What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Trump losing his mind at reporters (1 Viewer)

squistion said:
White House officials sent Jim Acosta a letter stating that his pass is set to be suspended again once the restraining order expires, Axios reports. CNN is fighting back, and is expected back in court as soon as today.

https://www.axios.com/trump-white-house-media-jim-acosta-cnn-lawsuit-584e82aa-a295-48fc-a40b-3992a96810b9.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic
Click to expand...
The WH loves this even if they lose....it feeds into Trumps anti-press narrative and is a great distraction from the continued dysfunction of the WH, the support of murderous the murderous Saudi Prince who's in bed with Kushner/Trump, firing of Sessions and installation of a Trumpite, Mueller's upcoming indictments, etc..  This is a battle they love even though they'll lose again in court.  

 
squistion said:
White House officials sent Jim Acosta a letter stating that his pass is set to be suspended again once the restraining order expires, Axios reports. CNN is fighting back, and is expected back in court as soon as today.

https://www.axios.com/trump-white-house-media-jim-acosta-cnn-lawsuit-584e82aa-a295-48fc-a40b-3992a96810b9.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic
Click to expand...
>>Sanders said Friday in an interview with her father, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, filling in for Sean Hannity: "We've laid out in a letter to CNN and their team what we think were some of the missteps that their reporter made at the press conference on November 7th."<<

- I guess the WH took the message that they hadn’t stated clear reasons or standards for the suspension so they just up and put in a letter to Acosta what they claimed they were and told him he was still suspended. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Banger said:
The WH loves this even if they lose....it feeds into Trumps anti-press narrative and is a great distraction from the continued dysfunction of the WH, the support of murderous the murderous Saudi Prince who's in bed with Kushner/Trump, firing of Sessions and installation of a Trumpite, Mueller's upcoming indictments, etc..  This is a battle they love even though they'll lose again in court.  
Click to expand...
The WH backed down

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Only technically. This is serious passive aggressive behavior. The pass is good for a/the month, and new rules are instituted such as no followup questions.
Click to expand...
How many examples do we need of what a coward he is?  

Under these new rules I would love to see legitimate news sources collaborate to keep asking him the same question until he answers it. 

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Those seem look good rules.
Click to expand...
Sure post facto rules written after a due process violation tailored to create a conflict in those rules where none existed before to explain why the WH was going to ignore a court order seemed like a good idea.

And on the face of it, no ‘no follow up questions’ is not a good rule. Especially not with this coherence-challenged and truth-evading President.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Sure post facto rules written after a due process violation tailored to create a conflict in those rules where none existed before to explain why the WH was going to ignore a court order seemed like a good idea.

And on the face of it, no ‘no follow up questions’ is not a good rule. Especially not with this coherence-challenged and truth-evading President.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I understand your first paragraph. The rules will govern future press conferences (so they are not ex post facto), they don’t explain anything about a court order, and there was obviously a (widely publicized) conflict that occurred before they took effect. 

I do think limiting journalists to one question at a time (unless the President allows a follow-up) is a good rule. A case could be made for two questions per journalist before passing the mic, but there should be a fixed number instead of letting each journalist go on for as long as he wants, and I think the best fixed number is probably one.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don’t think I understand your first paragraph. The rules will govern future press conferences (so they are not ex post facto), they don’t explain anything about a court order, and there was obviously a (widely publicized) conflict that occurred before they took effect. 

I do think limiting journalists to one question at a time (unless the President allows a follow-up) is a good rule. A case could be made for two questions per journalist before passing the mic, but there should be a fixed number instead of letting each journalist go on for as long as he wants, and I think the best fixed number is probably one.
Click to expand...
Should there be any rules about actually answering the questions or is word salad sufficient?

 
msommer said:
Should there be any rules about actually answering the questions or is word salad sufficient?
Click to expand...
Word salad has to be sufficient.

A press conference is analogous to a deposition rather than a court hearing because there's no judge there to rule on objections or compel answers. If there's a disagreement about whether a question was sufficiently answered, it's not going to be resolved right then and there. Just make your record and move on.

