In Donald Trump’s self-manufactured reality, disdain for journalists and affinity for autocrats are among few constants. By the same measure, the president craves the adulation of the press the way a junkie hankers for a wakeup fix. Trump denounces the New York Times as “failing” and “the enemy of the people”, but yearns for Maggie Haberman’s approval. No mommy issues there.

Enter CNN’s Jim Acosta, Trump’s on-air sparring partner, with a book entitled … The Enemy of the People. Trump’s presidency is about trashing constitutionally imposed checks and balances, dumping on the first amendment, sating the cravings of social conservatives and race-baiting. Acosta’s brand is about getting into Trump’s face and under his skin.

Acosta cops to “grandstanding”, “showboating” and, on occasion, “opt[ing] for the bait”. For such efforts, the White House stripped Acosta of his press pass, which was restored after a successful legal challenge.

Acosta’s book sheds real light on the West Wing funhouse. It explains how the “enemy of the people” emerged as a mainstay of Trump’s lexicon: blame it on Steve Bannon. Acosta also catches Jared Kushner, the first son-in-law, lying through his teeth from the get-go.

Acosta reports meeting Kushner at the White House in the aftermath of Michael Flynn being dismissed as national security adviser. Kushner calls Acosta “the fake news guy”, then is asked why he calls CNN fake news.

Neutrality for the sake of neutrality doesn’t really serve us in the age of Trump Jim Acosta

“The Russia story, he responded. ‘There’s nothing to it.’”

As Acosta puts it: “That was not true. Not by a long shot.”

Kushner’s name appears in both volumes and on 47 pages of Robert Mueller’s report. But then again, Kushner wouldn’t be anywhere near the West Wing or holding a security clearance in a normal administration, let alone be tasked with bringing peace to the Middle East.

Acosta also depicts a “tipsy” Reince Priebus, then head of the Republican National Committee, telling the author very early on election morning it was “going to take a miracle for us to win”. As the CNN man put it, Priebus “just walked up in a bit of stupor and uttered those unbelievable words. So, I let him talk.” And to think, Priebus’s ex-boss is a teetotaler.

Compared to its predecessors in the realm of the Trump exposé, The Enemy of the People lacks the acid-dripping punch of Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury and Siege, the granularity of Bob Woodward’s Fear and the salaciousness of Stormy Daniels’ Full Disclosure. In a universe already cluttered by “tell-alls” by administration alumni and discards like Omarosa, Spicey and the Mooch, the bar is high for whatever comes next.

Unfortunately, Acosta’s quotes and anecdotes are frequently sourced to unnamed White House officials and political insiders. For example, we are told that at least one member of the administration views Trump as “insane” and another sees him as potentially “compromised” by the Russians. On such topics, Acosta glides across well-tilled ground.

Last September, an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times boasted of active resistance to Trump within his own administration. Rex Tillerson, former secretary of state, reportedly denounced his boss as a “moron”. Trump has proclaimed himself a “very stable genius”.

Acosta acknowledges Trump’s working class base and captures the shock that reverberated with his upset win. But he fails to place the rage and resentment in the larger context of how America and the west reached this inflection point. Unlike Hillary Clinton, Trump was not just a candidate. He embodied a movement. Like it or not.

Jim Acosta speaks outside court in Washington, after a judge ordered the White House to reinstate his press credentials. Photograph: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

Trump, Nigel Farage, Matteo Salvini, Viktor Orban and Benjamin Netanyahu are on stage at the same moment. Grievance toward elites and immigration are themes with ready audiences on both sides of the Atlantic and beyond.

And yes, Acosta should address all this after he tacitly cops to acting like an advocate or editorialist, as opposed to simply reporting breaking news or calling balls and strikes. In his words: “Neutrality for the sake of neutrality doesn’t really serve us in the age of Trump.”

Lest Acosta forget, Edward R Murrow’s takedown of Joe McCarthy and Walter Cronkite’s editorial on the Vietnam war carried sway because Murrow and Cronkite possessed gravitas and credibility. They also respected boundaries and lines.

When Paul LePage, Maine’s then-governor, told an interviewer “our constitution is not only broken, but we need a Donald Trump to show some authoritarian power in our country”, he was speaking for an audience larger than himself or even Trump. A majority of the GOP now believes the press is the enemy of the people, more than two-in-five Republicans think the president should be able to shutter media outlets for “bad behavior”, and a similar number cast a kind eye towards Russia and Vladimir Putin.

During the 2016 campaign, Trump made NBC’s Katy Tur a foil and focal point. In the end Tur had a passel of death threats and a security detail to show for it, but only after Trump had telephoned her and, sounding like a stalker or mob boss, said: “Be fair to me Katy … you and I should be friends.” Nothing has changed. Trump still expects the media to bow, scrape and be co-opted. To give him his due, Acosta refuses to do that.

With 2020, the Mueller report and the specter of impeachment all hovering before us, don’t expect a kinder, gentler Trump. The latest iteration of the indictment against Julian Assange places a bullseye on the back of a free press. In May, from Japan, Trump tweeted: “‘Why doesn’t the press apologize to President Trump for the Russian Collusion Delusion?’ … How about the Dems also?”

Things will get worse before they get worse.