Transcript: President Trump’s sell with CNN’s Jim Acosta

President Trump clinging many of Thursday’s press conference, that he called to announce a new hopeful for secretary of labor, to aggressive a media. He criticized a press in ubiquitous and had this sell with CNN’s comparison White House correspondent, Jim Acosta.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Jim?

JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Mr. President, appreciate we unequivocally much. And usually for a record, we don’t loathing you. we don’t loathing you.

TRUMP: OK.

ACOSTA: … pass that along.

TRUMP: Ask Jeff Zucker how he got his job.

ACOSTA: If we might follow adult on some of a questions that have taken place so distant here, sir, and we don’t know that microphone to reason here. I’ve got 3 microphones.

TRUMP: (INAUDIBLE) people, and your ratings aren’t as good as some of a other people that are watchful (ph).

ACOSTA: They’re flattering good right now, actually, Mr. President.

TRUMP: Go ahead, Jim.

ACOSTA: If we might ask, sir, we pronounced progressing that WikiLeaks was divulgence information about a Hillary Clinton discuss during a choosing cycle. You welcomed that during one discuss rally. You pronounced we desired WikiLeaks. At another discuss press conference, we called on a Russians to find a blank 30,000 e-mails.

I’m wondering, sir, if we —

TRUMP: She’s indeed blank 33,000 and afterwards it got extended with a whole —

ACOSTA: Maybe my numbers are off a small bit too.

TRUMP: No, no, yet we did contend 30, yet it was indeed aloft than that.

ACOSTA: If we might ask you, sir, it sounds as yet we do not have many credit here when it comes to leaking if that is something that we speedy during a campaign.

TRUMP: (INAUDIBLE). Ready?

ACOSTA: If we might ask we that —

TRUMP: No, no, yet let me do one during a time. Do we mind?

ACOSTA: If we might ask a follow-up. Yes, sir.

TRUMP: So in one case, you’re articulate about rarely personal information. In a other case, you’re articulate about John Podesta observant bad things about a boss. we will contend this. If John Podesta pronounced this about me, and he was operative for me, we would have dismissed him so quick your conduct would have spun. He pronounced terrible things about her. But it wasn’t personal information. But in one box you’re articulate about classified.

Regardless, if we demeanour during a RNC, we had a unequivocally clever — during my idea and we give Reince good credit for this — during my suggestion, since we know something about this world, we pronounced we wish a unequivocally clever defensive mechanism. we don’t wish to be hacked. And we did that. And we have seen that they attempted to penetrate us and they failed. The DNC did not do that. And if they did it, they could not have been hacked. But they were and terrible things came in.

And, we know, a usually that we consider is astray is some of a things, they were — when we listened some of those things, we picked adult a papers a subsequent morning, we said, oh this is going to be front page. It wasn’t even in a papers.

Again, if we had that occur to me, it would be a biggest story in a story of edition or a conduct of newspapers. we would have been a title in each newspaper. we mean, consider of it. They gave her a questions to a discuss and she should have reported herself. Why didn’t Hillary Clinton announce that I’m sorry, yet we have been given a questions to a discuss or a city hall, and we feel that it’s inappropriate, and we wish to spin in CNN for not doing a good job.

ACOSTA: And if we might follow adult that, usually something that Jonathan Karl was seeking we about. You pronounced that a leaks are genuine yet a news is fake. we theory we don’t understand. It seems that there’s a undo there. If a information entrance from those leaks is real, afterwards how can a stories be fake?

TRUMP: The stating is fake.

ACOSTA: And if we might ask — we usually wish to ask —

TRUMP: Jim, we know what it is? Here’s a thing. The open isn’t — we know, they review newspapers. They see television. They watch. They don’t know if it’s loyal or feign since they’re not involved. I’m involved. I’ve been endangered with this things all my life. But I’m involved, so we know when you’re revelation a law or when you’re not. we usually see many, many untruthful things.

And I’ll tell we what else we see. we see tone. You know, a word tone. The tinge is such hatred. I’m unequivocally not a bad person, by a way. No, yet a tinge is such — we do get good ratings; we have to acknowledge that. The tinge is such hatred. we watched this morning a integrate of a networks, and we have to say, “Fox Friends” in a morning, they’re unequivocally honest people. They’re unequivocally — not since they’re good, since they strike me also when we do something wrong. But they have a many honest morning show. That’s all we can say. It’s a many honest.

But a tone, Jim. If we demeanour — a hatred. we mean, infrequently somebody gets — well, we demeanour during your uncover that goes on during 10:00 in a evening. You usually take a demeanour during that show. That is a consistent hit. The row is roughly always disdainful anti-Trump. The good news is he doesn’t have good ratings, yet a row is roughly disdainful anti-Trump. And a loathing and venom entrance from his mouth. The loathing entrance from other people on your network.