 
You know that Trump is going to continue to allow follow-up questions from Fox, Breitbart, InfoWars, etc. And as soon as someone from CNN or NBC asks a follow-up question, he'll revoke their credentials.

And his supporters will absolutely love him for it.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Word salad has to be sufficient.

A press conference is analogous to a deposition rather than a court hearing because there's no judge there to rule on objections or compel answers. If there's a disagreement about whether a question was sufficiently answered, it's not going to be resolved right then and there. Just make your record and move on.
Click to expand...
And very often an insufficient answer is better for the questioner than any sufficient answer would have been. 

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don’t think I understand your first paragraph. The rules will govern future press conferences (so they are not ex post facto), they don’t explain anything about a court order, and there was obviously a (widely publicized) conflict that occurred before they took effect. 

I do think limiting journalists to one question at a time (unless the President allows a follow-up) is a good rule. A case could be made for two questions per journalist before passing the mic, but there should be a fixed number instead of letting each journalist go on for as long as he wants, and I think the best fixed number is probably one.
Click to expand...
Fwiw I'll note the letter is from Bill Shine, still incredible he has a job much less WH communications director, and much much less that he is writing a letter about adherence to norms and standards.... anyhow...

The Friday ruling guaranteed Acosta use of his press pass to the White House through the end of the month. But over the weekend, the White House wasted no time informing Acosta of a “preliminary decision” to suspend his pass after that period is up. 

...

Over the weekend, Acosta and CNN’s legal team wrote back to Sanders and Shine, calling the letter an “attempt to provide retroactive due process” and requesting the White House “refrain from — yet again — violating the constitutional rights of CNN and Acosta.”

In the letter, Acosta wrote that there were "no so-called 'widely understood practices'" governing press conferences, which the White House jumped on in outlining four rules on Monday.
Click to expand...
(ABC)

At the time I was referring to the fact that the administration lost in court, was ordered to restore the pass, but then said they would suspend him anyway pursuant to the rules which they published in the letter on the 19th. I just took it it was these same supposed rules. But of course Acosta asked for an emergency hearing and the WH backed down and issued this letter.

About the no follow up rule, sure that sounds fine - for presidents who follow the norm of letting the journalist ask 'a question' - but in the instance where Trump and Acosta mixed it up Trump must have cut off Acosta 6-7 times alone on one question, and then evaded the question when he did finally get it in pieces. Trump does this regularly as a matter of practice. He filibusters, interrupts the question, restates it, then gives an answer to a question that wasn't asked and the reporter is constantly left trying to complete his question over the interjections then trying to get an answer to it. The way this is phrased, Trump can simply say what he wants and have the mic taken from the reporter.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
Good call.  I’m out.  For good.  

Later Dodds.  You win.  You’ve demonstrated over and over again you aren’t interested in holding yourself to the same standards you expect the users here to adhere by.  

I can’t continue to participate in this community if you’re going to continue to behave like this.  

Bye.
Click to expand...
Wow - this really was Ferris' last post.  One of the best posters on this board, ran off.

Anyone seen @TobiasFunke recently?  Another of the best and brightest posters on this board, suddenly not posting.

What's going on here?

 
tommyGunZ said:
Wow - this really was Ferris' last post.  One of the best posters on this board, ran off.

Anyone seen @TobiasFunke recently?  Another of the best and brightest posters on this board, suddenly not posting.

What's going on here?
Click to expand...
Tobias was active until last week. Maybe on a timeout?

Bruce shouldn't have quit the board. If you're frustrated with another poster's refusal to engage from a position of good faith, then the best course of action (IMO) is to either expose the hypocrisy or to put the poster on ignore.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Comedian attacked because she voted for Biden, handles it like a champ
2 3
Replies
109
Views
2K
tymarsas
T
massraider
LIV Golf comes to Trump ⛳
2
Replies
61
Views
2K
massraider
massraider
Joe Bryant
Trump And The Vaccine - A New Angle?
3 4 5
Replies
222
Views
4K
lazyike
L

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top