White House Says Press Access ‘Is A Privilege, Not A Right’ In New Court Filing

President Donald Trump and his administration are defending the president’s ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico as they prepare for the legal battle ahead, after the outlets filed a First Amendment lawsuit to restore their access to the White House press pool.

So far, Trump has not offered an example of a specific falsehood any of the banned outlets reported about his administration. He has whined that media outlets “shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES” — as if he himself has ever let the truth or reality get in the way of whatever lie-laden message he wished to communicate to the people in any given speech, interview or social media post — but he has never mentioned a specific lie either outlet told. Well, White House officials are being a little less vague in a Tuesday court filing, in which they have accused the three outlets of “trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information.”

OK, well now we’re getting somewhere. Sure, we all would’ve understood that these vile networks were a threat to national security much earlier if the president had complained about literally anything other than the “purposely negative” stories written about him, but all we got was the whining about the big meanies at CNN and friends.

But fine, these outlets were leaking top secret information to the public, which would be a great affront to the most transparent administration ever. Care to give us any examples? Oh, you do? You wrote letters detailing it? Do tell.

From the court filing:

The letters also set out the factual basis for this preliminary decision. Each letter identified with specificity a “non-exhaustive list of reporting incidents, including those that have threatened national security and spread falsehoods.” Letters at 1. For example, “CNN disclosed ‘top-secret’ construction details related to the East Wing bunker.” Ex. 1 at 1; Wilson Decl. ¶ 22. “MSNOW reported on an alleged leak investigation,” which, “if it existed, would be nonpublic sensitive law enforcement information.” Ex. 2 at 1; Wilson Decl. ¶ 24. “Politico published a document detailing funding for the White House ballroom containing intricate descriptions of how the Secret Service would invest in security improvements.”

So — the ballroom and the bunker, huh?

Other lines in the filing stood out, such as this gem: “At the very least, the Government may control reporters’ access to restricted presidential areas, such as the Oval Office, even for viewpoint-discriminatory reasons.”

So, basically, Trump banned these outlets because they were security threats, but even if he did do it over “viewpoint-discriminatory reasons,” that’s his right. What isn’t a right is the press’s access to the White House.

“Access to the White House is a privilege — not a right,” the filing states.

The White House also argued that “the President’s actions were not retaliatory because the Government would have taken the same action anyway, notwithstanding Plaintiffs’ speech criticizing the President” and noted that “the President has not
revoked access to other outlets that have equally criticized the President.”

Well, some of that is true. Trump hasn’t banned every outlet that publishes negative stories about him from the White House; he just sues them, lashes out at their reporters, especially female reporters, for asking him the most basic questions a president should be able to answer, and urges the FCC chair he keeps in his pocket to revoke the licenses of media platforms that are unkind to him. So, sure, he hasn’t banned every outlet he hates from the White House, but all I’m saying is — give him time. After all, his officials already tried something similar out at the Pentagon; it just didn’t work out for them.

As for the idea that the ban wasn’t “retaliatory” — come on, bro, has the White House even met its president?

Finally, while the White House claims White House access isn’t a right, it also argues that the plaintiffs “are unlikely to prevail on their due process claims because, even if they have a constitutional right to access the White House, they have received adequate notice and post-deprivation process, including an opportunity to contest the President’s factual findings.”

So, to recap: White House access is a privilege, not a right, but even if it is a right, it’s not discriminatory or retaliatory; but even if it is discriminatory and retaliatory, that’s the president’s right, because he gave the press plenty of notice.

So the White House seems pretty confident the court will validate the president’s selective media ban. Meanwhile, Trump seems significantly less confident, as he suggested in a social media post that the judge presiding over the case is on the outlets’ side. (At least I think that’s what he wrote. It’s hard to tell because either he or his ghostwriters have a weird relationship with syntax, proper punctuation, and random comma splices.)

It’s also apparent that Trump still doesn’t understand why CNN was allowed to cover him at the UN General Assembly since it was banned from — *double-checks notes* — the White House.

“All of the SLEAZEBAGS, like Third Rate ‘Reporter,’ Kaitlan Collins, of Fake News CNN, a truly unhappy person, said they weren’t going to be covering me. Then why were they ranting and raving like Lunatics, in the Press Area, at the United Nations? Why was she there? She’s got a ‘TRUMP’ addiction, and so does CNN and MSDNC. They’re all sick, treasonous, and demented! The ‘good news’ is that they have a great, for them, and totally disloyal Judge.”

Ahead of Trump’s UN speech on Tuesday — a speech that was chock-full of the “FICTION and LIES” he complains about — he confronted Collins for being in the UN press pool, because, again, the president of the United States doesn’t realize that all press pools are not the same.

As for the aforementioned judge, according to the New York Times, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly will hold an emergency hearing on Wednesday to consider the media outlets’ request for a temporary court order undoing the access ban. Kelly was nominated for the bench in 2017 by, you guessed it, President Donald Trump.

Welp, we’ll just have to see how all of this goes, but regardless of how it shakes out, we’re left with a propagandist president who makes a habit of labeling anyone “treasonous” just for being persistently critical of him, and we should all be more concerned about that.

SEE ALSO:

Surviving Trump: The President Misses The Media Attention [Op-Ed]

Trump Renames AI ‘Supreme Intelligence’ During Embarrassing UN Speech