Of course he doesn't think coverage treats him "fairly." He doesn't view election results as treating him "fairly" (when he loses). He doesn't believe reporting on Iran, or gas prices, or tariff-and-trade nonsense, as being treated "fairly." The problem exists with a man who sees himself as being exempt from even basic truths. Facts, when applied to him, are to be regarded as unfairness.

Also, Trump was banned from Twitter for violating their policy on inciting deadly riots while CNN was banned because they might ask the president against gas prices

The press is not meeting the moment.

So his answer is no. All of his qualifiers are nothing but an attempt to not answer the question. It’s a violation of the 1st A and he knows it!

therefore if Trump successfully let's only friendly news outlets to cover the WH, he'll go back to say the things that got him banned from Facebook and Twitter in 2020.

They work for cheap milkshakes on a parked plane.

But it’s MORE than that Sam. 1A freedom of speech/press applies directly to government - it cannot use its awesome powers to restrict it (except under limited & extreme circumstances) Private companies don’t have that awesome power - and thus don’t have the same restriction

The WH /GOVT (which TRUMP is at the top of) has every RIGHT to DENY the PRESS the PRIVILEGE of gaining security clearance to enter into the WH/OVAL OFFICE for press conferences! CNN and MSNOW ABUSED that privilege by not only disrupting the press conferences, but inadequately reporting the FACTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. WE all watch these press conferences! We all HEAR what CNN and MSNOW report from these meetings! We all know they put their own NEGATIVE spin on what they convey to the public! ENOUGH is ENOUGH!

Barasso is not a stupid person - he knows the difference between the two situations. He is just another republican who traded his dignity and integrity in an effort to maintain the power they currently hold.

No. You have to be worthy of a security clearance to get a pass. Simply being a journalist isn’t enough.

If only the interviewer had reminded him of this.

The private companies were acting under pressure and encouragement from DC Democrats as a work around for individual 1st amendment protections and it was always a pathetic cop-out for people to ignore that and pretend they acted on their own independent of government coercion.

When you take the oath of office you pledge to uphold and protect the constitution. Which includes the first amendment. So I don’t think that argument holds any water.

I don’t think they should have banned him. I think the people should have impeached and imprisoned him.

Trump’s first term exposed how many of you were willing to trade critical thinking for a propaganda script and you’re still mad the curtain got pulled back. So fck right off hack.

It's whataboutism Sam, the justification of an act that can't be justified by using actions of the past as the metric it is judged by.

He’s sitting there like an elderly demented man going roodle, roodle, roodle. The press doesn’t report it. The press overlooks a lot. He’s being treated more than fairly.

Sam Literally knows nothing about this.

Barrasso will get a pat on the head and a doggy treat the next time he visits the White House.

I don’t understand your argument. Why would those two things be equivalent?

Well, when you put it like that, he seems like a very dishonorable man...

Throw these bums out.

Trump thinks the White House is his personal property.

Sam supports liars

Trump was inciting violence.

@grok search @samstein posts for reactions to Trump being banned from social media especially Twitter

Facts!

Watching karma come for @jaketapper after that book is amazing

Pathetic.