Posted on 11/11/2023 9:05:04 PM PST by Tench_Coxe
Former President Donald Trump’s legal team has formally told a federal court that he would like his election subversion trial in Washington, DC, to be televised.
Court rules do not allow for broadcasting of federal proceedings, and the Justice Department is opposed to allowing cameras. Several media outlets have asked the court to consider allowing cameras at the historic trial, set for March.
“President Trump absolutely agrees, and in fact demands, that these proceedings should be fully televised,” his attorneys wrote in the filing late Friday night.
(snip)
Special counsel Jack Smith, who brought the case, opposes televising the federal election subversion trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at lite.cnn.com ...
The good book in several places about where evildoers like to perform their work.
Also “sunlight is the best disinfectant”.
The policy of this court seems rather clear: whatever The Trump Team asks for, all judges just say no, with only a few exceptions.They are showing their power against someone they deeply dislike.
Kangaroo Court
They can’t handle the truth.
It figures that YOU would go on record against transparency in these legal proceedings...
Fed. R. Crim. P. 53 - Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited
Except as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules, the court must not permit the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom.
Rule 53. Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited
Except as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules, the court must not permit the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom.
Yeah, same shit, different post.
>> Except as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules
That’s a pretty broad and vague “except”. So, great legal mind, give us all of the statute and rule and argument behind this and prove why there’s no wiggle room.
Or else STFU and go away.
Crickets...
Frankly I think they should be. Yes the base will get their jolly’s from Trump’s antics, but people honestly interested in judicial proceedings and one that is a critical case will get some transparency.
Pointing out that the Federal Rules do not allow transparency is not at all.the same as going on record against transparency. The Federal Rules expressly prohibit televised broadcast of criminal proceedings. It is an old rule and I would like to see it changed, but unless and until it is changed it is what it is.
Turn the light on
And rats..coackroaches...mice..and other unsavory critters slither away .
I’d like to see the court allow full coverage of the actions and behavior of the participants involved in these proceedings. Photographic and A-V materials should be entered into the record as official case and court documentation but not necessarily broadcast live or released for public consumption before the case has ended. I don’t think this judge would go for it but being a former POTUS, I feel that Trump should at least have that option available to him.
Calling this an “election subversion trial” is sadly ironic, given the fact that the real purpose of the trial is to subvert an election - the 2024 election.
“. . . but being a former POTUS, I feel that Trump should at least have that option available to him.”
The founding fathers, and most of the presidents in the early 19th century believed in the concept of the citizen public servant. Citizens ran for elected positions to serve the public and the nation. When their terms were over they went home and became ordinary citizens again. There were no stipends, guard details, book deals, free luxury office space, paid speaking engagements, and other trappings of royalty associated with today’s politicians.
I suspect George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Andrew Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln would take great issue with the assertion former presidents or congressional representatives are entitled by their service in public office to be treated differently in any way than any other citizen once having left office. They would also vehemently object to the pensions, cars and drivers, Secret Service guards, government paid offices and staff and other perks former presidents receive courtesy of the taxpayer.
Presidents are temporary elected leaders, not members of an aristocracy supported by the public purse. They should not be entitled to be treated any differently in the courtroom than you or I.
Every year we move closer and closer to dictatorship. In the 20th and 21st centuries we’ve seen many presidents use dictatorial executive orders, as well as the arbitrary rulings of friendly black robed tyrants in the judiciary, to thwart the will of the people’s representatives in Congress. The executive branch today has powers the founders never envisioned and the exercise of those powers threatens the core principles on which our nation was founded. I fear I may live to see the day when a President, aided by a stacked Supreme Court, cancels elections, sends Congress home, and rules as a dictator.
Is Trump being unfairly treated? In my opinion he is. I also believe thousands of American citizens from all walks of life are unfairly treated in the corrupt and highly politicized American justice system. However, the fact Donald Trump served as POTUS does not entitle him the privilege of having his trial televised when no other citizen is afforded that privilege. He is a citizen, equal to all others, not a member of the royalty the founding fathers despised and were determined would not take root in the Republic.
Remember how clear it was that Trump, as President, had the authority ban certain countries from immigrating. That took 2 years to wind through”the system”. It’s clear what’s going on to anyone who doesn’t have an unhealthy hatred for Trump.
Lincoln?
Really?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.