Bitcoin Forum

Imagine ignoring the President telling you, “That’s enough” and forcefully denying a young woman White House staff member trying to do her job. Then complaining about it all over the media when you’re not allowed back.

https://i.redd.it/mdhg79vqkyw11.gif

From the link... her job isn't violently attempting to grab the mic.

8)

So much for freedom of the press.  ::)

I guess if the press asks you questions you don't like, you just silence them. Seems like a fair and free democracy.

I know all you leftists think illegally hijacking some one else's event, preventing others from speaking is free speech, but it is not. This is a White House press conference. No one has a RIGHT to be there. They are all invited, and as such must follow the laws, such as NO PHYSICALLY ASSAULTING THE STAFF for doing their job. Which is exactly what he did. He is lucky he didn't have charges filed as well.

The press has their own mics. And anybody can get one.

8)

Everybody in that room was asking questions Trump didn't like, but he answered them.

Jim Accoster thinks the press room is actually "The Jim Acosta Show."

https://i.imgur.com/uCwPwdI.gifv

 ::)

PRO TIP: Putting your hands or any part of your body in contact with another person without their permission is in fact legally assault. Pushing, shoving, punching, or even brushing some one one's arms aside multiple times while they are in the process of recovering property that she is in legal charge of, and has every right to retrieve, is in fact assault.

I saw that video over 10 times, all he did was stop her from grabbing the mic. If that's considered assault, then our justice system is fucked more than it already is.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/assault

Yeah isn't it a shame you can't just use physical force whenever you like to get what you want when you have no legal right to it? I mean as long as you don't injure anyone it is ok right? No.

Now prosecuting this, yes I agree would be excessive, however that doesn't change the fact that he very literally committed an act of assault.

Technically, she touched him first if you watch the video. She assaulted him!

https://i.imgur.com/Oya1a1V.jpg

God damn, violent white house staffer! Assaulting a journalist! Dude was just defending himself from an onslaught of the intern!

Looks like the media is siding with Acosta. Of course, they almost have to, to retain some semblance of respect. The pictures absolutely show Acosta was only protecting himself from liberal violence - https://www.prisonplanet.com/media-sides-with-acosta-after-physical-confrontation-with-female-white-house-staffer.html?fbclid=IwAR1PGJUet5qKibfrfPY-hZPz8fdTaoxI3FIA5bfdMgekX-k-QV5NfvWiltQ.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrasULFXQAAPGH6?format=jpg&name=small

8)

Lets break it down for the slower bluer folks here...



1. Does he have a RIGHT to be present at this press conference?

-No.



2. Did he have an opportunity to ask a question?

-Yes. Nothing entitles him to have more questions answered immediately.



3. Was the microphone his property?

-No. The microphone did not belong to him.



4. Does the custodian of property have the right to deprive that property from some one with no rights to it?

-Yes.


5. What is the legal and technical definition of using force in an attempt to prevent some one from doing some thing they are legally entitled to do?

-Assault.


6. Should he be prosecuted for assault?

-No, this is only some thing retards on the left say in order to build the most extremist narrative possible here in order to distract from the fact that he shouldn't have behaved that way regardless of the law.


7. Are people really that upset about what Jim Acosta did?

-Most people wouldn't stop to piss on Jim Acosta if he was on fire. No one cares about him except when he makes himself a nuisance. People are pissed because this is a BLATANT AND OPEN demonstration of the double standards the media has for the left vs the right. If the roles were reversed here and it was a conservative reporter and a liberal staffer they would be LOSING THEIR FUCKING MINDS and it would be on the 24 hour media loop for months.


8. Any of you remember this?

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHGfyrvRK0Y



In short, this is why the left has no more credibility. At least on the right, you can expect people to do things conservatives do. The left has no substance, is unpredictable, extremist, and does not follow any rules, even the ones they make.

Really disappointed I haven’t seen any Bruce Lee or Street Fighter edits of this video yet.

Here's the best I can do for you.

https://i.imgflip.com/2m6fxf.jpg

I know, right? So ridiculous. Everyone knows that in the Trump White House you are only allowed to grab women by the pussy.

