All errors should be reported to

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Accountability is not the job of the press

CNN is suing the United States of America for the entitlement to debate the president at presidential press conferences.

In a memo to his underlings, Jeff Zucker at CNN wrote, "The First Amendment grants the right of all journalists to hold those in power accountable and ask tough questions."

He lies.

The myth of the press holding presidents accountable is just marketing by CNN to puff up its importance and to fluff the egos of its on-air personalities.

Nothing in the First Amendment refers to the press holding anyone accountable.

The job of the press is to inform. That's it.

The Constitution actually assigns holding a president accountable to Congress and the judiciary.

We can also argue that the states, through their quadrennial elections of delegates to the Electoral College, provide accountability but it is not as immediate as the authority the legislative and judicial branches of government wield. Indeed, upon re-election, the states no longer have the power of the ballot box over a president.

If Benjamin Franklin and company wanted the press to hold presidents accountable, they would have done so.

But as a newspaper publisher, among other things, Franklin knew well the power of the press and the people who worked there. He said no thank you to empowering the press like that.

The beauty of the Constitution is that each of the three branches of government hold the other two accountable. It's like that Clint Eastwood movie where three men draw guns on the other two.

The other beauty is that we now elect directly one branch (Congress), and indirectly another (president) who then elect that third branch (judiciary).

No one holds the media accountable, and that is by design. We forbid Congress -- and therefore all of government -- from interfering with what the press reports.

However, the Constitution does not grant the press access.

CNN has press privileges at the White House. Sarah Sanders just reminded them it is a privilege, not a right.

The judiciary will now hold the president accountable on that point.


Please enjoy my books in paperback and on Kindle.

Trump the Press covers the nomination.

Trump the Establishment covers the election.

Fake News Follies of 2017 covers his first year as president.

For autographed copies, write me at


  1. I'm not taking this lightly. These evil people are counting on some judge manufacturing a new right for them and having an appelate judge back them up in it. If they can force kids to be bussed across counties and deny people the ability to entreat God in public fora, they can do just about anything under the right circumstances.

  2. By CNN's reasoning every reporter has the right to get as many questions as they want at a presser. If CNN should prevail one result will be the end of Presidential press conferences. CNN (and Fox according to latest reports) better beware of what they wish for.


    1. If CNN had just taken the time to read, and understand, our founding documents, she would have known the rights as assumed to endowed by god and granted to all men.

  3. The point that has to be pounded in, is that CNN (NY Times, may be the MEDIA, but they are no longer THE PRESS, and therefore are not entitled to 1st Amendment protection. They are no longer doing journalism, when they run 93% negative stories, completely fail to report anything good Trump has done, and when they openly admit that they no longer think journalists should be neutral.
    Fine, they can do whatever they want, BUT, they no longer are JOURNALISTS, so the 1st Amendment no longer applies to their activities.

  4. Illiterate sonsabitches don't know the difference between a right and a privilege.

    I am REALLY pissed at Fox News for joining that frivolous lawsuit.

    1. Fox may well be being foxy on this move.

      After all, if any leverage is gained by the cunt nut network, fox will then be pouncing the fuck out of equal share of that leverage.

      Imagine, mud wrestling matches to determine which "news" network gets to hog the mic!!!!!

      Why, I'd damn wellmpay a dollar to watch that!!!!!

      Bikini thongs required.

      Yep. That includes the man boob bikini.

  5. Bizarro World - Fox supports CNN in this matter; Bob Woodward does not.

  6. If it is the media's job to hold presidents accountable then where the hell were they between Jan. 2009 and Jan. 2017???

    1. Hibernating until another Republican got in office.

    2. Naw Hoss...didn’t you notice how sales of knee pads and Astroglide rocketed?

      “How did you sleep last night, Mr. President?” (Typical question asked of the Black Jesus)

  7. "The beauty of the Constitution is that each of the three branches of government hold the other two accountable."

    Not true even on paper these days. More of a fanciful myth we like to think was the result of the genius of the Founding Fathers. But times have changed. Congress has the power to impeach the President to hold him accountable. On the other hand, while the President can veto legislation passed by Congress, Congress can override his veto, which means that the President can make life difficult for Congress but ultimately cannot hold Congress accountable. I'm actually fine with that: Article I is lays it all out that Congress is chief among "equals." Similarly, the Judicial Branch can hold the other two branches of government accountable by issuing judicial orders, but the President has only appointment power over the courts, which is no leverage at all on a daily basis. Congress can impeach a judge or justice, or even abolish the entire system of lower courts if it wishes, but in practice that is impossible or nearly so. The courts have the easier time of it (meaning virtually no accountability) because they are not subject to removal by the people on a periodic basis or via easy removal by Congress. They can do as they see fit.

  8. Even if you accept CNN's "accountability" premise, I still don't see how that has any relation to the right to receive a hard press pass. You are attending briefing given by the President's press secretary. Regardless of how frequently or aggressively you question her, you are only going to get answers that give the President's side of every issue.

    If you truly want to hold the President "accountable," the you're going to have to go out and do some real reporting to ferret out facts and data that test the President's position on the issues. That doesn't require a White House pass at all.

    I'm old enough to actually remember when some members of the Washington press corps actually did that. But I can't recall it happening in this century.

    1. Investigation is slow, expensive and might hurt one's allies. It does not fit a rapidly fluctuating news cycle run by billionaires with selfish issues,hence the claim that calculated lies presented as news are just based on "incomplete information" , as J.Pace, Ace reporter for the AP, has said many times on Fox. If the media is ever to be controlled, 1A will need to be rewritten, a tough task. The information most people seek today for themselves is not composed of lies, but it is not political to begin with. It is the indifference of the "people" to this distiction that gives the media its power. The proletariat deserves what it is getting, sorry to say.

    2. You have either not read the 1st Amendment or failed to understand it.

      The media, press, journalists, reporters, etc., are not the People. Nor is presuming that the People are in any way represented by the press a factual understanding of reality.

      Thus, the 1st Amendment of the Constitution requires no "rewriting".

      Kinda a slick attempt there, bucko, but no sale.

      Fucking media prostitutes can think they are special, but they are not.

      In fact, this goofball attention whore from the goofball attention whore network is effectively biting the hand that has kept them from vanishing into the empty void of no one gives a shit that cnn is a memory.

      This cnn has nothing left to stay alive as a business but this drama queen tantrum throwing.

  9. This, and other lawsuits, are unbelievable. Yet a judge might rule in favor.

    It really is sad.

  10. If the courts invent the Acosta Clause to the Constitution, President Trump can issue his own One-Man legislation; DACR: Deferred Action on Childish Reporters.

  11. So, if I start a blog and start calling myself a sports journalist, does that mean all the sports teams I want to "report" on have to start sending me free tickets?

    They wouldn't want to violate my 1st Amendment rights, would they.

  12. For those that support CNN's claims, includung like minded judges, ...

    The White House is the house of the President. By tradition, it is also his official and personal workspace.

    Do Senators and Representatives let anyone in their offices? Does the press have a to go into any of their offices? Will they allow the press to come into their homes and daily disparage them, their actions, policies, and even, at times, their families?

    Can a reporter get up in a court preceding and accuse the judge of hating minorities? Can the press go into a judges house and criticize them?

    The White House only started regular press conferences in the early 20th Century and a press office was created just past mid 20th Century.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.