After representing to prosecutors that he would not file a response to media groups’ request that Judge Chutkan permit cameras in the courtroom during him March trial, Trump filed one late last night. What could be more on brand? Trump says he now favors cameras. He condemns the Biden administration’s political prosecution of its “leading electoral opponent”, labeling it a “show trial.” His lawyers write: “this case has all the unfortunate badges of a trial in an authoritarian regime, lacking legitimacy or due process.”
Such a chess match. In any case the truth needs to be seen & heard first hand and in and most especially all Americans that care about our way of life and futures as voters of our own destinies. I think most everyone understands that the former president’s truth is in his disingenuous mind only. So be it and let the cameras roll.
To make it happen, please join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised: https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial (and share with your friends/followers).
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith said the news organizations should lobby the Judicial Conference. That's exactly what I'm doing.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
A good friend had a head-strong boy. When he was about 4, he would head outside and say, I'm not wearing a coat Mom. I don't need one. She'd say , "Ok". It shocked me. We're in northern WI and it was about 20 degrees F. A few minutes later, he came back in and said, "It got cold mom, I'm gonna need my jacket." "OK!" He also put on a hat, mittens and boots and then out he went..Had she told him he had to wear them, there would have been a stand-off, a tantrum, tears. Instead she kept doing whatever she was doing without missing a beat. She said to me, "see how that works?" Same principal. In this case though, the 4 year old was a smart kid and figured it out himself. TFG never learns
A mother (who I know well 😃) and her 3 year old daughter were grocery shopping. The little girl wasn’t happy when her mother told her “no” about something. The little girl flopped to the floor and started having a tantrum. What did her mother do…. She got down the floor and had a tantrum right along with her daughter (mimicking her daughter). The daughter stopped almost immediately. The mother who told me this story said It was the last tantrum her daughter ever had.
Lori and George, I love your “meltdown” stories. I never had children, but I babysat for young kids from 8 on. I had a little boy who would hold his breath, turn blue and faint. There was abuse in his house and I never really knew what to do for him until he came to. Then we had some milk and cookies and his siblings and I helped him return to “normal”. Haven’t thought of that memory in a very long time. I’m 74 now. Thank you both.
I wouldn't be surprised. SC Smiths' reputation is pretty terrific. I believe if anyone can see multiple steps ahead of a loser like the orange traitor, it's Jack Smith.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised. As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
I see the problem. Apparently you were not able to read, or did not read, Joyce's Five Questions that she sent out earlier. In that essay, she clarifies that the decision to allow cameras is entirely up to the judge in a federal court, with consideration being given to what impact allowing cameras would have on the defendant. But apparently, Trump has no concern about the cameras, so let's go at it. Still, it is the judge's decision.
Yes, I am aware of what Smith argued. But if you read some of the comments, some folks speculate that Smith was just drawing Trump in - gambling that Trump would do the exact opposite of whatever Smith wants so he appears to be the victim. I certainly hope that is the case, and like you, I hope the judge decides to allow cameras, or at least a camera. Also, Smith's "argument" about not allowing cameras was fairly "weak" and didn't seem to have a lot of conviction behind it. Just quoting Scripture, so to speak.
Perhaps you missed previous comments that noted Smith said the media can petition the court for cameras. That surely seems to me like an invitation for the public to weigh in. And the media has filed briefs.
But the most persuasive argument for the governments position was the simplicity of trumps psychology. Treat him like a toddler and you can get him to do what he doesn’t want to do,
I wonder how long it will take before he realizes how he’s effed up.
I am under the impression that the judge has entire discretion about allowing cameras in court and regarding number allowed, positioning, etc. I don't think either the Judicial Conference or Roberts has anything to do with it. Apparently you do not think that is true ?
Not for federal criminal trials. Broadcasting is prohibited. That was the central argument in Jack Smith's response. But in the petition I note that exceptions have been made for victims to view noteworthy trials.
As Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted; we should be allowed to see the trial first-hand.
