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Media argued that the long-standing rule against cameras in federal criminal trials, which dates to the 1940s, is outdated and would violate the First Amendment if strictly enforced in the Trump case.

67 points

Smith has set up the cleanest legal shot possible against Trump, removing as much complexity as possible from all aspects of the prosecution. He is against cameras because they introduce unforeseeable complexity.

permalink
report
reply
31 points
*

I would prefer the cameras be there, but only being released after the conviction gets returned. This would give the necessary transparency without any circus from it being publicized real-time

Doesn’t have to be HD.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Imagine if debates weren’t aired live either. It would just serve as proof as to what fools politicians made of themselves in order to provoke a reaction. Imagine if the only way to know about what’s going on in a debate was to read the transcript or read commentary from the press. If the recorded video of what happened during the debate is only released after elections are over, it disincentivizes making the debate into an entertainment shitshow.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The entire point of a debate is to be an entertainment shitshow, though.

Besides which what has that got to do with criminal proceedings? What point are you trying to make here?

My point: we can have video of the court proceedings without it being turned into soundbite central simply by delaying the release.

On the other hand, we- the broader public- need a certain amount of transparency that’s difficult to get without full coverage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
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
33 points
*

Trump’s trials need to, to the extent possible, follow the normal rules and procedures of the courts in which they are held. These are not political prosecutions, there is sufficient evidence to support all of the indictments that Trump has been charged with, but he is still a former President. Even if the prosecution decisions are not political there is an unavoidable political element to these trials, especially in terms of media coverage and public perception, which must be zealously guarded against. I do think that the prohibition on pictures and video recording should be changed but that change should go through the normal process and apply to all proceedings going forward. To make exceptions to the usual order is to invite greater politicization and distrust of the institution.

permalink
report
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
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
7 points

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

permalink
report
parent
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
25 points

The Justice Department has a long-standing policy of supporting the long-standing policies of the Justice Department.

I don’t think it’s more than that

permalink
report
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