Jim Acosta is to "journalism" what Hitler was to comedy: the grandstanding douchebag making himself into the story through obscene antics, and being wrong in virtually everything he does. When the President said "next" and tried to move on. Acosta decided to "lay hands" on a WhiteHouse intern, and physically prevent her from doing her job - which is handing the microphone to the next person. For that he got his White House credentials suspended, and the left proved their insanity by whining that this was an intrusions on the first amendment or a Free Press. Words mean things, and they don't mean what the left seems to think they do.
Every new event is just the latest in a series of Acosta being a douchbag. There was times like:Acosta : 4 items
- 2019.08.26 Climate Change Dodge - After a Press conference was over, and Trump was walking off stage, Jim Acosta yelled out an irrelevant question about does he believe in Climate Change... and Trump kept walking. Jim then went on Twitter to whine about it... and a bunch of people were doing the "Dear Diary, I got my feelings hurt" spoofs of Jim (the Douche) Acosta.
- 2019.03.19 BestWeekEver - Jim Acosta whined about softball questions from the conservative media, after President Donald Trump didn't call on Jim. Sarah Sanders linked a tweet to #bestweekever where Acosta had a long winded oratory sex with Obama over what in Jim's mind was Obama's best week ever... exposing the hypocrite from CNN.
- 2019.01.28 Acosta Rips Sanders - Appearing on CNN with Brooke Baldwin, CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta couldn’t resist taking a swipe at White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, saying she doesn’t live in the “real world.” That's fine for an OpEd writer, but no real reporter would show that kind of blatant bias.
- 2019.01.11 Acosta Border Wall - Acosta goes to the border to diminish Trump's claim that there's a crisis... and proves that the Wall helps. e.g. he goes to a section where 'The Wall' has been built and notices how good and safe things are. Duh!
- 2018.11.08 - Left of center and defender of Journalists Poynter, wrote a rare editorial admitting that Acosta does not represent real journalism very well in the exchange with the WhiteHouse: by poor phrasing and making himself the center, Acosta makes it easy for the President to play the victim. That was their best defense of Acosta.
- 2018.10.18 - He complained about a wacky conspiracy to turn the music too loud for him to do a field report. Intro music that's too loud? What a shock. His response to people mocking him? Pouty boy professional has a meltdown on twitter, "Fuck you!" 
- 2018.08.02 - Acosta attacks Sean Hannity for being a propagandist, and it backlashes as many in the twitterverse ask what he thinks he is? Hannity is an opinion commentator, not part of the WhiteHouse Press pool -- so even if true, the standards are supposed to be different. 
- 2018.06.12 - Acosta interrupts a North Korean signing ceremony to shout out an insulting questions. Brad Parscale says they should probably revoke his Press pass over the break in decorum. Acosta claims (ignorantly) that "dictatorships take away press credentials. Not democracies" -- both are false. Dictatorships kill assholes like him. And no other Democracy has as big an asshat in their leaderships Press pool. 
- 2017.06.15 - Scalise shooting: Acosta tweeted how he talked to a WhiteHouse official and Trump didn't visit Scalise in the Hospital or go in the room -- all three are lies that he eventually deleted his tweet but refused to correct.
- 2017.02.16 - Very fake news: Acosta gets into an argument over how good his agency and ratings are (both suck), tries to lay landmines about Russian collusion, and doesn't get to a real question. Of course the President is attacking him for past/present lies. But the truth is that CNN and Acosta are guilty of what the President is saying. 
- 2017.01.11 - Trump and Acosta have an exchange after Ocasta/CNN claims they have compromising material on Trump and Trump says they're FakeNews. Oh, and CNN was also wrong in the imagined compromising material they had on the President so was wrong there too. 
- Acosta misquotes the President on Charlotte (again) and implies that the rally was all Nazi's and that Trump defended them -- both are false.
I'm 100% for a free Press. Far more than the average democrat or CNN watcher is. But "free" doesn't mean free from consequences.
- Trump is correct: Acosta is rude. While this isn't a crime, the WhiteHouse is Trump's home. The President can invite them in to ask tough questions -- but if someone is rude, won't follow the rules, and asks stupid grandstanding questions, you don't have to invite them back. That's not about the free Press, that's about whether you'd invite a rude/insulting/drunk back to your home or not. Most do anyways to show their openness, or because they're scared of bad press, but never has there been someone as repeatedly offensive as Acosta: he lowers the bar.
- No one would complain if Acosta was any good: If Acosta asked deep/penetrating/pithy/hard and on topic questions, I'd celebrate him and he wouldn't be in trouble. Most of the press is obnoxiously anti-conservative, and especially anti-Trump, and they're not getting much heat for it. But Acosta and CNN are "special". He asks dragged out, off-topic, self-aggrandizing questions, and won't take "no" or "next" for an answer. It's not about the questions he asks, but that he's disruptive when he doesn't get what he wants, and he doesn't treat the office or his roles with respect (he's unprofessional). He holds every Press conference hostage to his agenda. This is like the difference between a political debate, and far left protestors trying to disrupt any discussion they don't like. CNN forgets Journalism-101: the reporter isn't supposed to be the story. So while it is a tradition to see if a President can answer scripted questions extemporaneously, I'm not sure it's even as useful as the formal interview with questions submitted in advance. The fact that the media has become the opposition party, could make changing the script a little more thinkable and useful.