I say, give Trump want he wants even if he doesn't want it. Let the cameras into the courtroom so everyone sees the evidence of the case being presented to the American people.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Thank you for sending this link. I believe there should be cameras allowed so the world can decide the innocence or guilt of the defendant and the evidence against Trump.
Classic R "gaslighting" by turning the topic on its head to get what Trump really wants: a (patently false) "perception" that Trump is being unfairly treated by our judicial system. The irony about this is we all agree with him!! Trump IS being "unfairly" treated with super-soft kid gloves in a manner no other Defendant would be treated in similar circumstances solely because he is a former president running for re-election as a way to avoid prosecution/imprisonment. We get it; we are not suckered into his Alice in Wonderland world. (BTW, Joyce, it's Judge Chutkan's court - see your first reference.)
And may I add as well, we Americans are being unfairly treated by that “super-soft kid glove” approach to this criminal and con man extraordinaire. Were anyone else other than Trump they would have been sitting in solitary confinement long ago.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
To me it looks more like he’s been getting the kid glove treatment in order to not give his followers or his lawyers a reason complain or to revolt, or to delay the trial--not because he was a president or is going to run again.
Show time! Give trump live tv coverage in the courtroom. It would be a grand production. Wonder if he wants "Hail to the Chief" played as he enters. Perhaps a wrestling ring where he can go head to head with the Judge. A 3-ring circus is what he really wants. Too bad we can't skip to the end and know the outcome. Carry on.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Something I haven't seen discussed before is Trump's accusations toward Biden. According to Trump, Biden has "weaponized" the Justice Department against Trump.
We all know that this is not the case, but we should be clear that this is exactly what Trump would do if their places were reversed.
What Trump blithely ignores is that he has actually broken the law and committed crimes, and that's why he finds himself in courtroom after courtroom.
No one is empirically "out to get him". What is happening now is the consequence of his own misguided actions as a businessman and as a president. In the court of public opinion, he continues to claim total innocence ("it was a perfect phone call"), which he cannot claim in the courtroom, without perjuring himself.
This point needs to be stressed over and over to take up some of his oxygen.
This is totally consistent for Trump: he routinely accuses his opponents of things he's done or is doing himself. When his lawyers compare the Biden administration to an "authoritarian regime," I first choke on my breakfast then wonder if they've read about "Project 2025," the right wing's blueprint for what Trump would do if elected in 2024.
Project 2025 is about putting a Christian theocratic rule over the country. Trump is just a means to that end. He's a useful distraction. The only way to stop it is to defeat Republicans at the polls and expose the Heritage Society for the American Taliban organization it is.
Trump is a proven vote-getter, and neither the Heritage Foundation, Leonard Leo, nor the Stephen Millers and Steve Bannons of the right can come anywhere close.. But Trump is also a potential liability: he doesn't take direction, he's 100% out for himself, and he can't shut up. I can see a scenario where the anti-democratic GOP ticket wins (which is NOT going to happen), and after a decent interval the plotters do away with Trump, or Trump does away with himself. IOW, pay close attention to the VP candidate on such a ticket. If anyone wants to see the public face of Project 2025, here it is: https://www.project2025.org/
Meanwhile -- what's your source for the "Christian theocratic rule" part? These people will absolutely pull the strings of the fundamentalist Christians, but as far as I can tell, they're realpolitik to the marrow and would do away with any hardcore fanatics as readily as Hitler did away with the SA.
Yes. They will do anything! And when Trump is out of the picture, they will sanction another leader and this time they will be smarter. My hope is anyone who wants to be this leader will get from it what he can at the expense of whoever gets in the way.
Every day in every way I thank all the gods, goddesses, and lucky stars that Trump is as stupid and self-absorbed as he is. (OK, he's canny, but IMO that's consistent with stupidity.)
And converting the US form of government to government of a man rather than of laws.-- what is usually called a dictatorship.
Many of the fright wing assume they’ll be able to trample over him to get their agenda. They’d find out, as they are now on abortion, that the only agenda hes committed to is his own wealth and power.
