198

Special counsel Jack Smith opposes televising Trump federal election subversion trial (www.cnn.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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Media argued that the long-standing rule against cameras in federal criminal trials, which dates to the 1940s, is outdated and would violate the First Amendment if strictly enforced in the Trump case.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ChrisLicht@lemm.ee 63 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[-] provisional 11 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

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.

this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023

198 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19148 readers

2075 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

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.
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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
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.
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