First Amendment

Trump Keeps Contradicting the 'National Security' Rationale for Banishing Disfavored Journalists

Attorney General Todd Blanche, who complains that CNN's coverage is "almost 100 percent negative towards the president," also has trouble keeping the story straight.

Jacob Sullum | 10.6.2026 4:45 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google

Media Contact & Reprint Requests

(Samuel Corum/Pool via CNP/Polaris/Newscom/Andreykr/Dreamstime)

When President Donald Trump banned CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House on September 18, he was clear about his motivation. Their coverage, he claimed, was "FAKE NEWS" full of "FICTION and LIES." It was "purposely negative," "one-sided," and "never good," he added. But after CNN et al. challenged their banishment in federal court three days later, the government's lawyers offered a different explanation: The president, they said, was trying to protect national security.

U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee who issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the White House ban on September 24, was understandably skeptical of that rationale. And as the plaintiffs note in a brief they filed on Monday, Trump himself has had trouble sticking to the official story.

In a September 28 interview with Time, Trump reverted to his original justification for punishing CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. "It's just bad story after bad story," and "most of them are fake," he complained. "I don't think anybody should be forced to bear fake news, constantly bad stories, because I've done great things." Although "I can........

© Reason.com