Anytime Trump accuses anyone of anything, its a usual indication that he’s guilty of it himself.
As a Christian, I shudder to see that description. This is not "Christian," it is right wing Christian Nationalism by white (mostly)men (mostly), rich (mostly)which has been in the works for maybe 50 years trying to rule the country and fight against a multi cultural people who want to be a community that works together. They want power.
I used to feel a sense of comfort when I would hear someone stating that they are Christian and follow Christian principles. However, you're right. That term has been co-opted by zealots who would impose their way of living on others, I fear with no kindness. I observed and separately experienced that lack of empathy for the other personally, borne of ignorance and naive certainty, but cruel just the same. This element of the "former Republican Party" shakes me.
My new focus message is, we must pay attention to the down ballot. I deeply believe Trump will not win, but that’s not the real problem. It’s the MAGAs. No MAGAs in congress or the senate. They’re are the real and continuing threat.
This is why we must begin paying closer attention who running throughout the country. I do believe were understanding that more and more.
Just because we cannot vote in a state running a MAGA, does not mean we can’t help defeat them. I donate, as I know many of you do also to races across the nation to defeat candidates unfit for office.
That such a fine statesman as Tim Ryan was abandoned over JD Vance just sticks in my craw. Maybe the DNC thinks Ryan was unelectable in OH, but I think otherwise. I’ll bet if Roe v Wade was overturned before the 2022 midterms it would have been a completely different outcome. We are seeing Republicans voting blue over the Dobbs decision because the wave of outrage over losing a constitutional right is only increasing in both parties and with Independents.
Now Republicans are proudly telling the residents of OH to f#ck off, they are going to fully ignore the will of the people, they’ll do as they please and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
Not right now, however I believe as more daylight shines upon their illegal and immoral practices, the voters will abandon them.
They want the freedom to make health decisions back in their own hands.
I believe by Nov 2024 all other issues will pale in comparison with abortion being the driving force for Democratic candidates. By that time, the Democratic Party could run Huey, Dewey and Louie and they’d win in a landslide as long as Roe is codified.
He doesn't see it that way because he thinks he is above the law and he has never been held accountable! Even when he has been taken to court , he lies and manipulates and bullies his accusers or he just pays a fine . Now he is being indicated and all his old tricks and bullying isn't working so now more chaos and threats to everyone !! I wish he would just go away !
Yes, I thought this as I read the request. How can he, and his attorneys, get away with the constant lies about this being Biden's fault. It's HIS fault for being a criminal! But the more he says this, the more it is perceived by some that this is all Biden's fault. It's his mode of repeating it long enough and they'll believe it. For the lawyers to say this seems another step into illegality. I know they are his "minions" but I don't get how they get away with it.
The justice system is by its nature a weapon to be deployed against lawbreakers. Due process is that by which, under law, not by direction of a few people in government but by investigations and citizens ( grand juries, juries etc). What we are talking about “weaponizing” it is subverting the due process of law in aiming the system. There is zero evidence this has been done in the case of Trump. There is, however, direct evidence -- his own statements-- that it is how Trump will run the system. When there’s someone who is a thtreat to him he will turn to the DOJ and say “ indict him” and the Doj will. Shockingly he doesnt even mention finding a credible charge other than disloyalty or challenge to him. That’s governmnment by a man, not by law. .
My personal opinion is that he wants to be on record asking for camera so that when they are inevitably denied he can say the system is rigged against him and the administration that argued against camera and the court system system are trying to hide their corruption from The People. Basically it helps his sham trial narrative.
It’s because the Government filed a brief opposing it. If they filed a brief in favor of cameras he would file a brief opposing. If the judge disapproves the request for cameras he’ll be the persecuted one.
The judge at the beginning of the trial should admonish trump that she will remove him from the court if he tries to behave improperly.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
“Trump says he now favors cameras.” Trump being Trump, I actually think he means it. He’s always been “red light Don.” His lawyers write: “this case has all the unfortunate badges of a trial in an authoritarian regime, lacking legitimacy or due process.” This sentence, like so many voiced by Trump, his lawyers and friends, convinces me these people do not know the meaning of words.