That is a wonderful whataboutism you have there. I don't know if anyone has taught you but, words are different than actions, and women throwing themselves at you because you are rich is different than assault. You keep sticking with those talking points though, they are clearly working for you.

+1
Jim had been told that he was to sit down, as Trump was done with his questions. I don't understand how people are going to be able to support someone who's openly not listening to the rules of the WH press conference.

Even after this, he got up and started talking while someone from NBC was asking questions to Trump -- I don't get it folks.

It's as simple as this. If Acosta was required by policy to hand over the mic, and he didn't, he was wrong. But if he was assaulted, he was in the right for protecting himself.

Even if he was wrong about handing over the mic, the violence of the woman was wrong.

Even if Acosta was fired for his actions, his act of self protection is part of universal law, and especially in the U.S.

Wanna play politics? Go ahead. But Acosta was right in protecting himself.

If Acosta was wrong in not handing over the mic, the woman was wrong in trying to take it from him by force.

There is appropriate policy in place for both Acosta and the woman... a way to handle the situation peacefully.

This whole thing is a political tug of war.

8)

This is false equivalency horse shit people always trot out when shit like this happens, allowing this double standard to continue.

Taking some thing from some one's hand is not force (unless of course you have no rights to said property). Even if it was, a reasonable amount of force used to obtain your own property from some one with no rights to it is not a crime.

Also it should be noted the act began with Accostas resistance to the legal act of taking the microphone back, not the other way around. The first to initiate illegal force is quite relevant to any case of assault.

I'm a little surprised at you. It seems you would rather start a brawl than do things through peaceful, due process channels.

If Acosta started it and was in the wrong, he would have been correct through proper channels, just as he was. The idea that he can't protect himself from violence is simply absurd.

Did you really want to see a tug-of-war over the mic?

8)

Forcefully lol ? She's the one putting her hands on him.
He even apologizes to her !

Meh, it was obvious that Jim was trying to bait the president(and succeeding to some extent.) There were other reporters waiting to ask questions too. He should have just handed over the mic when prompted to, with no resistance. There is always another day to get your f**ing "scoop."

Can you highlight an example of a previous president just demanding a reporter to be silent?

I can find things of places with dictatorships (turkey) silencing journalist, but nothing of America with a quick Google query.

I've seen people escorted out, but I haven't really seen presidents just "SHUT UP PERSON! STOP TALKING" from the USA.

     Well, unfortunately the USA now has a petulant brat for a president, and ~40% or so give it their stamp of approval. At least the president didn't have the secret service tackle the guy to the ground and beat him up. After all, the intern the president had remove the microphone was really petite. It wasn't like a typical bar bouncing situation. If Jim feels that his 1st amendment rights have been infringed, then he should proceed to Federal court, ASAP, and settle this civilly. (If he hasn't already done so.)
 

Aha, if the secret service tackled him to the ground for refusing to give up a mic, we'd probably see an uproar from the left. Hell, the media already sides with Jim just because his speech was infridged, and that's literally the only thing protecting their jobs.

It's kinda sad to see the state of journalism in the United States;

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

Ranked 45 in freedom for "america, land of the free^*"


_{* Only if you're rich.}

Yet, many lefties cheer when the social media moguls censor someone from the right. (ie nutjob Alex Jones) Granted, private corporations are not obligated to grant free speech. However, aren't the lefties being somewhat hypocritical? What ever happened to "When they go low, we go high?" Or is Michelle Obama's strategy too complicit for us lefties now?

Government vs private industry.

Two entirely different things man.

If Alex Jones pay for his own platform, I don't give a shit what shit he spews from his corner. I won't do business with his entity either, based on just his views. If I remember right, Alex Jones violated contracts with Google and therefore lost privileged access. If I remember correctly, the violation was "harassment". Now, if you want to start setting internet rules, good luck dude.

I don't like government silencing media. That's dystopian.

I am not aware of the government issuing an injunction or indictment on CNN or any other news outlet. Since my partner is a news addict, I can still hear them shouting quite loudly 24/7; especially when they put together a panel of 12 lefties and one righty to issue their opinion. If the Trump administration is truly making a concerted effort to silence the media, they are failing miserably.  :D

"THAT'S A STUPID QUESTION?"

ha, what a presidential response to a question.  ::)

This thread exists, the right wing making up fud happens. ;)

In this case, totally justified.

