(National Sentinel)Â Misguided:Â PretendÂ CNN journalist and whiner-in-chief Jim Acosta and his network once again drew the ire of the Trump administration on Wednesday as he responded to a lawsuit they filed because the White House jerked a jerk’s press pass.
After Acosta acted like a nimrod once too often last week when he refused to yield a microphone at the president’s urging while putting his hands on the intern trying to take it, he was banned from the White House, though otherÂ CNN correspondents still have access.
So naturally, rather than call the White House and try to smooth things over,Â CNN decided on a course of action that could eventually findÂ all the network’s correspondents out on the street: They went to court, making bizarre — and factually untrue — arguments to boot.
Nevertheless, the White House noted thatÂ CNN isn’t harmed by having Acosta cover the White House from outside the front gates, considering the network hasÂ 50 other journalists covering the White HouseÂ from inside the gates.
â€œNo journalist has a First Amendment right to enter theÂ White House,â€ the Trump administration is arguing.
â€œThe president is generally free to open theÂ White HouseÂ doors to political allies, in the hopes of furthering a particular agenda, and he is equally free to invite in only political foes, in the hopes of convincing them of his position,” White House lawyers argued.
“The First Amendment simply does not regulate these decisions. And the First Amendment does not impose stricter requirements when journalists, as a subset of the public, are granted or denied access to theÂ White House.â€
CNN, in its ridiculous lawsuit, is also arguing that Acosta’s Fifth Amendment rights to due process were violated. But again, the idea that somehow the Constitution guarantees a jerk pretending to be a journalist the ‘right’ to harass and harangue a president he doesn’t like is folly.
Not that there isn’t some Left-wing judicial activist federal judge the network will find who will say otherwise.
Justice Department attorneys said maybe –Â maybe — Acosta’s due process argument might hold water. But the rest of the argument, that somehowÂ CNN and the public’s interest is ‘harmed’ by his press pass revocation, is a s-t-r-e-t-c-h.
â€œSaid differently, plaintiffs have not established that the public interest is uniquely harmed byÂ Mr. Acostaâ€™s absence, in light of the other tenacious reporters still on theÂ White HouseÂ beat,â€ the department said.
And some could argue that the public’s interest isÂ better served without Acosta accosting POTUS.
Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter â€”Â Click here!