Drug Testing For White House Press Corp

[2aguy]

I suspect the Secret Service decides who has access to the White House.

Read the constitution. I suggest you start with the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does it say no drug screening?

The
Art about unreasonable searches without warrants.

\Do you ever turn off your prerecorded responses?

The constitution is clear and it never turns off. The government cannot conduct warrantless searches and seizures. Further, journalism is the NLY profession mentioned in the constitution. Restricting free press is unconstitutional.

funny how you asshats don't apply the same logic to guns.........

 

[2aguy]

That is unlawful search and seizure.

No its not. No one is forcing them to pee in a cup. They can choose to do it and keep their job, or they can refuse and lose their press credntials at the white house.

Anyone anywhere who pees in a fucking cup for a job is a sellout.
If enough people simply had the friggin' stones to just say no --- it would go away and stay away.

Yeah....let's let construction companies allow their employees to be high and drunk when they are using heavy equipment........

 

[2aguy]

That is unlawful search and seizure.

No its not. No one is forcing them to pee in a cup. They can choose to do it and keep their job, or they can refuse and lose their press credntials at the white house.

And that isn't even losing their job...they can handle the D.C. traffic beat instead.....

 

[ClosedCaption]

This is dumb and fascist. What can anyone possibly gain from restricting our access to what our leaders are doing in our name.

I've never heard a defense for why less transparency is a good thing.

 

[Anathema]

Not by conducting warrant less searches. Why is the 4th amendment so disposable while the 2nd is so inviolable?

The rth has been proven to protect CRIMINALS. The 2nd protects CITIZENS.

MAJOR DIFFERENCE.

 

[Anathema]

This is dumb and fascist. What can anyone possibly gain from restricting our access to what our leaders are doing in our name.

I've never heard a defense for why less transparency is a good thing.

When you cannot trust ANY part of the media to actually report FACTS without spin or opinion being included, then the news becomes worthless.

 

[Nosmo King]

"secure in their persons" is the first one.
Followed by "unreasonable searches and seizures".

FAA requires I got drug screens unannounced.

I had the option. Take the test or quit.
No violation of my Constitutional Rights occurred.

Same with the press. Don't want to do it, don't join the WH press Corp.

The White House is not the employer of the White House press corps. That's the difference.

They don't have to grant them access either........

Not by conducting warrant less searches. Why is the 4th amendment so disposable while the 2nd is so inviolable?

It isn't.......the White House can set rules for entrance.......

Then have a Court issue legal search warrants. Good luck.

 

[Nosmo King]

Not by conducting warrant less searches. Why is the 4th amendment so disposable while the 2nd is so inviolable?

The rth has been proven to protect CRIMINALS. The 2nd protects CITIZENS.

MAJOR DIFFERENCE.

The constitution protects citizens. There is still due process, like it or not, and no one is guilty, therefore a criminal, until they are convicted.

 

[Nosmo King]

Read the constitution. I suggest you start with the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does it say no drug screening?

The
Art about unreasonable searches without warrants.

\Do you ever turn off your prerecorded responses?

The constitution is clear and it never turns off. The government cannot conduct warrantless searches and seizures. Further, journalism is the NLY profession mentioned in the constitution. Restricting free press is unconstitutional.

funny how you asshats don't apply the same logic to guns.........

"A well regulated militia..."

Why is it you asshats" ignore that claus?

 

[Anathema]

The constitution protects citizens. There is still due process, like it or not, and no one is guilty, therefore a criminal, until they are convicted.

I have little to no use for the current Legal system. I'm a believer in a JUSTICE System instead of a Legal System.

 

[Pogo]

That is unlawful search and seizure.

No its not. No one is forcing them to pee in a cup. They can choose to do it and keep their job, or they can refuse and lose their press credntials at the white house.

Anyone anywhere who pees in a fucking cup for a job is a sellout.
If enough people simply had the friggin' stones to just say no --- it would go away and stay away.

Yeah....let's let construction companies allow their employees to be high and drunk when they are using heavy equipment........