It's all projection, all the time, with these people. I can't believe how many people seem to be blind to this.
At any rate, I hope that the government allows what he says he wants to happen and allows the cameras in. He will try to turn the proceedings into a circus; narcissists always do (I remember Ted Bundy's trial videos!), but people need to see him LOSE so he can't say he won and the government is lying.
I believe you Joyce. He will find some way of twisting it to his advantage if the court doesn’t allow cameras into it’s proceeding. After all, he will be in court instead of out on the campaign trail. What better way to muck it up.
Be afraid, be very afraid (said in an Elmer Fudd voice)🤣
Peace and prayers for our country and democracy☮️👏
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
I've been told that when court proceedings are televised, the jury is not shown -- for good reason! I just checked the cell phone rules for my state (MA), and they say that cell phones are allowed in the courtHOUSE, but in the courtROOM, they must be turned off or muted and out of sight. Journalists and members of the public may use their cells IF the judge permits it. Not sure about other jurisdictions, but I'm pretty sure most of them have rules & regs about cameras and cell phones.
Cameras aren't allowed in federal courtrooms either, and haven't been since long before cell phones. Apparently they're sometimes allowed in civil cases but not in criminal ones. My strong hunch is that Judge Chutkan (who along with every other judge associated with a Trump case has been getting death threats) will be very strict about this.
"And Trump’s lawyers may have inadvertently provided Judge Chutkan with some cover by asking for cameras and claiming Trump’s due process rights would otherwise be violated." My sediment <g> exactly.
For T, it's a win-win. (It's not, but that's how he sees it.)
If cameras are allowed in, his rabid base can see how he's being mistreated by an evil government. If cameras are not allowed in, it's a conspiratorial plot to hide what an evil government is doing to him.
Either way, he gets to play the victim card, which is his favorite game.
And I think it will backfire. When everyone sees the same thing, which is ever true at his rally, you get mob mentality there, truth will out. His witless followers mostly didn’t watch the Jan6 hearings. But tfg wasn’t there.
They’ll turn out for this. And I bet many will start to have the fog lift.
Is it possible that Trump wants cameras in Judge Cannon's courtroom where she may let him get away with campaigning, whereas federal judges would not let him get away with that?
As a consequence of Trump's filing last night, the legal issues pertaining to whether the court can order the Jan. 6 prosecution televised are now very different. Rule 53 absolutely prohibits broadcasting a criminal case. But as Chad Bowman argues, the First Amendment right to a public trial trumps that rule of procedure. The government responds that federal courts have universally held that Rule 53 is constitutional and its limitations are consistent with the First Amendment. But there is no reason why those limitations cannot be addressed by the alternatives suggested by the Media Coalition. Because of advances in technology, and the experience of state courts that have televised criminal trials, Judge Chutkan can easily distinguish all of the prior cases cited by the government where this issue has been addressed.
Now, on top of that, we have Trump's demand that his case be televised. I disagree with the idea that he really does not want the proceedings televised. I don't think he believes that a trial will undermine his chances of being elected. He depends upon theater to keep his constituency riled up. But even so, his lawyers certainly know that his position greatly increases the likelihood that Judge Chutkan will grant Midea Coalition's motion.
This is because Trump has now eliminated one of the most powerful arguments that have influenced the courts in the past: the defendant's due process rights. Of course, the government argues that it is entitled to a fair trial as well. Certainly, some courts have recognized such a right, but that "right" has no basis in the constitution, unlike a defendant's 5th and 14th Amendment due process rights.
Things Judge Chutkan knows:
1. This is the most important prosecution in the history of the United States.
2. The importance of the cases cited by the government pales by comparison because the country was not divided over whether the crimes took place. Nor did a large number of Americans believe that those cases were politically motivated show trials.
