Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just the opposite. The judge ordered the WH to submit rules and procedures.
This is actually a Yuge win for Trump. The judge ruled on due process and called on WH to submit rules and procedures. Implicity he is saying WH can set any rules it wants and revoke anyone's pass so long as they post the rules and provide for appeals. So maybe the rules will be like this. 1. Invitees will not speak until it is their turn, which begins when called upon. 2. Invitees will stop speaking when their turn ends, as determined by the host or when next person is called upon. 3) Invitees will promptly hand over mike and sit down when their turn ends. Violations will be subject to pass revocation. 1st offense - 3 days. 2nd offense - 30 days. 3rd offense - lifetime. No more interruptions or grandstanding.
Good try at spin, but ultimately incorrect. The White House has existing rules and any changes to those rules must include "the procedural requirements of notice of the factual bases for denial, an opportunity for the applicant to respond to these, and a final written statement of the reasons for denial are compelled by the foregoing determination that the interest of a bona fide Washington correspondent in obtaining a White House press pass is protected by the first amendment"
Moreover, any standards doing so must be "narrow and specific" in advancing a "compelling government interest" sufficient to override First Amendment concerns. The only such interest that qualified that was identified by the DC Circuit was something that poses a "potential risk to the physical security of the President or his family."
Or, wait a minute, I have something that Trump might do that would alleviate this problem. How about if Trump ACTUALLY ANSWERS THE QUESTION ACOSTA (and others) ASK ? .
Ummm..HE ANSWERED 2 ALREADY...where the hell have you been? In addition to answering 2 idiotic questions, The President also had to listen to this moron reporter blather on about nonsensical STATEMENTS about the invasion from the south..
I didn't bother reading the rest of your screed since you could not even get your first statement right...
The judge is ruling based on the Constitution, that document that Trump swore to uphold. It most certainly does apply.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says anyone has the right to be heard or answered. The press's right to express their opinions is not infringed by not allowing them in the White House. Courts have also ruled the press has no special rights than the people. Do you have a consitutional right to a hard pass to a WH press conference?
Actually, the judge didn't. (Even though I think the ruling will have the end effect of benefiting Trump.)
The Consitution lays out three EQUAL branches of government. It does not specify one branch at the top that can decide what two other branches a level below can do or not do. A judge has no more rights to dictate how the executive conducts business within the White House than the executive does to issue an EO dictating how the courts must handle their cases.
Shroud of secrecy? What do you call the process by which appeals courts decide whether or not to hear a case? Maybe Trump should issue an EO mandating that SCOTUS publish the rules and criteria for how they determine the cases they will hear and order them to treat all appeals fairly and evenly?
And each branch is subservient to the Constitution, which not only empowers the judiciary to determine what Constitutional rights exists, but requires the Executive to act in accordance with those rights. So when the judiciary determines that the press has a right to due process procedures (narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest), the executive has to abide by that requirement. It isn't because the Court says it has to, its because Constitution says so.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says anyone has the right to be heard or answered. The press's right to express their opinions is not infringed by not allowing them in the White House. Courts have also ruled the press has no special rights than the people. Do you have a consitutional right to a hard pass to a WH press conference?
You are incorrect. Read Sherrill. Your argument was addressed and unanimously rejected. Again, read Sherrill.
It seems to me that the WH should be able to ban someone on the basis of being disruptive. They didn't ban the press or CNN, just one member.
Edit: never mind, I see there has been a lot of discussion. I'll just wait for the final verdict.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
so do I have a right to go in the White House when I want and debate and argue with the President on national tv, be rude and disregard rules and hijack a Press Conference?.....it's my house? right? LMAO!
'rude' is a subjective conclusion. If one say's Acosta is rude but Trump isn't, then that's a subjective conclusion. There is no set of guidelines for what constitutes rudeness.
Rudeness is a perception and laws are not based on perception. They are based on clear guidelines.
Acosta wanted answers and verification of Trump statements concerning immigration, the hottest most front and center topic of that particular week.
Trump made it the front and center topic of the nation. Acosta was addressing Trump's statements. Trump had no answers to Acosta's questions because everything Trump said about the caravan was unsubstantiated bull ****. Trump gets very mad when someone questions his Bull **** and calls him on it. He proceeded to have a meltdown and lost it.
Perhaps you need to review the actual incident again on you tube.
the 5th amendment applies to due process for life, liberty and property. None of that applies to Acosta. Acosta wasn't arrested, no charges file nor his property confiscated.
If the judge gives his final ruling and sides with CNN using the due process clause, this will go to the SC and rightly so.
He had a pass and Trump needs to demonstrate why he revoked his pass and no one else, there have been plenty of follow up questions from reporters but none have been banned. The question is what is the WH criteria for granting access keep in mind this was Trumps choice to call on Acosta. If interrupting the president with follow up questions is grounds for a ban Acosta will have company. Trump banning someone for being rude, that's one for the ages.
I doubt this goes beyond the DC circuit court but Trump is giving the courts quite the workout.
I have said it before, and I will continue to say it:
trump should re-instate acosta.
Then acosta should be seated in the back of the room. He should NEVER be given a microphone again. He should never be called upon to ask a question. He should never be responded to in any way, not even if his shirt is on fire. ALL CNN flaks should join him in the back row. If any of them stands up before the press conference is finished, they should be told by the Secret Service to "Sit down and shut up or leave the room!"
No, I do not believe the President (or anybody else) has any duty under the Constitution or any of the Amendments to recognize their existence in any way.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
