Print 
PDF
Fox News announced yesterday that they will support CNN's lawsuit against the White House over the temporary suspension of CNN's Jim Acosta "hard pass" press credentials.
Fox issued a statement explaining their action.
Be informed.
Fox News issued this statement:
FOX News supports CNN in its legal effort to regain its White House reporter’s press credential. We intend to file an amicus brief with the U.S. District Court. Secret Service passes for working White House journalists should never be weaponized. While we don’t condone the growing antagonistic tone by both the President and the press at recent media avails, we do support a free press, access and open exchanges for the American people.
CNN then thanked Fox News for backing its lawsuit.
NBC then announced that they, along with the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, will also be supporting CNN in the suit.
Later in the day, yesterday, NBC tweeted again,
"Just In: Numerous news outlets, including NBC News, issue joint statement saying they will file briefs to support CNN's and Jim Acosta's lawsuit against the Trump administration over its decision to revoke Acosta's press pass."
All this, as most of us know, is over Acosta taking over the press conference, interrupting and confronting the president, not over policy matters, but over opinions---his vs the president's opinions.
Finally, President Trump, wanting to give other reporters a chance to speak, told Acosta he was done talking.
He continued---finally, a young woman on the White House staff came to take the mic from Acosta and give it to someone else, Acosta refused and brushed her aside and continued shouting at the president.
Press Secretary Sarah Huckebee Sanders says Acosta is always grandstanding in the press conferences.
She's right, he is. Every time the man speaks it's about himself, not the issues that are generally brought forward by the press.
Can CNN win this lawsuit?
Ken Klukowski is a legal expert and has written for Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council and Breitbart News. He says,
"President Trump will win the lawsuit...because the Constitution does not allow a federal court to issue this kind of order to the White House and because the First Amendment does not protect what Acosta did."
This will be much in the news in coming days because the press has a personal vested interest in that they have joined CNN against the White House.
I encourage you to read Klukowski's complete article. These are some of the points he is making:
- The lawsuit hinges on a 1977 precedent from a US Court of Appeals at a time when the court was moderately liberal. Many decisions came from the Supreme Court at that time, including creating a constitutional right to abortion in Roe v Wade, to misrepresenting the Establishment Clause into a wrecking ball against people of faith in "Lemon v Kurtzman.
- Those days are over, as America today has what may be the most conservative Supreme Court since 1934. And there is no Supreme Court precedent on point here, so no precedents need to be overruled to get this right.
- CNN and Acosta are asking a federal judge to give the president orders concerning whom he must allow into his home---much like it would be for the president to give the Supreme Court orders as to whom they should allow into their courtroom. Separation of co-equal powers.
- And Klukowski says Judge Kelly of the US District Court of Columbia, who will hear this case, should be free to dismiss this case on political-question grounds. If not, then after an appeal to the DC Circuit, the Supreme Court should dismiss this case under the doctrine. If the court allows the suit against the President to proceed, President Trump and the White House will win on the merits.
The Poynter Institute, a journalism think tank, generally agrees with Klukowski. They say Acosta's behavior "was less about asking questions and more about making statements. In doing so, the CNN White House reporter gave President Trump room to critique Acosta's professionalism."
Poynter says, "CNN's Jim Acosta's actions to Trump don't represent the best of journalism."
They conclude that reporters should "report the news, not become the news."
Great concept.
Some personal thoughts.
Many of you who read this Faith and Freedom Daily column watch Fox News. So do I---selectively. There are certain personalities on Fox that I don't give the time of day.
Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and several others are consistently conservative in their views. That's why they are the highest rated shows on Fox---and cable television. That's why I watch them fairly regularly---much like you.
If I want the "moderate" or far Left views, I watch the far Left news organizations---which includes most of them.
I also watch One American News (OAN). They are pretty consistently conservative, but not nearly as slick as Fox. Their graphics, etc. are considerably inferior, but their content---based on what I've seen---is fairly consistently conservative. OAN is channel 347 on Direct TV. I'm not sure about other delivery systems.
In fairness, I suspect this was a difficult decision for Fox. At least I hope it was. If they had not joined the chorus, they would have become the news organization that "didn't stand for the First Amendment"---or whatever, even though as stated, Acosta and CNN will likely not win this battle because it isn't about the First Amendment or Jim Acosta's "Rights" to enter the White House and do and say what he wants, as he wants.
If you read this column, as you are at the moment, you are aware that we try to make it clear that all of us must be "informed," "discerning," and "vigilant."
Think.
Biblical teaching calls us to "be vigilant" And "discerning."
Our Founding Fathers were "vigilant" and told us we'd better be too.
Greg Gutfield, a Fox personality has written, "Imagine Earth as a crime-ridden town, and there is one safe house. How do you keep that safe house, America, always safe? It's called vigilance."
Great advice.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Prayerful.