Now we will contend this, we watch it. we see it. we am vacant by it. And we usually consider you’d be a lot improved off — we overtly do. The open gets it, we know. Look, when we go to rallies, they spin around, they start screaming during CNN. They wish to chuck their placards during CNN, we know.

we consider you’d do many improved by being different. But we usually take a look. Take a demeanour during some of your shows in a morning and a evening. If a guest comes out and says something certain about me, it’s brutal. Now they’ll take this news discussion — I’m indeed carrying a unequivocally good time, OK? But they’ll take this news discussion — don’t forget, that’s a approach we won. Remember, we used to give we a news discussion each time we finished a speech, that was like each day. OK? No, that’s how we won! we won with news discussion and substantially speeches. we positively didn’t win by people listening to we people. That’s for sure.

But I’m carrying a good time. Tomorrow they’ll contend Donald Trump rants and raves during a press. I’m not repetition and raving; I’m usually revelation you. You know, you’re prejudiced people. But — yet I’m not repetition and raving. we adore this. I’m carrying a good time doing it. But tomorrow a headlines are going to be Donald trump rants and raves. I’m not repetition and raving.

Go ahead.

ACOSTA: If we might usually one some-more follow-up.

TRUMP: Should we let him have a small more? What do we think, Peter?

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Peter, should we have — let him have a small bit some-more —

ACOSTA: Just since of this —

TRUMP: Sit down. Sit down. (INAUDIBLE). We’ll get it.

ACOSTA: Just since a conflict of feign news and aggressive a network, we usually wish to ask you, sir —

TRUMP: I’m changing it from feign news, though.

ACOSTA: Doesn’t that criticise —

TRUMP: Very feign news.

ACOSTA: But aren’t we —

(LAUGHTER)

TRUMP: Go ahead.

ACOSTA: Real news, Mr. President.

TRUMP: And you’re not associated to a new —

ACOSTA: we am not related, sir. we do like a sound of Secretary Acosta, we contingency say.

TRUMP: You know, we looked during that name. we pronounced wait a minute. Is there any propinquity there, Alex Acosta?

ACOSTA: I’m certain we checked that out, sir.

TRUMP: No, we checked it. we pronounced — they said, no, sir. we pronounced do me a favor, go behind and check a family tree.

ACOSTA: Aren’t we concerned, sir, that we are undermining a people’s faith in a First Amendment, leisure of a press, a press in country, when we call stories we don’t like feign news? Why not usually contend it’s a story we don’t like?

TRUMP: we do that.

ACOSTA: When we call it feign news, you’re undermining —

TRUMP: No, we do that.

ACOSTA: — certainty in a news media.

TRUMP: No, no. we do that.

ACOSTA: Isn’t that important?

TRUMP: we know what you’re — and you’re right about that solely this.

See, we know when we should get good and when we should get bad. Sometimes they’ll say, wow, that’s going to be a good story. And I’ll get killed. we know what’s good and bad. I’d be a flattering good reporter. Not as good as you.

But we know what’s good. we know what’s bad. And when they change it and make it unequivocally bad, something that should be certain — infrequently that should be positive, they’ll make OK. They’ll even make it negative. So we know it. So — since I’m there. we know what was said, we know who was observant it. I’m there. So it’s unequivocally critical to me.

Look, we wish to see an honest press. And we started off currently by observant that it’s so critical to a open to get an honest press. The press — a open doesn’t trust we people anymore. Now maybe we had something to do with that. we don’t know. But they don’t trust you. If we were loyal and unequivocally told it like it is, as Howard Cosell used to say, right? Of course, he had some questions also. But if we were straight, we would be your biggest booster. we would be your biggest fan in a world, including bad stories about me.

But if we go — as an example, you’re CNN, we mean, it’s story after story after story is bad. we won. we won. And a other thing, chaos. There’s 0 chaos. We are using — this is a fine-tuned machine. And Reince happens to be doing a good job, yet half of his pursuit is putting out lies by a press. You know, we pronounced to him yesterday, this whole Russia fraud that we guys are building so that we don’t speak about a genuine subject, that is bootleg leaks. But we watched him yesterday operative so tough to try and get that story proper. And I’m observant here’s my arch of staff, a unequivocally good guy, did a unusual pursuit during RNC. we mean, won a election, right? Won a presidency. We got some senators, we got some — all over a country, we take a look. He’s finished a good job.

And we pronounced to myself, we know — and we pronounced somebody to that was in RNC (ph), we take a demeanour during Reince. He’s operative so tough usually putting out fires that are feign fires. we mean, they’re fake. They’re not true. And isn’t that a shame, since he’d rather be operative on health care. He’d rather be operative on taxation reform, Jim. we meant that.

we would be your biggest fan in a universe if we treated me right. Now we arrange of know there’s a certain disposition maybe by Jeff or somebody, we know, for whatever reason. But — and we know that, yet you’ve got to be during slightest a small bit fair. And that’s because a open sees it. They see it. They see it’s not fair. You take a demeanour during some of your shows and we see a disposition and a hatred. And a open is smart; they know it.

OK, yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.

Article source: http://rss.cnn.com/~r/rss/edition_entertainment/~3/f7N_u7CRVKA/index.html