[T]he Trump administration [just] announced the White House would determine which media outlets would cover the president in smaller spaces such as the Oval Office [boldface added]. … [They] denied … an Associated Press photographer and three reporters from Reuters, HuffPost and Der Tagesspiegel … to President Trump’s first cabinet meeting in keeping with [their] new policy regarding media coverage. TV crews from ABC and Newsmax, along with correspondents from Axios, the Blaze, Bloomberg and NPR were permitted to cover the event.
Reuters, 2/26/25
In a statement sent Wednesday night to members, White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) president Eugene Daniels said in part, “This move from the [Trump] White House [to modify conditions for press access to the president] threatens the independence of a free press in the United States. It suggests the government will choose the journalists who cover the president.”
The Wrap, 2/27/25
[I]n 2023 the Biden administration revoked the hard passes of 440 journalists and … WHCA took quote “a non-committal stance.” [Further, former CNN correspondent] Chris Cillizza calculated that in the first month of [this] Trump administration, Trump took 1,009 questions, hardly dictatorial behaviour. [By contrast] Biden [took] 141 [questions in his first month]. Trump has been far more transparent than any recent administration.
Scott Jennings on Abby Phillip’s 2/25/25 CNN News Night discussion of the Trump White House’s modifications of the criteria for press access to President Trump.
In 2023, more than 440 reporters lost press credentials after Biden’s WH … unveiled new standards [for the renewal of] hard passes, … [Trump Press Secretary Karoline] Leavitt [just] announced that the Trump WH would work to “restore the press passes of the 440 journalists whose passes were wrongly revoked by the [Biden] administration” … [in order] to “give the power back to the people” [and] ensure that “all journalists, outlets and voices deserve a seat at this highly coveted table.”
Fox News, 2/26/25
“Anybody can take an image and manipulate it to make it look like … something that didn’t happen,” [said] CBS News chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes, [adopting] the language and arguments of the WH communications office, leaving the intended impression that Biden was mentally and physically vigorous …. The “cheap fakes” narrative took off in the corporate media [and it] instantly became a matter of faith among media that questions about Biden’s capabilities were [just] Republican dirty tricks.
Washington Times, “Cover-up of Biden’s cognitive decline [by White House and media] will be his legacy,” 1/2/25
Besides the Democrats, the biggest opposition President Trump is the corporate media. It is well established that much of the American press has discarded most journalistic standards in order to damage Trump.
Bill O’Reilly, 2/27/25
Much of the Democrat Party Propaganda Collective or DPPC [aka the “Mainstream” or “Legacy” media propagandists] have expressed outrage at the Trump WH’s decision to revise the conditions for media access to the president. It appears that WHCA and the DPPC, having, starting on inauguration day 1/20/25, awakened from a long refreshing 4-year nap, are suddenly asking hard questions of the president and Party in power again.
The hysteria is caused by the fact that the Trump administration has changed the rules for press access to the WH “in smaller spaces such as the Oval Office.” Now why, apart from the fact that one simply cannot fit all the different media outlets and perspectives into small spaces, would the Trump administration do this?
One of the reasons is illustrated by the fact that the DPPC simply cannot discuss what the Trump administration has done in this very case in sober terms but only in the near hysterical terms required by the standard DPPC script. WHCA states that limiting press access in smaller spaces such as the Oval Office “threatens the independence of a free press in the United States.” Actually, no! The press can still say whatever it wants about Trump. This has literally nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. Even Abby Phillip, about halfway through the discussion, admits that press access to the president is a “privilege”, not a right. And did WHCA not see that ABC, Axios, Bloomberg and NPR were admitted to the event?
The same hysteria is illustrated, as usual, on Abby Phillip’s daily laughing, giggling and interrupting conservatives CNN show. One of the panel members on Abby’s recent show discussing this issue, Xochitl Hinjosa, eager to demonstrate that she has memorized the fake “Trump-is-a-dictator” meme, says that “it’s not just individual outlets [being banned], but individual reporters. When Trump doesn’t like what some reporter says about him, he can ban those individuals [like] a dictator.” Needless to say, given her telepathic powers, Hinjosa needs no actual evidence to know that that Trump wants to ban individual reporters he doesn’t like. Naturally, Abby, who, apparently, also has the same telepathic powers, falsely states that “we know why Trump only likes people who ask him softball questions.” And Solomon Jones falsely states, in inflammatory language, that Trump is “trampling” on freedom of speech and the Constitution. Fortunately, one of the few discussion members that has functioning eyeballs, Democrat lawyer Arthur Aidala, points out that “Trump loves giving Caitlin [Collins] a hard time” and “shines” when he is “sparring” with journalists. Haven’t Hinjosa, Abby and Jones noticed that there’s nothing Trump loves more than a battle with Democrats and “journalists” to get his message out? Where have they been?
Abby quotes Peter Baker’s (chief WH correspondent for The New York Times, political analyst for MSNBC and reporter for The Washington Post for 20 years), statement that “Having served as Moscow correspondent in the early days of Putin’s reign, this reminds me of how the Kremlin took over its own press pool and made sure that only compliant journalists were given access.” The Kremlin? Really? Is this the latest iteration of the DPPC’s silly Trump-Russia collusion hoax? And hasn’t comrade Baker, who may have spent a tad too much time at Moscow cocktail parties, noticed that in the recent event, “journalists” from ABC, Axios, Bloomberg and NPR were permitted to attend? Perhaps Baker can explain how those outlets are “compliant” for Trump? Isn’t ABC the one that ran the rigged 3 on 1 debate against Trump before the election and incorrectly fact checked him?
What is going on here is painfully obvious. The WHCA have abused their monopoly on WH access with their rude partisan coverage of president Trump compared with their coverup, undermining both the democratic processes and US national security, of Biden’s cognitive decline (among a plethora of other leftist sins). So here is a suggestion for WHCA and the DPPC. In 2022 Americans chose the most popular journalists as, ordered from most to less popular, Tucker Carlson (Fox), Rachel Maddow (MSNBC), Sean Hannity (Fox), Lester Holt (NBC), Anderson Cooper (CNN), David Muir (ABC), Jesse Watters (Fox), Don Lemon (CNN), Laura Ingraham (Fox), Bret Baier (Fox). What a surprise. In a country evenly divided, exactly half are conservatives! Let’s make something like this list the model for the set of journalists chosen to have WH access to the president, thereby “giving power back to the people” by representing the other (neglected conservative) half of the country! Had we adopted this more representative idea 4 years ago, maybe a WHCA “journalist” would have actually done their job and exposed Biden’s dangerous cognitive decline. Imagine that!
Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!