Read time: 3 minutes

Lou Dobbs In A Fury Over Jim Acosta Getting His Press Pass Back

Fox Business' racist octogenarian, Lou Dobbs, was not happy that CNN's Jim Acosta got his press pass back or that the White House didn't push harder to keep it revoked.
Views:

FOX Business Host and resident crank, Lou Dobbs, really doesn't like that Jim Acosta was allowed to get his press pass back after a district judge ruled in his (and CNN's) favor last Friday. Dobbs starts off this insane segment by positing whether there is ever a time "where you have to tell a District Court Judge to go to hell."

Lou doesn't understand that if you do that, you probably would end up being found in contempt of court and end up in a nice jail cell overnight. But, by all means, I encourage him to try it some day.

He continued by questioning the very bedrock of court, wondering why "you have to follow the District Court Judge and create rules and cannot run the White House the way it has been."

Yeah, those pesky First (free speech) and Fifth (due process) Amendments are tricky ones, right?

FOX Bigot Network, taking every opportunity to shred the Constitution and our Bill of Rights at every chance....only to protect Hair Fuhrer. If Obama had done this, they'd be calling for impeachment.

Full transcript via Media Matters. Watch Gregg Jarrett nod in lockstep with Papa Lou, too.

LOU DOBBS (HOST): Let's be honest here, I want to ask you both this -- why -- isn't there a time where you have to just tell a district court judge to go to hell? Because -- I mean the idea that you have to follow the dicta of a district court judge and create rules and can't run the White House in the way that it has been run, since time immemorial? Harmeet?

HARMEET DHILLON: Well, Lou, to be -- to be fair to the judge, if you read his ruling from the bench, it seems clear that he felt that he was constrained by a prior decision.

DOBBS: Yeah, but that's -- that's patent nonsense.

...

DHILLON: Your question was, "Should we tell the judge to go to hell?" and the answer is "That's generally not a good idea." And I do think that norms announced in advance even though they are obvious, like, you know, you shouldn't have to tell people to behave like adults. But now that we have that rule, I think --


↓ Story continues below ↓

DOBBS: You shouldn't have to tell a district court judge to get back on your -- get back on your bailiwick either. What do you think?

GREGG JARRETT (GUEST): You're absolutely right. When you are -- there is no freedom to be obnoxious and rude. There is no freedom of the press to question the president. It's a privilege to be there at the White House, and there are rules and norms that have always been followed. And now you've got a judge who has decided to expand due process beyond any resemblance of --

DOBBS: He's telling a president of the United States how to conduct business.

JARRETT: And I agree with you. I would tell the judge "Go to hell, we're going to practice the way we want, let the Supreme Court decide it if necessary."

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.