a blue shirt and says they are wearing a blue shirt and you say its red but you "agree to disagree" you are still wrong.

Well Benton has already authorized me to disagree all I want and I will continue to disagree with the assertion that only the reporter afforded the opportunity to ask a question first hand can do his/her job. Acosta could do his job without access granted by a hard pass; it would just be fettered.

I have little issue with you and Benton stating I'm "wrong"; but I disagree. 

The "unbiased" comment was directed at your assertion that I was looking badly trying to discuss freedom of the press with a 1st Amendment expert such as Benton. Nothing to do with Trump/Acosta.