Fox supports CNN in Acosta lawsuit

[Lourdes]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/14/media/cnn-lawsuit-support/index.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Woody]

Traitors.

[Fight for Trump]

The rest of the media stood with Fox when Obama attempted to exclude them from certain briefings and interviews. This is their turn to show solidarity.

Wallace and Perino were talking about this after the initial event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPsQlCVmaCA

[pbrower2a]

FoX interest?

1. An assault one part of the news media is an assault on all.  Freedom of the press is indivisible.

2. Trump behavior in banning Acosta is so egregious that nobody can excuse it on any ground.

3. Interference with a journalist is assault. That includes taking or destroying a reporter's notepads, microphone, camera, electronic recording device,  camera, or any carrying case that one assume contains those.

4. Slippery slope. If the White House can do this with an accredited journalist, then what is next?

5. The other side: in 2021 the President might be a Democrat. FoX does not want to be shut out of reporting.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

FoX interest?

1. An assault one part of the news media is an assault on all.  Freedom of the press is indivisible.

2. Trump behavior in banning Acosta is so egregious that nobody can excuse it on any ground.

3. Interference with a journalist is assault. That includes taking or destroying a reporter's notepads, microphone, camera, electronic recording device,  camera, or any carrying case that one assume contains those.

4. Slippery slope. If the White House can do this with an accredited journalist, then what is next?

5. The other side: in 2021 the President might be a Democrat. FoX does not want to be shut out of reporting.

This.

Acosta's a jerk, however.  I support the principle here.  Not the aggrieved jerk.

Trump DOES, IMO, have every right to bar Acosta, or anyone else.  It's something he CAN do that he SHOULDN'T do.

[Kingpoleon]

Just a reminder:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/lifestyle/style/shocked-by-the-trump-aggression-against-reporters-and-sources-the-blueprint-was-made-by-obama/2018/06/08/c0b84d88-6b06-11e8-9e38-24e693b38637_story.html

[J. J.]

FoX interest?

1. An assault one part of the news media is an assault on all.  Freedom of the press is indivisible.

2. Trump behavior in banning Acosta is so egregious that nobody can excuse it on any ground.

3. Interference with a journalist is assault. That includes taking or destroying a reporter's notepads, microphone, camera, electronic recording device,  camera, or any carrying case that one assume contains those.

4. Slippery slope. If the White House can do this with an accredited journalist, then what is next?

5. The other side: in 2021 the President might be a Democrat. FoX does not want to be shut out of reporting.

This.

Acosta's a jerk, however.  I support the principle here.  Not the aggrieved jerk.

Trump DOES, IMO, have every right to bar Acosta, or anyone else.  It's something he CAN do that he SHOULDN'T do.

Acosta is a jerk, and a bad reporter, but that isn't a good reason to remove his WH pass. 

I am disturbed that he didn't "yield the floor" when his question was answered.  That is a reason to  suspend his pass, at least temporarily.     

Whether he should be respectful of Trump or not is not the issue.  That type of badgering comes with being a public official. 

[Sir Mohamed]

FoX interest?

1. An assault one part of the news media is an assault on all.  Freedom of the press is indivisible.

2. Trump behavior in banning Acosta is so egregious that nobody can excuse it on any ground.

3. Interference with a journalist is assault. That includes taking or destroying a reporter's notepads, microphone, camera, electronic recording device,  camera, or any carrying case that one assume contains those.

4. Slippery slope. If the White House can do this with an accredited journalist, then what is next?

5. The other side: in 2021 the President might be a Democrat. FoX does not want to be shut out of reporting.

This.

Acosta's a jerk, however.  I support the principle here.  Not the aggrieved jerk.

Trump DOES, IMO, have every right to bar Acosta, or anyone else.  It's something he CAN do that he SHOULDN'T do.

Acosta is a jerk, and a bad reporter, but that isn't a good reason to remove his WH pass.  

I am disturbed that he didn't "yield the floor" when his question was answered.  That is a reason to  suspend his pass, at least temporarily.    

Whether he should be respectful of Trump or not is not the issue.  That type of badgering comes with being a public official.  

Why is he a jerk? Because he's asking tough question the prez doesn't like. Last time I checked, this is a democracy. Media have to inform people on what their leaders are doing.

Glad to see there is some sanity left with Fox "News".

[Hammy]

CNN is reaping the consequences of creating Trump's presidency and spreading and normalizing the cancer we have in this country by giving them borderline obsessive coverage all for the sake of ratings.

[J. J.]

Why is he a jerk? Because he's asking tough question the prez doesn't like. Last time I checked, this is a democracy. Media have to inform people on what their leaders are doing.

Glad to see there is some sanity left with Fox "News".

Because he wasn't asking question as such, but was stating his opinion.  He also would not let another correspondent (from NBC) ask his question. 

Here is an example, where you can see criticism of him by journalists on MSNBC!   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9Qt4VyvbUA

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Fox News, welcome to #TheResistance.

