BREAKING: Fox News Joins White House Boycott

Sekulow

The episode covers the breaking news regarding President Trump's decision to ban specific media outlets, including CNN and Politico, from th

Key takeaways

• President Trump has officially barred Politico, MS Now, and CNN from White House premises.
• Major networks including ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News have suspended TV pool coverage in response to the ban.

Main topics

• White House Press Ban
• Media Boycott and Solidarity

Notable quotes

The White House is not instituting an assault on the free press... It is instituting an assault on the fake news.

Conclusion

The episode highlights the tension between executive power and press f

Transcript preview

Speaker 1 (0:00) We got breaking news. Fox News Channel joins the boycott of the White House press pool. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more Speaker 2 (0:10) than ever, this is Seculo. We want to Speaker 5 (0:14) hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. Speaker 1 (0:23) And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow. It's Monday. I think I started too early there. I don't know if we got it. Hopefully, I made it on the air. I think we did. Hey, look at that. Good job, everybody. It's Logan Sekulow. Will Haynes in studio. Senior attorney here at the ACLJ, CeCe Howell, is going to be joining us a little bit later. But, of course, we're covering the breaking news that is happening right now, as you have all of the major press organizations, including the Fox News Channel, all linking arms and saying no to the White House. Press ban. Of course, this came out just the last few days. President Trump decided that there were certain institutions, certain media outlets that were no longer going to be invited to the press pool or be invited to White House events. Now you have a print in again. This wasn't necessarily predicated on one specific instance or something that went wrong. What it seems like is President Trump just decided, I don't want to deal with these people anymore. Now, of course, there's been big pushback on that, saying this is censoring, this is removing the free press that we have here in the United States of America. I want to hear from you, your thoughts as well, 1-800-684-3110. But again, this is a statement that came from President Trump. He said the White House is not instituting an assault on the free press, something which I cherish. It is instituting an assault on the fake news, something that has grown like a cancer in our beloved United States of America. It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, totally out of control. It's a threat to our national security and must be stopped now. Thank you for your attention to this matter, President Donald J. Trump. That was from Truth Social. So again, President Trump saying that's not what this is, but there's enough behind it in a very, very big week. I'll be honest, a week that you would like to get some press coverage on. This is not necessarily to me, or maybe you don't, because maybe you think that there's going to be answers that you don't want to have to answer to, as we have. Xi Jinping coming to the White House. You have Benjamin Netanyahu. You have maybe some controversial things happening right now that could spur a very different conversation. Again, I want to hear from you at 1-800-684-3110. But Will, top line, what a mess here. Speaker 2 (2:24) What we're looking at is, first, three news outlets that were banned from the White House premises. That is... Politico, MSNOW, and CNN. When asked about why on Friday, the president said, no reason. It's a very simple ban. I don't want them in my office. I don't want them here. I would say the ban would go as far as you can go. Then you look at over the weekend as this developed, you see the Speaker 7 (2:49) news outlets that are in the TV pool, the TV press pool. Now, that's a very important distinction between just anyone that has credentials to get in and go to press briefings. The TV pool are there. They share cost with one another. They take turns on covering different events. It's very expensive. It is kind of the one layer to reporting that it hasn't been democratized by YouTube or podcast because it takes crews, it takes camera ops, it takes expensive travel. And so NBC, Fox News, CNN, they would share the cost and they would rotate, but they also provide that to everyone so that it can be given to every other press benefits from that. The five that are the TV broadcast press people are standing in solidarity with CNN, MSNOW, and Politico by saying, we're not covering any of your events, Mr. President, while this goes on. CNN was supposed to be traveling with the president today. They were the designated TV pool media outlet as they traveled to New York for the UN General Assembly because President Trump is speaking there on... Tomorrow, on Tuesday. So what you're starting to see is the press stand together, including Fox News, and push back at this blockade that the president gave to three outlets. Look, Speaker 1 (4:15) there has been talk of, hey, didn't Barack Obama do this? We'll break down what he did coming up in other segments in the show so you can learn that it's not new for a president to have some restrictions here. However, this sweeping of a restriction, this is fairly new. And again, it's the people's house, but what do you think? I see a lot of comments coming in. Certainly more on the side of the president at this moment. But, you know, I think we need to talk about this. I am all for independent journalists. I am all for independent outlets of media. And what happens when the mainstream media gets shut out from that conversation? Let's chat it out. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back with more on Sekulow. Speaker 1 (5:03) lighting up. We're going to take a lot of calls on this. Look, we've got to pose the question, if this was Barack Obama, if this was Joe Biden, remember even the uproar on Joe Biden not inviting Elon Musk to the electric car summit. And you guys having a lot of issues with that, of course. So you always do have to look at the shoe on the other foot here scenario. If what if it was Fox News and friends being blocked out of a Democrat president? Did you not like that Peter Doocy can push back on the current press secretaries in the Democratic Party that you had that voice in the room to at least cause them a little discomfort, if you will, and not just provide the same, you know, fluff questions, if you will, to them? And I'm not saying that on the other side that happens, but we know that that certainly was the case. I do think there is some validity to that. Now, again, when it comes to the legal side of this, we can also break that down. If a private business, if I didn't want certain people covering my private business and showing up into my offices, sure, you're not allowed to come in here and start interviewing me