A federal judge on Friday ruled that the White House had to return press credentials to CNN’s Jim Acosta — at least temporarily — rebuking President Trump’s decision to yank them after a contentious press conference.
Washington, DC, Judge Timothy J. Kelly issued his ruling after hearing nearly two hours of oral arguments about CNN’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on Wednesday.
The judge emphasized that his decision was based on the Fifth Amendment since Acosta was denied his right to due process — and not on the question of whether the White house can bar reporters from the grounds.
“If at some point after restoring the hard pass the government would like to move to vacate the restraining order on the grounds that it has fulfilled its due process obligations, then it may, of course, do so and I will promptly address that and then the remaining basis of the (temporary restraining order),” Kelly said.
CNN is suing President Donald Trump and multiple White House aides for revoking the press pass of the news network's White House correspondent, Jim Acosta.
The lawsuit comes less than a week after press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced it would suspend Acosta's White House credential, often called a "hard pass," in the wake of the reporter's fiery exchange with Trump at a news conference Wednesday.
Sanders, White House chief of staff John Kelly, deputy communications chief Bill Shine and Secret Service Director Randolph Alles are also included in the suit. The Secret Service officer who yanked Acosta's pass is included as well, though he is not identified by name.
In a statement, Sanders said the lawsuit was "just more grandstanding from CNN," and vowed that the White House will "vigorously defend" itself.
'That was a misfire! Don’t worry!' MSNBC left red-faced after on-screen graphic declares Florida Democrat the winner of governor's race a day before polls open
The nation got an impossibly early peek at the outcome of the hotly-contested Florida governor's race on MSNBC – after the network mistakenly posted a graphic of the results before the polls even opened.
The network posted a graphic showing the two candidates, Democrat Andrew Gillum and Republican Ron DeSantis, who are facing off in one of the nation's marquis contests, during its Monday night broadcast.
Deadline Hollywood, which posted a screen grab of the graphic, showed it had Gillum grabbing a narrow victory. It had precise vote totals with a 49.4 to 48.8 and a gap of fewer than 46,000 votes.
Yahoo News called the display of the flag “controversial.”
As some on social media quickly pointed out, Chief Shubert was proudly displaying a “Blue Lives Matter” flag during the face-off — a symbol that is widely seen as law enforcement’s insulting countermovement to the Black Lives Matter campaign, which aims to end systemic racism and violence against the African-American community.
Deadspin also derided the use of the flag to honor the hero cops.
For those who don’t know, “Blue Lives Matter” is an explicit reaction by law enforcement to the Black Lives Matter movement, which aims to end racial prejudice in policing. It’s a rallying cry used by some of the most empowered workers in America as propaganda against vulnerable people who are simply asking not to be killed or abused by state actors, and its endorsement by the Penguins is a gross slap in the face to some of their most marginalized fans.
New York Times Publishes Trump Assassination Fantasy After Asking Fiction Writers to Imagine End to Mueller Investigation
The New York Times published a short story about assassinating President Donald Trump Tuesday just one day before “potential explosive devices” showed up at the addresses of multiple political figures including former President Barack Obama.
The New York Times asked novelists “to conjure possible outcomes” to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election for a Tuesday piece.
English thriller novelist Zoë Sharp wrote the short story, titled “How It Ends,” about a Russian assassin on a suicide mission who receives help from a Secret Service agent to kill Trump. A character who is working with the Russians in the story implies that Trump “was handpicked at the highest possible level” and must be silenced.
The Daily Caller
The Washington Post falsely suggested that Georgetown Preparatory School was hiring a new employee to deal with fallout from the Kavanaugh hearings, despite the school directly contradicting WaPo’s report.
Emily Heil reported on October 18 that Georgetown Prep was hiring a director of alumni relations, and wrote that the school posted the advertisement for the position this week. The article further suggested that the school was adding the position because of the news surrounding the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Georgetown Prep alum, to the Supreme Court.
However, Heil was informed prior to publication of her article by a spokesperson for Georgetown Prep that the position was posted back in July.
Heil specifically asked spokesperson Patrick Coyle when the alumni director job was posted, according to a copy of the email posted by @AG_Conservative.
“Just thought it was interesting, given all the attention that your alums have been getting recently,” Heil wrote to Coyle. “I wondered if the job had been posted before or after the Kavanaugh hearings, and anything else you can tell me about it.”
Coyle responded within eight minutes telling Heil that it was “posted in July 2018,” and pointed Heil to a group of other statements from Georgetown Prep.
