CNN’s Jim Acosta is not above the law. Even kindergartners know when to ask questions and when to keep quiet.
UPDATE 3:45 p.m. ET — In response to the White House backing off, CNN is dropping its lawsuit against the White House.
— CNN Communications (@CNNPR) November 19, 2018
CNN and Jim Acosta have been informed that the White House plans to revoke the reporter’s credential again after the temporary14-day restraining order is lifted at the end of this month. The White House is working out rules and guidelines for reporters going forward. That alone is ridiculous; adults should know how to act respectfully when in public settings.
Other reporters have questions too. Give them a chance; it helps.
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) November 19, 2018
— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) November 19, 2018
I am in all in favor of freedom of speech, but journalists, under this President have pushed it too far. It is embarrassing to see “aggressive” journalists haranguing government leaders in such formal environments. You want to do that crap, sign up for Hollywood movies but when sitting in on WH press briefings, be respectful.
Acosta’s “hard pass,” which provided expedited access to the White House grounds, was suspended earlier this month after he engaged in a contentious back-and-forth with Trump during a Nov. 7 press conference. Acosta then refused to pass the microphone to a female White House aide and there was brief contact between the two.
The White House told Acosta that he “violated basic standards governing such events,” which resulted in his credential being revoked. The letter called it a “preliminary decision” and said the White House would consider any response that CNN or Acosta would like to submit.
Acosta’s legal team objected to the letter, calling it an “attempt to provide retroactive due process” in the papers filed on Monday.
“To say the least, the letter is a disappointing response to the court’s decision and our attempts to resolve the matter amicably,” Acosta’s attorney wrote in response. “More fundamentally, though, it is further evidence of your clients’ animus towards Mr. Acosta based on his work as CNN’s chief White House correspondent.”
Read More: Fox News
This ruling by a Trump-appointed judge that CNN is “likely to succeed on Fifth Amendment grounds,” is mind-boggling. What Constitution is this guy reading? Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I suppose that he could be offering that opinion based on some precedent of which I am unaware. Entirely possible.
Appellate judges are bound by precedent, but the Supreme Court is not bound by precedent. This is not a Constitutional issue even though CNN feels like it is as they invoke the 5th amendment. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment is designed to prevent the government from coming into your house and arresting you without due process or taking your home from you without due process or putting you in prison without due process.
There is no government intrusion here. There is no “right” to access the White House grounds. The White House simply revoked the pass; they did not storm into CNN and arrest Acosta or levy some kind of legal restraint on CNN reporters. The idea that either the fifth or first Amendment has been violated is patently absurd and should be taken to the Supreme Court for adjudication.
My Lord, where is Justice Scalia when we need him.
If you find inaccurate information within this article, please use the contact form to alert us immediately. Don’t forget to follow the Wayne Dupree Show social media accounts on Facebook, Spreaker, iHeartRadio, Google Plus & Twitter.
Having problems finding a source for real news links in real time, click on Whatfinger.com. Visit, bookmark and share this resource and then tell your friends and family.