Jim Acosta is not my champion.
Yes, he and I are in the same profession, but we need to be able to deal with what's right and wrong regardless of our connections, whether those are based on race, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, political party or, in this case, profession.
Acosta was unprofessional and rude. Period. End of tape.
A press pass is a professional courtesy, and the White House did not deny all of CNN from covering the proceedings. The White House took action against someone it deemed to be acting in an outrageous, grandstanding manner.
CNN sued. It sued the president and certain members of his staff. Fox backed them up - man, talk about politics making strange bedfellows - and said a full-time press pass should not be "weaponized."
And they are right. But having a full-time press pass does not give anyone carte blanche for acting however they see fit.
This lawsuit is less about the First Amendment and more about eyeballs. This is not about the ability to cover the news, it's about CNN looking at its sagging ratings and wanting to redirect the headlines.
Sadly, President Trump and some of his media relations bigwigs have allowed themselves to fall into the filthy muck of this type of PR tug-of-war, because they gave CNN exactly what it wanted and something it desperately craved but does not deserve.
It wants the attention. It craves being on the constitutional side of the argument. (And before a bunch of you start firing off the blah, blah, blah, "conservative, pickle head" emails, Fox News is just as guilty.
Follow along.
CNN and Fox long ago traded credibility for constituents. When those networks decided that preaching to the choir was more important than preaching the truth, then the First Amendment becomes a convenient crutch that can be used whenever they need it.
Now is one of those times, especially for CNN. It also makes sense that Fox backs the play because Fox may find itself in a similar spot when the next Democrat is in the Oval Office.
Which makes the old Potomac Two-Step even more difficult to follow, especially when the corporate mission is more about the money and being partisan than impartial.
Let's examine the reason that - no matter how much it hurts my professional soul and my love for journalism - we are dealing in a time when ''fake news'' is going to be among the soon-to-be-added words in the Webster's lexicon.
I get ''fake news'' and biased media claims and all the other buzzwords in between, and you know what? I know I am doing at least a few things right in that regular emailers on each side of the political spectrum have been outraged at different times. You may not always agree or disagree, but that's part of the process of being honest and true.
There are millions of dollars (and reasons) for Acosta to become the foremost Trump antagonist. And that is certainly not lost on CNN either. There is great value in that, not unlike forerunners such as Howard Stern, who became the pioneering radio ''Shock Jock,'' or even Tucker Carlson, who has become the TV face for the far right.
That role brings with it great notoriety and even bigger paychecks.
Did Jim Acosta purposely enrage the president? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not.
In the end, it feels like everyone lost in this one, and we the people don't need Judge Wapner or Judge Judy to decide that.
Contact Jay Greeson at jgreeson@timesfreepress.com and 423-757-6343.