But Acosta didn't karate chop the girl's arm.

I definitely wouldn't give his press privileges back.

What's really funny is the video's doctored to make Jim Acosta look worse. If you want the video that I posted, this whole thread is a nothing burger.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a24937408/kellyanne-conway-jim-acosta-video-doctored/

Oh please do source this "doctored" video so we can do a side by side comparison. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. Source it.

If you read the article; you'd see the source. Pretty sure you can compare the gif I linked on the first page to OP's post.

Overall, this is a false flag right wing operation to target the media.

A false flag? What? Do you even know what the words you use mean?

http://www.yourdictionary.com/false-flag

"false-flag
Noun

(plural false flags)

    (nautical) A ruse, in the days of sail, in which an attacking ship would fly the colours of its enemy until close enough to open fire.
    (espionage, military) A diversionary or propaganda tactic of deceiving an adversary into thinking that an operation was carried out by another party."

So your theory is Jim Acosta is an undercover Republican operative sent to discredit CNN and the Democrat party? Mmmmmk.


Why don't you make it absolutely clear and source the exact image you claim is doctored.

>the deception creates the appearance of a particular party, group, or nation being responsible for some activity, disguising the actual source of responsibility.

We're talking about the guy committing "violence" rather than presidential silencing of press. It's a pretty good disguise.

The best part is the "violence" was doctored footage, which "was sped up, but not doctored" according to the whitehouse.

Speeding up the video "is" changing the footage.

Even if what you are claiming were true, this still doesn't make it a false flag. Learn how to use words, then debate. Also, once again, source the image you are claiming is doctored. Not an article the image might be in, the URL to the image itself.

Uhhh, okay buddy.

One: It's not my claim, it's the claim of the whitehouse spokesperson that the footage was "sped up".

Two: My usage of "false flag" is perfectly fine in this sense. The whole "karate chop" distracts from the fact the president told an individual member of the press to "shut up". If we had a "presidential" president, they'd have calmly let the reporter talk, say "no comment" or rebuke the statement factually.

Instead we had a whining baby cry that they shouldn't have the right to speak. The baby didn't like what he heard to he ended up taking away their right to speak to him.

Again, we're not even talking about the president silencing a reporter; which was the whole point of the whitehouse speeding up the footage is to make Jim Acosta seem like the "violent bad guy" rather than the "silenced journalist".

It's a pretty sad state of affairs of easy the "right" forgets that "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" is something the government CANNOT infringe upon.

'BUT MAH 3RD PARTY PROVIDERS MUTED MY CHAN' -- guess what, that's not a government entity bucko.

I would have told him "Shut the Fuck Up, You Idiot!" or maybe "Suck some CNN cock." No, ignore that last one that's you that do that....

"False flag" is incorrect.

As for speeding up the video, I do that all the time, no big deal. Because the amount of content is so low, why not.

Stop whining.

I mean, if you think governments should censor their citizens you should move to China or Russia. That's not how the United States operates.

Really?

Even those countries use Roberts Rules of Order for meetings and such, with a few exceptions.

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

Russa - 148

China - 176

Thanks to our dumbass president, we dropped a bunch of ranks.


So much for "freedom of press" in the land of the free.

Ah, changing the subject yet again?

The issue is how to handle a complete asshole in the crowd that's hogging the other reporters' time.

You mean Trump right ?

No, I mean the reporter.

But it doesn't bother me if you want to assign the term to Trump. He's certainly got an odd personality and such; we all recognize that.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/cnn-files-lawsuit-against-trump-administration-over-jim-acosta-s-n935621

I wonder how a similar outburst would have been handled at the CNN Board of Directors meeting.

(not actually, actually you and I know full well how)

lol...

https://cnnpressroom.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/2-complaint.pdf

Let's see how the courts rule on this.


Seems about right.


Oh, he literally explained his playbook... alright then.



Oh, nice, precedent!