3. As it currently stands, everything that 350 million Americans will learn about the case will be secondhand. They will only hear accounts of the parties' opening statements, the direct and cross-examination of witnesses, the contents of documents, and the closing arguments and jury instructions from the media.
4. Those accounts will differ significantly based on the media outlet presenting them. Unquestionably, accounts by reporters and personalities working for MSNBC will be very different from those presented by Fox. Twenty years ago that might not have been so significant because people got their information from various (albeit far fewer) sources. But because of our nation's polarization, people only listen to sources that represent a particular ideology.
Based upon all of these factors, Judge Chutkan may believe that the only way to ensure the legitimacy of the jury's verdict is to televise the proceedings so that the American people will hear and see the evidence and make up their own minds.
The government argues that this is a policy decision. Not so, this is a constitutional question that is ripe for the court to consider. To the extent that prior to last night, the court had to balance competing constitutional rights, there is no longer anything to balance.
Your identification of this issue as a constitutional question is accurate, I expect. I have only experience in state courts as a cop; from what I do know, the advances in electronic technology should be pushing the courts to reevaluate this prohibition.
Well said, Jon. And Jack Smith said the news organizations should lobby the Judicial Conference. That's exactly what I'm doing.
Please join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised: https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Televise it. Federal judges will give him 15 seconds of his tom foolery and usual chicanery. Even Judge Cannon will have to rein him in or face future defendants and lawyers following his example.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Maybe Jack Smith's filing to deny cameras was a psychology move to induce Trump to support cameras.
Yep. What we used to call reverse or child psychology! Pretty much worked every time! ;-)
Such a chess match. In any case the truth needs to be seen & heard first hand and in and most especially all Americans that care about our way of life and futures as voters of our own destinies. I think most everyone understands that the former president’s truth is in his disingenuous mind only. So be it and let the cameras roll.
To make it happen, please join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised: https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial (and share with your friends/followers).
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith said the news organizations should lobby the Judicial Conference. That's exactly what I'm doing.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Done, also. It's been a while. I thought I had Change.org on an ActBlue monthly before the 2018 elections. Keep up the good work.
Thanks so much! Please share to your friends/followers. That's how we will get to my goal of 250,000 names (I've done it before!).
Signed, donated and will be sharing. Thank you!
Thanks so much, Diana! Really appreciate the support. Sharing is how I'm going to get to my goal of 250,000 names (I've done it before!).
Done. Good for you!
Thanks so much! Please share to your friends/followers. That's how we will get to my goal of 250,000 names (I've done it before!).
Done.
Thanks so much, Joyce! Please share to your friends/followers. That's how we will get to my goal of 250,000 names (I've done it before!).
Done and shared.
Thanks so much, Jen! Sharing is how we will get to my goal of 250,000 names (I've done it before!).
Done & done! (Thank you!)
100% agree!
I think the better chess term for this might be “gambit.”
“The Smith Gambits” (there have been more than one) -- coming soon to a penitentiary near you.
Done and shared. 2,000+ fb friends....
I'm inclined to agree with that one. Reverse psychology does work with this guy. Noticed that before. I think its a good move.
Reverse psychology always works on two-year-olds. . .
A good friend had a head-strong boy. When he was about 4, he would head outside and say, I'm not wearing a coat Mom. I don't need one. She'd say , "Ok". It shocked me. We're in northern WI and it was about 20 degrees F. A few minutes later, he came back in and said, "It got cold mom, I'm gonna need my jacket." "OK!" He also put on a hat, mittens and boots and then out he went..Had she told him he had to wear them, there would have been a stand-off, a tantrum, tears. Instead she kept doing whatever she was doing without missing a beat. She said to me, "see how that works?" Same principal. In this case though, the 4 year old was a smart kid and figured it out himself. TFG never learns
A mother (who I know well 😃) and her 3 year old daughter were grocery shopping. The little girl wasn’t happy when her mother told her “no” about something. The little girl flopped to the floor and started having a tantrum. What did her mother do…. She got down the floor and had a tantrum right along with her daughter (mimicking her daughter). The daughter stopped almost immediately. The mother who told me this story said It was the last tantrum her daughter ever had.
