President Donald Trump’s decision to ban MS NOW, CNN, and Politico from the White House because of the “FICTION and LIES” he claims they publish about him came as a big surprise to the media and even to some of his senior staff.
The 80-year-old president tried to explain his abrupt decision Friday afternoon, ironically, while answering questions from the media. “You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news,” he said. “They purposely write negative news.”
He didn’t have any particular story in mind. “It’s really just cumulative stories over the last two years,” he said. “You get sick of it.”
Events that he set in motion are spinning out of control. So, he lashed out at something he can control.
But banning journalists won’t make the bad news go away. The media isn’t lying about the war he started in Iran, or the haphazard and nonsensical tariffs he imposed or the grocery and gas prices that have gone up on account of that war and those tariffs. Reporters have not caused the trade debacle with Canada. They did not force his ICE agents to brutalize men and women in U.S. city streets.
And now, increasingly, unavoidably, Trump can see that more and more American voters are turning against him. The polls predicting Democratic success in the midterm elections must be weighing on him. Events that he set in motion are spinning out of control. So, he lashed out at something he can control, at least in the short term. “I don’t want them in my office. I don’t want them here,” he said on Friday. “I don’t have to let them into my — into the people’s house.”
But shooting the messenger never works.
And it likely won’t last, either. It is hard to imagine a more overt violation of the First Amendment than punishing journalists because he doesn’t like their coverage. That is a textbook example of viewpoint discrimination, which is unconstitutional.
Indeed, on Monday morning MS NOW, Politico and CNN announced they are all three suing Trump and several top administration officials, alleging that the ban “could not be a more direct assault on the First Amendment.”
This is familiar and comfortable territory for Trump, of course. He has been attacking the reality-based media as “fake news” since at least 2016. And for the past decade it’s been a surefire way to rile up his base.
In 2018, during his first term, Trump took away then-CNN journalist Jim Acosta’s press pass — until a judge’s ruling restored it. Last year, he banned Associated Press journalists from the Oval Office because their bosses kept calling the Gulf of Mexico by its real name. A lawsuit is ongoing. Meanwhile he has filed billions of dollars’ worth of lawsuits against newspapers and publishers, mostly for defamation and without merit. But as with those lawsuits, Trump has long seemed motivated more by revenge then precedent.
Which brings us back to the current situation. I think there are three major questions going forward. The first is whether Trump will ban other news outlets.
“There may be others to follow,” the president said. “New York Times is so fake. Washington Post is disgusting. I mean, they’re disgusting.” (That must be disappointing to hear for Post owner Jeff Bezos, who seems to have spent the past few years trying to curry Trump’s favor.)
Trump also suggested some of the banned news organizations would be allowed back into the White House “if they could straighten themselves out.”
Unlikely.
The second question is how long it will take for the legal process to reinstate the banned journalists. I’m betting days.
The third question is the most fraught. What should the White House press corps and the wider journalistic establishment do in response to this outrage?
This is a tired playbook and the nation’s focus will remain on his dismal record and his failure to deliver his biggest campaign promises.
Some observers on social media suggested that responsible media organizations should immediately boycott the White House in solidarity. But that would leave the remaining press corps filled entirely with MAGA cheerleaders.
Jacqui Heinrich, the Fox News journalist who is the current president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, said in a statement that “The WHCA stands in defense of our colleagues at CNN, MSNOW, and POLITICO who are being singled out for doing their jobs.”
But there is no reason to believe the group will do much more than issue strongly worded condemnation. As the WHCA proved by inviting Trump to its lavish press freedom gala earlier this year – twice! – access defines them, and I doubt they will ever risk it.
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, suggested reporters could “take a break from getting lied to and insulted at the White House” and “continue to fight back to protect their rights, not only to access the White House but to access the public records and whistleblowers this administration so desperately wants to keep from them.”
Pretty much every major news organization rushed over the weekend to express solidarity with the three banned outlets. But what are they going to do about it?
Individual news organizations and reporters could choose to boycott. Pentagon reporters who rejected Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s restrictive credentialing rules are delivering more scoops than ever from outside the building,
But members of the White House press corps could also decide to push back the next time they are lied to and insulted by a president who clearly disdains both them and the First Amendment.
On Friday, Trump literally answered a question by referring to “the ban on the free press.” When a reporter noted that China is one of most repressive countries in the world for journalists, Trump replied: “Well, I don’t know about that. I think — I think we’re repressive also.” (He then followed-up with a typically confusing statement seeming to equate repression and “fake news.”) This is not normal.
White House reporters are allowed inside the president’s bubble. Because of this, they have a rare privilege and a duty to the public. I think they should realize that the old rules of conduct no longer apply.
No more deference. Talk back. Speak up when he lies or doesn’t answer a question. Ask him why he’s lying. Object when he insults a colleague. Correct him. Confront him with reality.
Trump may believe that punching down at journalists is a good way to bury bad headlines. But this is a tired playbook that will do little to distract the nation’s focus from his dismal record and his failure to deliver on his biggest campaign promises: Stop the forever wars and bring down prices.
And unfortunately for Trump, journalists can keep reporting on all those things, whether standing in the Oval Office or safely outside the Secret Service perimeter.
The post Trump’s unconstitutional press ban won’t make the bad news go away appeared first on MS NOW.
