google.com, pub-8701563775261122, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
UK

US justice department defends Trump banning journalists from White House ahead of court hearing – live | Trump administration

Trump administration calls banned journalists’ White House access ‘a privilege, not a right,’ brands coverage a security risk

In a new legal filing in the case over a trio of new outlets barred entry to the White House, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice repeatedly defended the president’s ban by saying journalists were not entitled to access to the building.

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

The filing went on to assert that the three outlets – by publishing sensitive or classified information obtained through its reporting – constituted a national security threat, giving the president the right to ax their credentials.

Trump banned the three outlets – CNN, MS Now, and Politico – last Friday in a snap decision announced via social media. He branded the three outlets “fake news” and threatened future bans against other outlets could follow.

Signs of support for CNN, MS NOW and POLITICO hang on the White House grounds. Photograph: Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Early the following week, the three publications filed a joint lawsuit asking a federal judge to restore their access, alleging that the action was an illegal act of retaliation that violated their First Amendment rights. A president, they argued in their complaint, can’t bar access to journalists based on reporting he doesn’t like.

Since then, Trump has found himself in an escalating tit-for-tat with the press, which has responded to the ban with measures of solidarity. Several outlets have declined to publish any images or video of the president so long as the three outlets are denied access to the White House. And the members of Trump’s standard TV pool – five channels, including CNN, who take turns traveling with the president, filming his daily activities, and distributing that footage – have ceased their duties.

Share

Updated at 

Key events

Trump’s threat to annihilate Iran to UN general assembly is stunning, even for him – analysis

Robert Tait

Robert Tait

Donald Trump has a habit of discomfiting delegates to the United Nations general assembly. But this year, he may have upstaged the ghost of Nikita Khrushchev by openly contemplating the annihilation of a fellow UN member state.

Eleven minutes into a 40-minute address, the US president announced he had “a big decision to make” over Iran, which has staged a much more determined resistance than Trump anticipated when he decided to go to war against the country in February.

Will a deal be made with Iran that lets them rebuild, and create a far greater country than it ever was before?” he asked. “Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again? Do I drive them into hell with no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness or generations?”

US President Donald Trump addresses the 81st United Nations General Assembly. Photograph: Timothy A Clary/AFP/Getty Images

Possibly not since Khrushchev, the late Soviet leader, brandished his shoe and allegedly banged it on a desk in 1960 in protest at a fellow delegate’s speech has the annual gathering witnessed such a display of bellicosity from a superpower leader.

But this seemed more shocking.

The world may have become inured to Trump’s dire threats to send Iran “to the stone age” or end its civilization – so often have they been issued, only to sometimes be followed by a ceasefire or negotiations. But hearing them voiced in a forum created in the aftermath of the second world war, with the explicit aim of preventing future conflicts, was disconcerting.

Iran was the focal point of much of Trump’s speech, which began with a catalogue of familiar boasts of his supposed achievements that seemed better fitted to a domestic audience.

Whether or not the latest threat should be taken literally, little of what he said about Iran seemed reassuring. He appeared to play fast and loose with the facts, consciously or otherwise.

Share

Updated at 

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button