The Daily Caller
PolitiFact is forced to retract a story claiming Claire McCaskill didn’t say what she definitely said
At some point, we may have to consider the possibility that certain media fact-checkers are not so dispassionate and free from partisan biases as they’d like us to believe.
PolitiFact has already stepped in it twice this week, publishing two false stories favoring Democratic candidates, and I suspect this number isn’t going to decline the closer we get to the November midterm elections.
The first bogus PolitiFact ruling, which gives a “mostly false” ruling to an absolutely true claim made in an ad by Arizona Republican Senate Candidate Rep. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., still stands. The second bogus PolitiFact story, which originally gave a “false” ruling to a GOP ad claiming Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., once said “normal people” can afford to fly on private planes, has already been retracted and reissued with a new, still bogus ruling. It’s not even the weekend.
The GOP’s Senate Leadership Fund released an ad this week, titled "‘Normal' MO," focusing on McCaskill’s not particularly inexpensive love for traveling by private plane. Naturally, the ad sought to portray the senator as out-of-touch with her constituents.
"Claire even said this about private planes," the ad says before cutting to a video of McCaskill saying, "That ordinary people can afford it."
After the ad went live, PolitiFact was on the case, issuing a “false” ruling that concluded confidently, “Did Claire McCaskill say normal people can afford a private plane? No."
The video highlighted in the GOP ad comes from an August 2017 town hall event in Kennett, Missouri. That evening, a constituent asked of the senator, "You know, that’s one thing the United States has that nobody else has, is the freedom to fly around and be affordable where a normal person can afford it."
McCaskill responded, "Will you remind them when they come after me about my husband’s plane that normal people can afford it?"
In what he is calling the largest single campaign complaint in history, Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Neal Dikeman is alleging that a planned town hall meeting by CNN amounts to an illegal $10 million in-kind campaign contribution to Democrat Beto O’Rourke.
Dikeman filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission on the heels of news last week that O’Rourke shattered fundraising records with a $38.1 million take in the final quarter before the November 6 election. Dikeman alleges in his complaint that a town hall scheduled for Thursday in McAllen violates federal election law because it will give O’Rourke an hour-long prime time forum worth millions of advertising dollars.
“Politics should not be about money, and corporations should not be funding politicians,” Dikeman said in a prepared statement. “Particularly in this race as Congressman O’Rourke is running fundraising campaigns touting his exclusion of special interest money. Excluding a Libertarian nominee from the debates because you think I’ll take more votes from you than the other guy is one thing, politics is politics. But violating campaign finance laws, especially on this scale is much bigger than that. The scope of this violation should give every American pause.”
Neither the O’Rourke or Cruz campaigns responded to a Texas Monthly request for comment.
Treasury employee charged with leaking financial info on Trump team was arrested with flash drive in hand, prosecutors say
The top Treasury Department employee who was charged Wednesday with leaking confidential financial documents pertaining to former Trump officials was apprehended the previous evening with a flash drive containing the allegedly pilfered information in her hand, prosecutors said in court papers.
The dramatic arrest late Tuesday came on the heels of other high-profile, leak-related prosecutions under the Trump administration, which has pledged to go on the offensive against leakers that the president has called "traitors and cowards."
Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, 40, a senior official at the department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), is accused of illegally giving a reporter bank reports documenting several suspicious financial transactions, known as Suspicious Activity Reports (“SARs”), from October 2017 to the present.
The financial transactions involved Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort, campaign official Richard Gates, accused Russian agent Maria Butina and the Russian Embassy, federal law enforcement officials said Wednesday.
Joe Arpaio, the controversial former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, has filed a libel suit against The New York Times and a member of its editorial board.
In a complaint filed Tuesday evening with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the ex-lawman takes issue with a Times opinion piece published just after Arpaio’s loss in the state’s Republican primary for U.S. Senate. The article — “Well, at Least Sheriff Joe Isn’t Going to Congress: Arpaio’s loss in Arizona’s Senate Republican primary is a fitting end to the public life of a truly sadistic man" — was written by Michelle Cottle.
Arpaio argues in the court filing that “[w]hile the Defamatory Article is strategically titled as an opinion piece, it contains several false, defamatory factual assertions.” The claims made in the article, Arpaio says, were “carefully and maliciously calculated to damage and injure” his reputation among the law enforcement community, as well as among GOP donors who could help bankroll his intended run for the late Sen. John McCain’s seat in 2020, currently held by Sen. Jon Kyl.
Arpaio is seeking $147.5 million in damages from Cottle and the Times, as well as payment to cover his attorneys’ fees and costs. He is represented by Larry Klayman, the chairman and general counsel of the conservative watchdog group Freedom Watch.