- The President gets to dodge questions he doesn't like. Period. The people get to judge him as evasive/qualified or not. But that's the voters role, not the Press's. Acosta thinks he is not only entitled to ask questions, but that the President isn't entitled to dodge/ignore them, Acosta thinks he is entitled to force answers he likes, to argue until he gets them, and to ask more than one question and to control the whole press conference until he has been satisfied. And the answer to that is "piss off, you're not welcome in my house", he can go back to ambulance chasing or being a paparazzi, or working for YoungTurks, or whatever. There are 50 seats in the WH Press room, and no one is entitled to a favored spot.
- The left's whines are hypocrisy: This isn't some big attack against Free Press as some are pretending -- like FDR did by creating the FCC to revoke his political enemies licenses, or Lincoln did by throwing them in Prison; which the cry-bullies on the left are OK with. This is about one fake newsman being disruptive. Go be a fake somewhere else. I hear the Comedy Channel is hiring, but even then you have to at least be amusing. If anyone had been 1/10th as caustic and off topic as the appropriately named Acosta to Obama or JFK, the left would have screamed for the guillotine. Not just revoking access, but criminalizing this caustic disrespect to our office. Because they hate Trump, they will forgive any violence or disrespect the #resist protestors do. But the White House Press Briefing room holds 50, and is not the appropriate venue for CNN's #resist and distract efforts. They do that in their "newsroom" most of the time, however the briefing room is for a brief back and forth, not CNN's king of the dipshits to scream from his soapbox. So the left/CNN's double-standard, crocodile tears and hand wringing have no traction for the informed.
- Reporters have been banned before. LBJ blocked The Nation‘s Robert Sherrill under the false flag of being scared for his safety. Bill Clinton blocked Trude Feldman because she rifled threw some papers that weren't hers. Obama made executive pay czar Kenneth Feinberg available for round-robin interviews, “but specified that all members of the pool were welcome except Fox News.” (and much of the left cheered). Obama blocked FoxNews for being polite and respectful of the office but asking questions he didn't like (and had the intelligence agencies spy on them). And so on. So it is rare -- but then a major network having someone as crass and unprofessional as Acosta is damn right unheard of. Even the most radical and fanatic outlets, or pajama wearing bloggers have more professional and less entitled presence.
- Acosta did touch the intern. Then he lied about it. Then they lied about the President claiming he did. Then his network stood behind him in lying about it (as they have a dozen other uncorrected lies). And in the end, I think it's silly that a complete asshole being a mic hog is the only valid reason to revoke his pass. It should just be, "You're not useful, Bye Bye". But there's at least as good an excuse as LBJ had, and they don't need an excuse at all: "I don't like you" is good enough. And I think raising the bar for reporter behavior is a good thing.
- This isn't about Press access or accessibility, Trump is a spotlight whore diva who has been much more accessible than Obama or Hillary were. So blocking one douchebag for being rude, has no impact on the public getting at the truth (other than improving it), or asking penetrating questions. If you're an asshole, you might get treated like an asshole. And if your news organization has professionalism and journalistic standard that would embarrass Alex Jones, then you might get treated accordingly.
Barring Acosta for being rude (which I don't have a problem with), is NOT targeting a News Outlet (which I would have a problem with). It is targeting a caustic person. I'd still let CNN in -- just pick someone who knows how to ask tough questions, or even their normal stupid ones, without picking their nose at the dinner table. Heck, if Acosta/CNN would say, "I apologize for being too aggressive, and I shouldn't have blocked her from getting the mic" and he took an anger management class, I might let HIM back in. But without contrition, there's no forgiveness.
So as long as there are rules for decorum/procedure that are being applied equally/fairly to all sides (unlike Obama did), then I don't generally have problems with the rules of the office, unless they are designed to suppress questions/getting to the truth.
Someday I'll find a rational Democrat that can argue the other side of this. But so far, I've only found one that argue fallacies like:
- But Trump lies -- um, all politicians/administrations lie (twist/spin). Trump fundamentally exaggerates truths, Obama and other just flat out contradicted them -- but "your side is worse" doesn't matter. What matters is what are the JOURNALISTS standards. We know politicians spin. But a News Organization that spins is no longer news, but a political pundit, or opposition party, shortened as FakeNews: like CNN.
- Orange Man is Bad -- almost all arguments from the left devolve into this mindless NPC retarded stuff. They detest Trump, and would burn down any house he visited, just because they hate him that much. But this isn't about Trump, this is about standards and the office. I'm not arguing whether anyone can hate Trump or not: tell it to your therapist or someone who cares. I'm only arguing whether the Press should be held to account for breaking journalistic standards or not.
- Doctored video Conspiracy - there's some theory that the video the WhiteHouse released may have sped up parts of the video to show that Acosta's blocking of the intern was false and more "Karate Chop" like than it was. Whatever, they miss the point. Even if we assume they're right and that the WhiteHouse doctored the video and lied (and it appears they just used a video that someone else created) -- that's politics, and it does nothing to change that he shouldn't have been blocking her from handing the mic over at all -- the speed was irrelevant to the cut and zooms to show what happened. So it's like saying that when you raped a girl, if you look in the background, you can see she had a stolen TV: that's not a defense, it's a distraction. 
- Assault - There was delusional crack-smokers on the View, claiming that the intern violated and assaulted poor Acosta by trying to yank the mic away from him. Double face palm with an eye-roll for that one. The point is that's what they normally do to hand mics around when questions are done. That Acosta refused to be done was the problem.