[Fight for Trump]

Glad to see there is some sanity left with Fox "News".

Fox News has its roster of headliner personalities and contributors who are not really concerned with facts or the news, but they do have a lot of legitimate journalists on the payroll who are basically no different than the ones who staff the newsrooms at the major networks. The fact that they so successfully blurred the line between news and partisan commentary is what makes Fox News so dangerous, not that they aren't a real news organization.

[HisGrace]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

To be fair, the Democrats would never be able to get away with something like this as easily as Trump seems to. They wouldn't even bother. Yet again, they will have the moral high-ground  for the next time they take the White House, unfortunately that doesn't seem to mean much nowadays.

[Hammy]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

To be fair, the Democrats would never be able to get away with something like this as easily as Trump seems to. They wouldn't even bother. Yet again, they will have the moral high-ground  for the next time they take the White House, unfortunately that doesn't seem to mean much nowadays.

The only reason it doesn't matter is because Dem objections to Trumpist behavior seem more about jealousy that they can't get away with acting the same, instead of genuine objection to the normalization of such behavior.

[Gass3268]

Trump appointed judge orders the White House to give Acosta is pass back:

https://twitter.com/BreakingNews/status/1063454951400226817

[ProudModerate2]

Regardless of the ruling, I fear that trump and co. is only going to find other ways to make CNN/Acosta's job difficult.

[The Dowager Mod]

https://twitter.com/BiteHate/status/1063539760650772480

[ProudModerate2]

Video: President Donald Trump reacts to the judge's ruling that Jim Acosta should regain his White House press pass.

Click here to watch: https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2018/11/16/trump-comments-cnn-lawsuit-ruling-sot-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/business-media/

[Progressive Pessimist]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

To be fair, the Democrats would never be able to get away with something like this as easily as Trump seems to. They wouldn't even bother. Yet again, they will have the moral high-ground  for the next time they take the White House, unfortunately that doesn't seem to mean much nowadays.

The only reason it doesn't matter is because Dem objections to Trumpist behavior seem more about jealousy that they can't get away with acting the same, instead of genuine objection to the normalization of such behavior.

I don't think that's true at all. Objections to Trump aren't out of "jealousy" as much as theya re out of pointing out GOP and conservative hypocrisy.  Furthermore, one of the biggest issues with Trump's Presidency as a whole is with the precedents that he is either establishing or breaking.

[Hammy]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

To be fair, the Democrats would never be able to get away with something like this as easily as Trump seems to. They wouldn't even bother. Yet again, they will have the moral high-ground  for the next time they take the White House, unfortunately that doesn't seem to mean much nowadays.

The only reason it doesn't matter is because Dem objections to Trumpist behavior seem more about jealousy that they can't get away with acting the same, instead of genuine objection to the normalization of such behavior.

I don't think that's true at all. Objections to Trump aren't out of "jealousy" as much as theya re out of pointing out GOP and conservative hypocrisy.  Furthermore, one of the biggest issues with Trump's Presidency as a whole is with the precedents that he is either establishing or breaking.

I'm not talking policy, but behavior and lack of civility.

This isn't entirely different from what I said. Objecting to things that are wrong because "how come they can do it but we can't" under the guise of calling out hypocrisy while being okay when their side does it (citing said hypocrisy as their excuse) is not at all the same as objecting to thing that are wrong because they are wrong and refraining from doing it themselves. I am seeing very little of the latter among Dems lately.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Fox doesn't want the Democrats taking this as precedent and doing it to them later. Something more Republicans ought to think about. If you don't want a Democrat to do it later, stand against it when Trump does it.

To be fair, the Democrats would never be able to get away with something like this as easily as Trump seems to. They wouldn't even bother. Yet again, they will have the moral high-ground  for the next time they take the White House, unfortunately that doesn't seem to mean much nowadays.

The only reason it doesn't matter is because Dem objections to Trumpist behavior seem more about jealousy that they can't get away with acting the same, instead of genuine objection to the normalization of such behavior.

I don't think that's true at all. Objections to Trump aren't out of "jealousy" as much as theya re out of pointing out GOP and conservative hypocrisy.  Furthermore, one of the biggest issues with Trump's Presidency as a whole is with the precedents that he is either establishing or breaking.

I'm not talking policy, but behavior and lack of civility.

This isn't entirely different from what I said. Objecting to things that are wrong because "how come they can do it but we can't" under the guise of calling out hypocrisy while being okay when their side does it (citing said hypocrisy as their excuse) is not at all the same as objecting to thing that are wrong because they are wrong and refraining from doing it themselves. I am seeing very little of the latter among Dems lately.

I still completely disagree. I believe you will be proven wrong the next time Democrats take the White House.

[completely dead account]

That's good. Fox (as a whole) does have integrity after all. Certain individuals on there may have some, but not Fox as a whole until now, I suppose.