Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on November 13, 2018, 10:25:15 AM
-
CNN is suing Trump.. on behalf of Jim Acosta.
As a layman, I don't think they have a case. AFAIK, the White House is fine with CNN sending someone else to the briefings. They kicked out Acosta, not CNN. Of course depending on where this is tried, as a layman I could be wrong.
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2018/11/13/talk-about-butthurt-cnn-officially-sues-trump-for-kicking-jim-acosta-to-the-curb-and-omg-lol/
-
I need to re-read the First Amendment. Lemme see ... where did I put that? Oh, yeah ... here 'tis:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The pertinent part, parsed, is: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech or of the press ..."
So exactly how does revoking one man's press credentials -- which are a privilege, not a right -- in any way violate the First Amendment? I don't see any reference in the First Amendment to CNN or to Jim Acosta. Acosta can still write and say whatever he wants. His freedom to express an opinion has not been "abridged." I have written articles for on-line "publications" and even for a couple of print publications. Can I just walk into a White House press conference? No -- they first have to review my background and issue me credentials. More than likely, the nature and scope of my work would be deemed insufficient to qualify me to take up space in the press room, and I would be denied press credentials to the White House. Should I sue because my First Amendment rights are being violated?
I have no sympathy for Acosta. None whatsoever.
-
Seems like an easily frivolous lawsuit. He wouldn't abide by the rules. He laid hands on the microphone girl. On what leg do they claim to stand?
-
They could claim that requiring a reporter with manners is an unreasonable demand.
-
Press conferences are largely a 20th century invention. Did every president before Theodore Roosevelt (presented arbitrarily; I don't know if he held them or not) violate the 1st Amendment by NOT holding them?
More over, is CNN being censored? No. Is the press --- given that a number of other reporters who are maintaining their press credentials?
There is no true case.
That doesn't mean the White House will prevail, given the bent that has already been demonstrated by a few other court cases Trump has lost, that he should have won ...... :mad: .....
-
Maybe Trump's lawyer could behave like Acosta during trial. I doubt that would go very far.
-
Looking at the quotes, they weren't even preventing Acosta from asking "tough" questions. They did call on him and he asked questions. The conflict was that Acosta wanted to keep asking repeated questions and not give any other reporters a chance.
I have a feeling this will end up before some liberal judge and it will go further in court than it should. IMO, this ought to be one of those things where the administration tells the courts this isn't your jurisdiction.
-
"The granting of White House press passes to individuals is a privilege entirely contained within the executive branch. Case dismissed with prejudice".
In a just world, at least, that would be the extent of the proceedings.
-
I happened to catch this live. He asked several questions and didn’t like the answers and as per usually was bloviating and expressing his opinion instead of accepting the answers. The he refused to give up the microphone and did in fact push the young women’s arm/hand away while she was trying to do her job and take back the microphone. I half expected secret service to step in. Acosta is an ass, they had every right to pull his pass and shouldn’t let him back in.
-
IMHO, this lawsuit is not about winning. CNN winning the suit would be a bonus for CNN. This suit is about the publicity of suing the Trump White House. It's pandering to the base of people opposed to Trump and his administration, to draw more viewers to CNN. This, in turn, means more advertising dollars for the suits in the corner offices who really could care less about who is reporting the news from the White House for them.
-
IMHO, this lawsuit is not about winning. CNN winning the suit would be a bonus for CNN. This suit is about the publicity of suing the Trump White House. It's pandering to the base of people opposed to Trump and his administration, to draw more viewers to CNN. This, in turn, means more advertising dollars for the suits in the corner offices who really could care less about who is reporting the news from the White House for them.
Which is another reason any self respecting judge should throw it out.
-
IMHO, this lawsuit is not about winning. CNN winning the suit would be a bonus for CNN. This suit is about the publicity of suing the Trump White House. It's pandering to the base of people opposed to Trump and his administration, to draw more viewers to CNN. This, in turn, means more advertising dollars for the suits in the corner offices who really could care less about who is reporting the news from the White House for them.
This.
The question is will it work. It would be nice to see their ratings drop to the point that they lose revenue from this stunt and then wait and see how long the cluebat takes to impact.
-
This.
The question is will it work. It would be nice to see their ratings drop to the point that they lose revenue from this stunt and then wait and see how long the cluebat takes to impact.
Their ratings really can’t get much lower. It would be nice though if it actually forced them to get a clue.
-
They (like a lot of other cable channels) get a lot of money automatically from cable and satellite subscription fees. If you have CNN in your channel list, you are paying them. I don't know how the revenue balances. I know with ESPN, they get most of their money from subscriptions. Advertising is a smaller amount.
-
They (like a lot of other cable channels) get a lot of money automatically from cable and satellite subscription fees. If you have CNN in your channel list, you are paying them. I don't know how the revenue balances. I know with ESPN, they get most of their money from subscriptions. Advertising is a smaller amount.
Yeah, but CNN is pretty low on the totem pole. Case in point, I get CNN and I have such a basic package that it's not even offered anymore. I'm pretty sure the pittance they make off the cable/satellite companies isn't even close to ad revenue.
-
This part is embarrasing
Cable News Network (CNN) is an American news-based pay television channel owned by Turner Broadcasting System, a division of AT&T's WarnerMedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN)