Fentoine Lum
Verified User
Nah, he just meant he wears a constitutional collar.
Trump argues in court filing that he can limit journalists' access to White House
- Thread starter Nomad
- Start date
Nah, he just meant he wears a constitutional collar.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
more so than you and florifuck, yes......there is no constitutional right to a WH press pass........just like there is no constitutional right to Super Bowl tickets........no constitutional right to a college diploma...........no constitutional right to the Nobel Peace Prize........
Fentoine Lum
Verified User
The world knows what both Don and america are.
Fentoine Lum
Verified User
There is no free press and no watchdog function of the corporate state media.
Fentoine Lum
Verified User
Even as he refuses to obey decorum himself, stunningly.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
not as precedent, no......
floridafan
Verified User
You aint got a fucking clue.
I think he's running out of Schtick and the American people are increasingly disgusted.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
Let's let Justice Kavanaugh weigh in here!
That was intended as a cruelty joke! LOL!
That was intended as a cruelty joke! LOL!
Moron; you don't even read the cases that you think support your emotional hysterics. But I get why you didn't want to link up; you knew it wouldn't support your stupidity and you would look dumber as a result. Yay you! You've succeeded in looking like a dumbass again.
Appellants argue that because the public has no right of access to the White House,15 and because the right of access due the press generally is no greater than that due the general public
and;
The relief granted was not that a pass be issued to him but, rather, that the Service (1) formulate "narrow and specific" standards by which applications are to be judged and (2) institute certain procedures to be followed in their handling.
From YOUR source:
Luke M. Milligan, a professor at the University of Louisville School of Law and author of a law review article on press rights, told The Post in an email that it will be difficult for CNN to prove that the content of Acosta’s reporting was cause for the denial, while the White House “will point to the journalist’s disruptive conduct — not yielding to other reporters, refusing to hand over the microphone and lecturing the president rather than asking a question.”
Well now, if a Liberal claims that FOX News supports it, it must be supportable. You're too stupid to even comprehend how moronic you look. Nothing dumber, or more hypocritical, than a Fox hating liberal quoting Fox news as their damning evidence.
To get accredited for the White House, a reporter first needs to be approved for a congressional press pass by the Standing Committee of Correspondents, elected by accredited reporters.
floridafan
Verified User
First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams told The Washington Post that the Constitution doesn’t allow content discrimination against journalists who publish things that a political figure disagrees with, or against reporters who ask difficult and probing questions of that official. That conduct is protected.
“It cannot happen because of disagreement with a journalist about the content of his or her reporting. It cannot happen in an effort to retaliate because of prior reporting,” Abrams said Tuesday.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
I think the press needs to boycott the White House Press Conferences.
But not because of Jim Acosta being thrown out- But rather a protest to all the lies told by the evil eyed secretary bitch and Donald Chump!
Don't ask any questions- if you don't want to hear any lies!
But not because of Jim Acosta being thrown out- But rather a protest to all the lies told by the evil eyed secretary bitch and Donald Chump!
Don't ask any questions- if you don't want to hear any lies!
But then they would really do what they wanted un challenged.
We need to keep the microscope on them 24/7.
To get accredited for the White House, a reporter first needs to be approved for a congressional press pass by the Standing Committee of Correspondents, elected by accredited reporters.
Obama did the same thing; but you whiny lying liberal dumbfucks didn't whine then. Why is that? Starts with an H and ends with an E.
Flashback: When Candidate Obama Booted 3 Papers From His Campaign Plane, Nobody Cared
https://www.mediaite.com/online/fla...-papers-from-his-campaign-plane-nobody-cared/
Of course, President Obama was friendly, affable and lined up ideologically with most reporters, so they found it difficult to get too emotional when he stomped on press freedom. There were several egregious examples.
The Obama administration's Justice Department spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen. The DOJ, led by Eric Holder, somehow labeled Rosen an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case, even went so far as to call him a flight risk. He thereby avoided the pesky need to inform him he was under surveillance. Of course, he was guilty of absolutely nothing. Holder would much later acknowledge regret over the Rosen subpoena. Thanks for playing.
The same DOJ seized two months of phone records from the Associated Press. Close your eyes for a moment and picture the reaction if Attorney General Jeff Sessions had been found to order the same action against the New York Times. If anything but the apocalypse comes to mind, you're in a small minority.
The Obama administration rejected more Freedom of Information Act requests than any administration in history. That was after Obama promised the "most transparent" administration in history.
New York Times reporter James Risen summed it up well when he called the Obama administration "the most anti-press administration since the Nixon administration.”
"Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined," Risen wrote for The Times in a Dec. 30, 2016 column. "It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists."
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-b...but-didnt-mind-obamas-years-of-stomping-press
There you go with the asinine lies again. But then, you are a liberal and lying is the only thing liberals know how to do.
Luke M. Milligan, a professor at the University of Louisville School of Law and author of a law review article on press rights, told The Post in an email that it will be difficult for CNN to prove that the content of Acosta’s reporting was cause for the denial, while the White House “will point to the journalist’s disruptive conduct — not yielding to other reporters, refusing to hand over the microphone and lecturing the president rather than asking a question.”