Jim Acosta

[*bfine32*]

(11-17-2018, 12:13 AM)Dill Wrote: It's not like the court gave Acosta unfettered access to someone's private home. The White "House" is the People's house, and the guy living there is supposed to inform the people of his activities.

It already concerns me that, in the face of critical questions, Trump has pushed attempts to discipline the press to this new level.

And it would greatly concern me if a Trump appointee had upheld Trump's arbitrary ban. Rule of law, right?

Actually his Press Secretary is  "supposed to inform people of his activities". If they would have banned everyone then maybe you'd have a point.


It seems he has had issues with 2 people in his tenure, but leave it to the Left to try to turn that into denying the 1st Amendment


Of course the Judge made the call as he interpreted it; does mean we cannot disagree with it. We simply must accept it. As I said, it bothers me that the courts can allow some one unfettered (hell use whatever word you guys thins fit) access with POTUS and his staff has pulled it.