Trump had consent, Jim accosts did not. How hard is that to understand?
It wasn't Jim #accostsus mic. It belongs to the white house and it was her job to move it to whoever our president called upon. Why are you defending that flagrant display of misogyny. Are all you leftists card carrying members of the woman haters club?
It did not belong to him, it was borrowed. Regardless he had no right to intimidate a woman. When did you all start believing it was ok?
Don't know, ask them.
Jim Acosta was referencing an ongoing investigation which is relevant to his network's viewers. If you don't like him asking questions about ongoing investigations, maybe you should have Trump try to fire Mueller.
Who cares if she had consent. She isn't the one with toxic masculinity raging through her. He is the monster, she is the victim. Stop trying to shame her, you're better that that.
You mean Lewandowski the political operative who screwed up his career by deciding to rough arm a Breitbart reporter? The guy who did not understand you don't touch the free press because this isn't Spain or Venezuela or Russia?
He already used up his turn asking trump for his definition of "invaders". This wasn't an interview, it was a press conference. Other members of press were waiting to ask questions too. If he wants an interview there is a procedure for requesting oneJim Acosta was referencing an ongoing investigation which is relevant to his network's viewers. If you don't like him asking questions about ongoing investigations, maybe you should have Trump try to fire Mueller.
I am sure there would be zero political ramifications for Trump and we will all just move on a day later.
Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
It doesn't matter whether something is borrowed or dropped, or delivered at his doorstep. You, a civilian, do not have the right to touch another civilian, because they won't give you something. This is civics 101.
No deflection. I gave you a direct answer and then I asked you a question back. It's called dialogue
You don't get to decide who presents a threat to anyone else anymore than you get to decide whether or not you can touch someone without their consent. Acosta having a mic, a suit, a tie, a haircut, is irrelevant to whether or not you get to put your hands on him to get what you want.
Oh, there is tons of deflection coming from your posts and he's not the only one who sees it.
The good news is they fixed the problem by pulling his pass. He won't be allowed to emotionally scar women at the white house any longer. It's sad though that CNN and your ilk encourage him.
He didn't accost her. She confronted him, she initiated contact, she invaded his personal space and she was trying to take something from him.
The simple concept that you're being obtuse about is that a man used his physical dominance to prevent an innocent woman from doing her job.
