Acosta's white house pass removed ..

[Cow Poke]

I think what liberals don't understand about Trump is that he can't be shamed or pushed around. He just fights back harder.

They are used to people in power backing down and apologizing when they are accused of something offensive. Like Megyn Kelly did, or John Schnatter of Papa John's did, or any other celebrity when called on saying something wrong. They are accused of being racist or sexist and they apologize publicly and back down. Even when they are innocent. Not Trump. He will punch back, double down and spit on them. And they don't know how to handle that. But it's easy: don't poke the bear.

In other words, they're a bunch of bullies, but they can't seem to out-bully Trump.

[Jedidiah]

It's the job of the press to be adversarial to those in power in a democracy. That's part of what separates a democracy from a dictatorship.

The job of the pres should be to report without bias in any direction. Their job should not be to be adversarial or supportive.

[Cow Poke]

The job of the pres should be to report without bias in any direction. Their job should not be to be adversarial or supportive.

Just the facts, ma'am. There should be a clear difference between the editorials, the opinion page, and the news.

[oxmixmudd]

The job of the pres should be to report without bias in any direction. Their job should not be to be adversarial or supportive.

You are way overgeneralizing. If there is something going on that the president is trying to hide then the press can expose it. Asking questions that challenge actions is part of that process. It is their job to push so that the leaders know they have to have a reason for what they are doing. The press doesn't just sit back and write what the leaders say.

Jim

[Jedidiah]

You are way overgeneralizing. If there is something going on that the president is trying to hide then the press can expose it. Asking questions that challenge actions is part of that process. It is their job to push so that the leaders know they have to have a reason for what they are doing. The press doesn't just sit back and write what the leaders say.

Jim

That does not come close to anything I said. There is a clear difference between asking the hard questions, and being biased.

[oxmixmudd]

That does not come close to anything I said. There is a clear difference between asking the hard questions, and being biased.

Exactly, yet you said:

Source: Jedidiah

The job of the pres[s] should be to report without bias in any direction. Their job should not be to be adversarial or supportive

© Copyright Original Source

The implication is that bias and being adversarial are related. i.e. not being biased == not being adversarial: The opposite of what you just said above.

These are two separate things. I agree fully with the first, and was not addressing the first element of your statement. But to be adversarial does not imply bias. Nor does being supportive.

For example, to report the facts, sometimes they must be adversarial in order to get the facts. That is, the leader is doing X that looks bad, is bad, is fishy, seems contrary to the nation's best interests etc, and the question that needs be to asked is why they are doing X when it seems to present problem Y, and the leader will view that as being adversarial, and if they don't want to be asked why, it will in fact BE adversarial (they are going against the leaders wishes or perhaps making them look bad or perhaps bring to light why, in fact what they are doing is a bad thing).

That is a situation where their job IS to be adversarial. Adversarial is not a synonym of bias. And their job IS to be adversarial when it is required to get at the truth.

Jim

[RumTumTugger]

All to ask an idiotic question.

actually all to be able to argue with Trump more.

[Jedidiah]

Exactly, yet you said:

Source: Jedidiah

The job of the pres[s] should be to report without bias in any direction. Their job should not be to be adversarial or supportive

© Copyright Original Source

The implication is that bias and being adversarial are related. i.e. not being biased == not being adversarial: The opposite of what you just said above.

These are two separate things. I agree fully with the first, and was not addressing the first element of your statement. But to be adversarial does not imply bias. Nor does being supportive.

For example, to report the facts, sometimes they must be adversarial in order to get the facts. That is, the leader is doing X that looks bad, is bad, is fishy, seems contrary to the nation's best interests etc, and the question that needs be to asked is why they are doing X when it seems to present problem Y, and the leader will view that as being adversarial, and if they don't want to be asked why, it will in fact BE adversarial (they are going against the leaders wishes or perhaps making them look bad or perhaps bring to light why, in fact what they are doing is a bad thing).

That is a situation where their job IS to be adversarial. Adversarial is not a synonym of bias. And their job IS to be adversarial when it is required to get at the truth.

Jim

I did explain what I meant. I am not disagreeing with you necessarily. I am not a Trump supporter, but I would like to see a less adversarial approach and a less biased one. This does not in itself eliminate the "hard questions." Just a return to what I recall was a gentler approach from decade past.

[lilpixieofterror]

No. He should not. First, would he have known why the young lady was trying to take the mike? Second, how often do reporters push for more answers even when the moderator is trying to move on and it is tolerated? Third, the reason given for the removal was a lie. He did not touch the intern inaporopriately. The only contact was initiated by her and she was trying to forcefully remove the mike from his hand.

Jim

Funny, I thought liberals have said for years that men shouldn’t use physical force against a women.

[NorrinRadd]

For that word it depends on context. If it refers to a donkey, allowed, to someone's rear end, it is not.

So if we say someone has his head up his jackass...

[Tassman]

I don't think he assaulted her or even "put his hands on her" - He was just determined to keep the microphone and shoved her hand away when she reached for it. It seemed to be a reflex reaction.

That said, he was being rude and obnoxious to the President and to the intern and Trump had every right to kick him out and take away his press pass.

Acosta was attempting to follow-through with a question Trump clearly did not want to answer. This is what good reporters do, be persistent. It’s a press conference, not a polite cocktail party.

[rogue06]

Funny, I thought liberals have said for years that men shouldn’t use physical force against a women.

She was obviously "asking for it."

[Mountain Man]

Acosta was attempting to follow-through with a question Trump clearly did not want to answer. This is what good reporters do, be persistent.

Be persistent and aggressively block a young female intern from doing her job by roughly knocking her hand away, right?

It's funny how you guys want to crucify Trump over mere words but give Jim Accost-her a pass for his inappropriate actions.

[Sparko]

Do any of you remember when Lewandowski was charged with battery for merely grabbing the arm of a reporter in order to move her out of the way? The liberals couldn't shut up about it.

Jim Acosta even reported on it himself at the time:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/0...acosta-dnt.cnn

[oxmixmudd]

Funny, I thought liberals have said for years that men shouldn’t use physical force against a women.

If you call what he did 'using physical force against a women' then I would have to ask just how many mattresses does it take for you to get a good nights sleep pix? That whole line is just ridiculous, from Sanders 'inappropriate touching' down to the discussion here. Is there no depth to which you will not stoop to support 'your guy in the white house'?


Jim