All errors should be reported to

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Fake News channel files Fake Lawsuit

CNN filed a lawsuit against the White House and staff members in the cable outlet's demand that Jim Acosta be allowed to turn presidential press conferences into Acosta's version of the Howard Beale Variety Hour.

The Daily Caller fact-checked the lawsuit.

It is as fake as the news on CNN.

For example, "In point 33 of the lawsuit, CNN claimed that Acosta started his exchange with 'a question about one of President Trump’s statements during the midterm campaign — namely, whether a caravan making its way to the United States from Central America constitutes ‘an invasion’ of the country,'" the Daily Caller reported.

"Video of Acosta’s line of questioning showed that he first promised to 'challenge' the president and gave his own opinion that it is incorrect to characterize the caravan as an invasion. He finally asked why Trump called the caravan an invasion.

"CNN also claimed that the president 'declined to respond' in this point — except Trump responded to Acosta by explaining that they both have a 'difference of opinion' on how to characterize the caravan. The president also denied that he 'demonized immigrants,' per a second question from Acosta, explaining that there is real video of caravan members forcing their way through Mexico’s border."

Apparently CNN fudged so many facts that the Keebler elves ran out of raw material for their delicious fudge-striped cookies.

Owned by the megla-national conglomerate Time-Warner, CNN also included as a defendant the Secret Service agent who asked Acosta to hand over his press pass.

"As I told the officer, I don’t blame him. I know he’s just doing his job," Acosta said.

Acosta lied.

(I know, what else is new?)

We will see if lying in court documents works as well as lying about President Trump.

UPDATE: DC Whispers: "CNN’s Acosta vs Trump White House Lawsuit Reads Like It Was Written In Crayon."


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. CNN is trying to disguise the core issue which is does the Executive have the authority to grant and revoke passes to the White House for any reason. If SCOTUS rules in CNN's favor does that mean that every citizen has the right to a White House pass?


  2. Someone on Twitter is promising a counter suit against CNN for ruining air travel LOL

  3. JimNorCal-- Ha ha-- love it! As Trump said, two can play this game.

  4. CNN should be sued into oblivion.

    1. … there's a trip that doesn't use much fuel, ain't they pretty close to oblivion already?

  5. The press has a right to lie thanks to 1A so the case will turn on other points. The judge who has the case was appointed by Trump.

  6. CNN = the arrested development news network. Motto: "We empathize with our viewers because we are who you are."

  7. All CNN has to do is replace Acosta with someone competent, but they are worried about being acused of ableism. Don't want that.

    1. Read somewhere that there are at least 49 other CNN reporters with White House passes.

  8. I've only watched the Acosta accosting and a few minutes after of that press conference, but it leaves the impression of Trump as the schoolmaster trying to get unruly children to settle down. Not a professional look for the "media". And really all the White House did was rebuke a classroom disrupter who was making it hard for those serious about the activity to get their work done.

  9. CNN may have made a legal mistake in not including the Secret Service as a defendant. The pass is not a "press pass" but a security pass that permits entry onto the premises. It is the Secret Service that issues security passes. So, even if Acosta's pass was revoked at the request of the President, it is the Secret Service that officially would issue it. That minor point aside, there is no guarantee of access to the WH under the 1st A. Acosta is free to express his opinions (!) from the park across the street from the WH and CNN is free to send another person in Acosta's place. The WH is under the jurisdiction of the Executive Branch and it should have the exclusive right to determine who has access to the grounds, in the same way that judges have jurisdiction over the courts and can decide who may attend a trial, i.e., whether a trial is open or closed to the public.


  10. Turns out so did FNC in support of CNN!

  11. 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.

  12. So, when CNN loses their case, will the Judge require CNN to pay the other side's legal expenses?

  13. What is so, so sad, is the high likelihood of most silly points to be taken seriously by many judges; usually, but not always, appointed and supported by Dems.