and grilling me on these things. I think there can be restrictions put in place. But this is, again, you're the president of the United States. Somewhat you work for the people. And there needs to be some kind of freedom of the press, which is one of our top tiers here. We do have to have some form of accountability. Now, you may say that these are not the people who are telling the truth and are being honest, so how can they keep us accountable? That's fine, but maybe we need to make sure there are other outlets that are maybe even similar politically bent that can get the questions and the important questions. And again, both sides here, we got to think beyond, you got two years left to President Trump. Do you want to set this precedent? I understand President Trump's frustration. I think the mainstream press in general is pretty bad. And they do some really poor reporting. And they're creating clickbait nonsense. And a lot of the times it is not for the betterment of society. It's not for the betterment of America. It is not to push back on things that are happening. It is simply to get clicks or to ask them the inappropriate time to get a clip. You know, they're clip farming in these spaces. I get that. I get the frustration. I can feel it in his bones saying, I don't want to deal with these people anymore. so what does that look like though what kind of precedent does it set let's chat that out so many of you have called in right now we're going to take some calls well i know you got something Speaker 2 (7:27) yeah i want to read this this is from cbs news this line it says for the first time ever a presidential administration is treating news reporting like a crime and a reporter like a criminal suspect that's not about donald trump that's about president barack obama and we called it out then That was when the Obama administration were using tactics to try and get source material, trying to subpoena journalists, Speaker 7 (7:55) trying to spy on journalists. Both James Rosen from Fox News and James Risen, who I believe was with the New York Times at the time, but more left-leaning journalist and more right-leaning journalist, if you want to look at the ideological spectrum. But that was from the Obama administration. And we called it out that that was not a... a good precedent they were setting at the way they were going after the press. Now there were some legitimate concerns about the things that were being leaked that were going through those outlets both Fox News and the New York Times but it didn't necessarily mean that what the administration's response Speaker 2 (8:29) to go after the journalists was the right call because the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press that we have enshrined in our first amendment. When you look here and you Speaker 7 (8:39) even see that CBS was saying that precedent that they're treating news reporting like a crime. That was the Obama administration. Here, it's gotten to a point where President Trump is saying, I'm kicking them out because of purposefully negative stories. If you're the president of the United States, yes, I will grant it. He probably has the most negative stories written about him of any president in history. Of Speaker 1 (9:06) any person probably in history, yeah. Speaker 7 (9:07) However, that is also part of the job. The press is going to be antagonistic towards you. They are going to go after you. Now, sometimes you see some people get a pass, but you also see CBS was reporting on the brazen nature of what the Obama administration was doing. I think that's where we have to always be cautious and why we don't always agree with those of you that watch that. Sometimes things maybe aren't the smartest Speaker 1 (9:32) move. The Obama administration also at one point did try to get Fox News to be not allowed into a certain interview. There was restrictions being put on Fox News during his tenure. The question is, because I see that in the chat a lot, but you go, okay, well, that was wrong, therefore this is right. I think that's where we get a little blurry. I do get it, though. I wouldn't want them there either. I'm just going to say it. What I want, what I feel like is just made to create more divisiveness in this country, you know, these outlets and people say, well, why do they get better outlets or why do they get picked? The others, well, they do have the largest sphere of influence, you could say. Maybe not MSNOW, but you can't say that CNN isn't one of the top places people turn to for news, even if the numbers are dwindling. And a lot of new media has been allowed in that press pool. So I do have to give credit to President Trump for allowing in. a lot of digital streaming, podcasts, those kind of things into that world and it not just be the old school way, the old school approach. However, they're not always the ones getting called on in those moments. They're not always the ones who are, look, I'll be honest, sometimes aggressive enough to get their questions in there. And I do think we do need to have access to the White House because whether it is for the conservative side or the liberal side, you need to always make sure that, again, that this doesn't turn around. Because what we know is if you say, well, Obama did it, well, that means whoever's going to do it next is going to do the same thing. And if it's someone who you don't agree with, you're essentially saying I'm cool with them having no press accountability and for them not having to answer for anything. Do you feel that way for real? Or do you just feel that way because right now it's on your side? Speaker 1 (11:14) I understand the frustration of the fake news side. Trust me, we've been victims of it firsthand. I've seen it happen. I hate it. I hate the ways a lot of mainstream media has gone. And how a new media has gone in general. That's why we try to present you a different show here. And this show, I tell you, we always tell you the truth. And look, freedom of the press isn't necessarily this. Freedom of the press just means you have the freedom to talk about, make statements against your government, do these kind of things. create this sort of situation doesn't mean you're gonna have full access to the president of the united states at all times however as will said when the idea is i just pulled your press credentials because i felt like it today i do think we need to look at that in a bigger scope i do we know we do need to take some calls well Speaker 2 (11:56) and i think we should as well and one thing too when you start to look at it also not just as a first amendment issue but when he is basically targeting pointing out three outlets and when there's a lot more that have negative headlines every single day. Then it becomes arbitrary. Then is it viewpoint discrimination? There's a lot of other constitutional issues that are raised by the action. When he's even admitting, I'm tired of the negative headlines, that in and of itself