Special counsel Jack Smith opposes televising the federal election subversion trial of former President Donald Trump in Washington, DC, according to a filing late Friday.

Prosecutors wrote that federal courts are expressly prohibited from allowing proceedings in a courtroom from being broadcast or even photographed and that although the public was allowed to access some proceedings through teleconferences during the Covid-19 pandemic, the exception ended in September for criminal trials.

In a long-shot attempt, a group of media organizations, including CNN, asked the federal judge overseeing the case, Tanya Chutkan, for permission to broadcast the trial given its historic nature. In a separate petition to the judge, NBCUniversal Media argued that the long-standing rule against cameras in federal criminal trials, which dates to the 1940s, is outdated and would violate the First Amendment if strictly enforced in the Trump case.

36 points

Trump and his Nazi hoarde gain power by working in the spotlight, this takes away their ability to be on air 24/7/365, and will also serve to protect the court employees who would be singled out and targeted should their faces ever make it into frame. I’m completely ok with this.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

I totally agree. I wish I could watch so bad but I think it’s the right move. People really started coming around to Hitler after his trial was broadcast.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

DAMMIT jack… what am I supposed to do with all those calls i got on jiffy pop? huh?

(/s)

permalink
report
reply
12 points

The advantage of having the trial televised is that tRump and his hack lawyers can’t stand outside the courtroom at the end of each day and spew lies about what went on, as we can immediately call bullshit when we see it for ourselves.

You know Smith and his team won’t say anything so tRump’s lies will seem as valid to some as what reporters say actually happened.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

No it won’t. They would lie while watching a video showing it is a lie. And later they would lie that any of it ever took place.

And his true believers would accept it all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Exactly. For his worshippers, Trump shapes reality.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

tRump and his hack lawyers can’t stand outside the courtroom at the end of each day and spew lies about what went on

They can and they will. Anyone paying attention has already picked a side. His cult will believe him over any facts or proof so they have nothing to lose by lying. In fact, believing Trump over all evidence to the contrary is like their proof of loyalty badge.

For anyone who’s not paying attention, lying about it will muddy the waters because they probably won’t be watching.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I’m a little confused. Don’t we want this to be as transparent as possible to limit conspiracies?

permalink
report
reply
30 points

There’s transparency and then there’s theater.

Before CSPAN started televising Congress, members were able to make deals and pass laws. Being on TV let the GOP extremists force the Party to the Right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

If you watch their hearings and assemblies a lot of Congress appears to be focused on trying to get sound bytes and Tik Tok clips out of what they say. The clips just seem so weird and forced when seen in context of what the topic of discussion is.

We didn’t elect people to be actors on the clock, please make law and talk to the press later.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Newt Gingrich was the first to weaponize it. He’d make long speeches to an empty chamber, because he knew that someone was watching. Backroom deals and horse trading may seem undemocratic, but you can’t get compromise when people are forced to stand by every word.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

There will be full court transcripts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

There’s going to be conspiracies no matter what. That’s the sort of people we’re dealing with here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Televising a trial is always an additional risk of compromising the integrity of the court. Imagine, for example, if the camera operator captures a juror’s face by accident. It’s better to eliminate everything that could conceivably risk an appeal, and circus is definitely something I’m willing to give up if it means a rock solid conviction.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points
*

To be honest, I don’t care what CNN and NBCUniversal have to say about their FiRsT aMeNdMeNt RiGhTs when they’re just looking for special treatment to be allowed to turn this gravely serious and historic trial into a three ring circus complete with a daily parade of clown cars driven by talking heads.

They’re going to be doing that anyway so there’s no reason to make it any easier on them by ignoring the rules and letting cameras into the court room just so they can charge high premiums for commercials. Fuck them.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

They’re going to be doing that anyway, so it would be better for the public to be able to see the actual trial, instead of only getting the trial filtered through the media outlet of choice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

They smell profits!!! And by God they WANT them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Give exclusive broadcast rights to C-Span

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I have never heard a better idea in all my life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

PBS and C-span co-broadcast.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 412K

    Comments