CNN's Jim Acosta says he works 'on behalf of the American people,' network doesn't 'spin' coverage

Kyle

Imagine No Democrats
PREMO Member
Promoting his new book "The Enemy of the People: A Dangerous Time to Tell the Truth in America" on "CNN Tonight," Acosta explained that he "wanted to write something to the American people, 'You know what folks, we've got to think deeply about this... Do we want to hand off to the next generation a country where it's okay for the president of the United States to refer to journalists or any segement of the American population as the 'enemy of the people.'"




Yeah... We all believe you Abilio!


:killingme
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Do we want to hand off to the next generation a country where it's okay for the president of the United States to refer to journalists or any segment of the American population as the 'enemy of the people.'"
I think the president of the United States can say whatever he/she wants. It's up to us to decide via the vote whether we keep that person in office.

Why does Acosta not get this?

Does Mr. Acosta remember, "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back." Basically telling the American people, as president, that Republicans should be treated as second-class citizens? Or, even, "I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking", where he basically said Republicans don't have the right to discuss Mr. Obama's political desires?

Or, how about when Mr. Obama disparaged all white folks? "That’s just how white folks will do you. … It was as if whites didn’t know that they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn." Is THAT "presidential" and acceptable speech, Mr. Acosta?

The fact is, we elected the racist Obama, and thus deserved what we got from him. Obama had every right in the world to talk those ways, disparaging an entire race of human citizens, and attacking political opponents by saying society should not allow them to speak. What came of that? Well, violence against all conservatives or those labelled as conservatives, directly attributable to the previous president. And, what will come of Mr. Trump? If it is violence against journalists (it hasn't been, yet, thank God), then Trump's rhetoric will be directly a part of the driver for that. But, so will Mr. Obama's rhetoric and actions, such as when he violated many journalists' rights through "surveillance" (spying, by another word) and when he (attempted to, and failed to) ban an entire network from the White House because he didn't like their brand of "journalism".

Save me the faux/selective outrage, Mr. Acosta. It's insulting to any informed person's intelligence (this, of course, leaves out people like Tranny and MidnightSpanker).
 

transporter

Active Member
I think the president of the United States can say whatever he/she wants. It's up to us to decide via the vote whether we keep that person in office.

Why does Acosta not get this?

Does Mr. Acosta remember, "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back." Basically telling the American people, as president, that Republicans should be treated as second-class citizens? Or, even, "I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking", where he basically said Republicans don't have the right to discuss Mr. Obama's political desires?

Or, how about when Mr. Obama disparaged all white folks? "That’s just how white folks will do you. … It was as if whites didn’t know that they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn." Is THAT "presidential" and acceptable speech, Mr. Acosta?

The fact is, we elected the racist Obama, and thus deserved what we got from him. Obama had every right in the world to talk those ways, disparaging an entire race of human citizens, and attacking political opponents by saying society should not allow them to speak. What came of that? Well, violence against all conservatives or those labelled as conservatives, directly attributable to the previous president. And, what will come of Mr. Trump? If it is violence against journalists (it hasn't been, yet, thank God), then Trump's rhetoric will be directly a part of the driver for that. But, so will Mr. Obama's rhetoric and actions, such as when he violated many journalists' rights through "surveillance" (spying, by another word) and when he (attempted to, and failed to) ban an entire network from the White House because he didn't like their brand of "journalism".

Save me the faux/selective outrage, Mr. Acosta. It's insulting to any informed person's intelligence (this, of course, leaves out people like Tranny and MidnightSpanker).
Huh...so why did you make this a racial issue? What in comrade GURPS' post spoke to race?

I heard Acosta interviewed yesterday morning. He did not speak to race. He also didn't mention Obama....now why would that be...because his book is about Trump. Just to point out what should be stunningly obvious: Obama isn't President anymore, Trump is. Obama's actions or lack thereof, do not excuse Trump for anything he does or doesn't do. (Why you ignorati types keep making this juvenile argument is beyond me). Aren't you supposed to be a conservative? Isn't one of the core belies of a conservative that individuals are responsible for their own actions? Or is this just another one of those core Rebulican tenants, like free trade, that have died at the feet of the inept, incompetent and unfit Donald Trump?

He spoke about Donald Trump's lies. As a recent example of Trump's lack of fitness for office, he spoke of Donald Trump's disparaging comments about other US citizens while on foreign soil, seated in front of the graves of US servicemen who dies on June 6, 1944.

You really should get your head out of you ass and maybe go look up the definition of the word "informed". You don't seem to understand the meaning....but that should not come as a surprise.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
You really should get your head out of you ass and maybe go look up the definition of the word "informed". You don't seem to understand the meaning....but that should not come as a surprise.


Anyone or Anything that does not conform to YOUR World View is Either Ignorant, Uneducated or Selfish ..... or a Russian Bot or a Russian From Minsk


Every post you make is against anyone or any group that doesn't conform to your propagandist viewpoints.


:lmao:
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Huh...so why did you make this a racial issue? What in comrade GURPS' post spoke to race?

I heard Acosta interviewed yesterday morning. He did not speak to race. He also didn't mention Obama....now why would that be...because his book is about Trump. Just to point out what should be stunningly obvious: Obama isn't President anymore, Trump is. Obama's actions or lack thereof, do not excuse Trump for anything he does or doesn't do. (Why you ignorati types keep making this juvenile argument is beyond me). Aren't you supposed to be a conservative? Isn't one of the core belies of a conservative that individuals are responsible for their own actions? Or is this just another one of those core Rebulican tenants, like free trade, that have died at the feet of the inept, incompetent and unfit Donald Trump?

He spoke about Donald Trump's lies. As a recent example of Trump's lack of fitness for office, he spoke of Donald Trump's disparaging comments about other US citizens while on foreign soil, seated in front of the graves of US servicemen who dies on June 6, 1944.

You really should get your head out of you ass and maybe go look up the definition of the word "informed". You don't seem to understand the meaning....but that should not come as a surprise.
I brought up race because Acosta was speaking to how a president was attacking a segment of American society - just like the most recent president before Trump attacked a segment of society - once with race, once with political party. He attacked many others many other times, but I was pointing out that Acosta never seemed to take such a stance against that president; he waited until a president attacked journalists. But, then I pointed out that the most recent president did that, too - as have the majority of presidents before Obama. But, Acosta waited until a president attacked him and his network and his ideology specifically. Thus, Acosta's whole point is, well, meaningless.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Anyone or Anything that does not conform to YOUR World View is Either Ignorant, Uneducated or Selfish ..... or a Russian Bot or a Russian From Minsk






:lmao:
I did find it hilarious that @Kyle posts something, Tranny claims it was YOUR post, then has the audacity and lack of self-awareness to champion how "informed" Tranny is.
 

Kyle

Imagine No Democrats
PREMO Member
I did find it hilarious that @Kyle posts something, Tranny claims it was YOUR post, then has the audacity and lack of self-awareness to champion how "informed" Tranny is.
They're all like that to some degree.

We have another that either hears words or reads hidden messages into statements and articles, another pretending to be Phil Donahue overdosing on scopolamine and yet another acting as resident know-it-all who wants to argue some meaningless esoteric nuance while ignoring the primary point of the discussion.

Why are you surprised? :lmao:
 
Last edited:
Top