No, let's not. Actually let's give 'em a simple motor skills test before they begin their shift. That will show if they're impaired ---- rather than simply in possession of some blood component that may or may not be affecting them at all --- by drugs, alcohol, lack of rest, distraction, some creeping illness they're not aware of, or a reaction to some legally prescribed medication.

Oh wait ------ we can't do that because that would be actually looking out for safety rather than commanding people to submit to invasions of privacy. And that just wouldn't stroke the shaft of Authoritarianism.

We also can't do that because it would cost a fuck of a lot less and there's too much money to be made by companies in bed with those Authoritarians. Yeah that'll never work.


Meanwhile please to essplain to the class what the fuck a White House Pool reporter needs to be motor-skills alert for. What, is he gonna drop his voice recorder where it might bounce off the floor, careen and hit the president in the temple, where a blood clot will form and travel to his heart thereby killing him and making Mike Pence the President?

 

[Nosmo King]

The constitution protects citizens. There is still due process, like it or not, and no one is guilty, therefore a criminal, until they are convicted.

I have little to no use for the current Legal system. I'm a believer in a JUSTICE System instead of a Legal System.

Look into a retirement community on the banks of the Volga. We're going to stick with our system of jurisprudence here thank you.

 

[Anathema]

Look into a retirement community on the banks of the Volga. We're going to stick with our system of jurisprudence here thank you.

You don't have a system of jurisprudence. You have a joke. The criminals don't fear your system. It doesn't fix anything. It's a failure.

 

[longknife]

I suspect the Secret Service decides who has access to the White House.

Read the constitution. I suggest you start with the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does it say no drug screening?

The
Art about unreasonable searches without warrants.

\Do you ever turn off your prerecorded responses?

The constitution is clear and it never turns off. The government cannot conduct warrantless searches and seizures. Further, journalism is the NLY profession mentioned in the constitution. Restricting free press is unconstitutional.

You really can't get out of that rut, can you?

 

[Nosmo King]

Read the constitution. I suggest you start with the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does it say no drug screening?

The
Art about unreasonable searches without warrants.

\Do you ever turn off your prerecorded responses?

The constitution is clear and it never turns off. The government cannot conduct warrantless searches and seizures. Further, journalism is the NLY profession mentioned in the constitution. Restricting free press is unconstitutional.

You really can't get out of that rut, can you?

You really cannot grasp the concept that warrantless searches and seizures are unconstitutional. That perception tigon problem is yours and yours alone.

 

[Anathema]

You really cannot grasp the concept that warrantless searches and seizures are unconstitutional.

You cannot grasp that some of us place the concept of Justice (the Guarantee that criminals are always punished) above legal protections for criminals in every situation.

 

[Nosmo King]

You really cannot grasp the concept that warrantless searches and seizures are unconstitutional.

You cannot grasp that some of us place the concept of Justice (the Guarantee that criminals are always punished) above legal protections for criminals in every situation.

You do not seek justice. You seek retribution and punishment. America just isn't a good fit for you and your outlook. North Korea might e the system for you.

 

[Anathema]

You do not seek justice. You seek retribution and punishment.

Retribution and Punishment is the definition of Justice. An eye for an eye. It's that simple.

America just isn't a good fit for you and your outlook. North Korea might be the system for you.

I was thinking Iran. Better climate, better looking women. A place that might be willing to overlook my non-religious sentiment in exchange for my knowledge of electrical distribution systems.

 

[Nosmo King]

You do not seek justice. You seek retribution and punishment.

Retribution and Punishment is the definition of Justice. An eye for an eye. It's that simple.

America just isn't a good fit for you and your outlook. North Korea might be the system for you.

I was thinking Iran. Better climate, better looking women. A place that might be willing to overlook my non-religious sentiment in exchange for my knowledge of electrical distribution systems.

Justice is a fair and rational quest for proof and truth, not retribution.

And perhaps you might consider the Iranians might not be eager to overlook your lack of religious faith.

 

[Anathema]

Justice is a fair and rational quest for proof and truth, not retribution.

And perhaps you might consider the Iranians might not be eager to overlook your lack of religious faith.

No, that is not a Justice System. That's a Legal System; which generally favors the criminal over the victim and Society.

Saudi Arabia might be another option.