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/416630-fox-news-backs-cnns-lawsuit-against-trump-administration

Ahaha, even Fox news is supporting CNN against Trump.

xD

Hey look! More distraction from Democrat crimes and their supporters by creating yet another freak show. I changed my mind, that house staffer should file charges for assault now.

Ya think all these "distractions" would eventually stop. Maybe if Trump would take this piece of advice, they would:

https://i.imgur.com/OND2Arp.gif

  You are right, Jim Accosta shouldn't have broke the law assaulting that women.

About time, Jim has crossed the line many many times, there are dozens of videos of him yelling questions when he shouldn't.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/media/cnn-trump-lawsuit-hearing/index.html


Ahaha.


>Judge orders White House to return Jim Acosta's press pass


I guess that Trump's in the wrong here. Who'd thunk?  ::)



Oh, violating constitutional amendments; that's a paddling.


Oh, fake news from the whitehouse propagated straight to bitcointalk. Ahahaha.




The whole executive administration is a shitshow.

Yes, I am sure CNN has zero incentive to cover up for their retarded employees.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-orders-white-house-returns-press-pass-to-cnns-jim-acosta

And? Who the fuck said Fox had any credibility either? Not me. That lawsuit is going to be thrown out, it has no standing. ZERO.

The left likes to make up its own rules as it goes along... how long do you think the rest of the country is going to tolerate that before they start making their own rules for you personally? You children have no idea what you are playing with for some petty narcissistic obsession. Once the rule of law is gone from all your games you will have about as many rights as a hunted animal. I hope it was worth it.

So now Fox has "incentive to cover up for [CNN's] retarded employees"?

It's an actual Trump-appointed judge in an actual courtroom saying that Acosta should get his pass back and the case is going forward. Pretty much the opposite of "thrown out".

Not sure about the rest of your rant - should I get off your lawn or not?

Maybe take a few minutes and research how few companies own all these media outlets you believe are opposed to each other. They don't serve the public. They serve their owners.

His pass was temporarily reinstated, not under any first amendment right to be there, but because the judge ruled he should have been given due process. So in short, they are going to have some kind of hearing, or who the fuck knows what, demonstrate he committed an act of assault, then revoke it again.

Regarding my "rant" you do whatever the fuck you like, just know you are going to eventually going to have to personally pay for the results of subverting the rule of law. I hope "winning"  was worth it.

Hopefully this leads to new rules about media conduct that will result in avoiding this type of disruption and disrespect to the office in the future.

Changed the title to get the convo back to the topic instead of stupid rants.

That's the thing most people don't understand about how flimsy this suit was. The White House is not an official government entity. It is literally The President's home. He has no requirement to admit anyone there, that is why the 1st amendment argument was ruled invalid. They did however say he had a 5th amendment protection for due process. I am looking forward to him in court trying to weasel out of explaining how he legally committed an act of assault.

The problem was that he was disruptive, not that he was asking hard or mean questions. He was literally yelling stupid shit when there weren't even questions during the Kim jong un meeting and more.

https://i.imgur.com/kUItQef.jpg

Could you imagine? OP never did edit his title.

Thinking about this more, I think Jim Acosta may have just walked into a trap. Think about it. The court says he is entitled to due process. That means a court hearing. What happens in court? You have to testify under penalty of perjury. He is going to have to pick between felony perjury to lie to cover for his behavior which is clearly on video, or he will have to essentially admit to assaulting her. Either way he isn't getting his press pass back for long.

Why would I?

Well duh, because he told you to of course!

CNN's Acosta back at White House after judge's ruling (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/251358-2018-11-16-cnns-acosta-back-at-white-house-after-judges-ruling.htm)




This should be fun. Look at who the judge is. But it isn't over with an ongoing lawsuit.


8)

I just found out last night, they apparently never even revoked Acostas "soft pass" which is what admits him to the press areas. They revoked his "hard pass" which essentially allows him to walk The White House grounds. Effectively this is just Accosta throwing a shitfit over nothing. He never even had his access as a reporter revoked.

This is simple to solve. Simply freeze the idiot in liquid nitrogen and put him on a cart. Then roll him in and out.

He will be quiet and make trouble no more.