Lori and George, I love your “meltdown” stories. I never had children, but I babysat for young kids from 8 on. I had a little boy who would hold his breath, turn blue and faint. There was abuse in his house and I never really knew what to do for him until he came to. Then we had some milk and cookies and his siblings and I helped him return to “normal”. Haven’t thought of that memory in a very long time. I’m 74 now. Thank you both.
Surly you're not comparing our ex-presidents behavior to a two year old. That puts two year olds in a bad light🤣
I wouldn't be surprised. SC Smiths' reputation is pretty terrific. I believe if anyone can see multiple steps ahead of a loser like the orange traitor, it's Jack Smith.
God, please, please let that be so....
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised. As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
I see the problem. Apparently you were not able to read, or did not read, Joyce's Five Questions that she sent out earlier. In that essay, she clarifies that the decision to allow cameras is entirely up to the judge in a federal court, with consideration being given to what impact allowing cameras would have on the defendant. But apparently, Trump has no concern about the cameras, so let's go at it. Still, it is the judge's decision.
Thanks for heads up. I am now a paid subscriber, so will check that out. If true, that would be awesome; but that's not what Smith argued: https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/03/politics/special-counsel-cameras-courtroom-trump-federal-election-subversion-case/index.html
Yes, I am aware of what Smith argued. But if you read some of the comments, some folks speculate that Smith was just drawing Trump in - gambling that Trump would do the exact opposite of whatever Smith wants so he appears to be the victim. I certainly hope that is the case, and like you, I hope the judge decides to allow cameras, or at least a camera. Also, Smith's "argument" about not allowing cameras was fairly "weak" and didn't seem to have a lot of conviction behind it. Just quoting Scripture, so to speak.
Perhaps you missed previous comments that noted Smith said the media can petition the court for cameras. That surely seems to me like an invitation for the public to weigh in. And the media has filed briefs.
But the most persuasive argument for the governments position was the simplicity of trumps psychology. Treat him like a toddler and you can get him to do what he doesn’t want to do,
I wonder how long it will take before he realizes how he’s effed up.
I am under the impression that the judge has entire discretion about allowing cameras in court and regarding number allowed, positioning, etc. I don't think either the Judicial Conference or Roberts has anything to do with it. Apparently you do not think that is true ?
Not for federal criminal trials. Broadcasting is prohibited. That was the central argument in Jack Smith's response. But in the petition I note that exceptions have been made for victims to view noteworthy trials.
As Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted; we should be allowed to see the trial first-hand.
Ok, that's an interesting take. If so, then WOW.
Very spy vs spy!
😂😂😂😂😂👍
I say, give Trump want he wants even if he doesn't want it. Let the cameras into the courtroom so everyone sees the evidence of the case being presented to the American people.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant!
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Thank you for sending this link. I believe there should be cameras allowed so the world can decide the innocence or guilt of the defendant and the evidence against Trump.
Thanks Patrick. Please share to your friends/followers. My goal is 250,000 names so I need everyone’s help!
Classic R "gaslighting" by turning the topic on its head to get what Trump really wants: a (patently false) "perception" that Trump is being unfairly treated by our judicial system. The irony about this is we all agree with him!! Trump IS being "unfairly" treated with super-soft kid gloves in a manner no other Defendant would be treated in similar circumstances solely because he is a former president running for re-election as a way to avoid prosecution/imprisonment. We get it; we are not suckered into his Alice in Wonderland world. (BTW, Joyce, it's Judge Chutkan's court - see your first reference.)
That exact accusation has been made recently by one (at least) of the Jan.6th defendants!
Exactly Sheila
And may I add as well, we Americans are being unfairly treated by that “super-soft kid glove” approach to this criminal and con man extraordinaire. Were anyone else other than Trump they would have been sitting in solitary confinement long ago.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
To me it looks more like he’s been getting the kid glove treatment in order to not give his followers or his lawyers a reason complain or to revolt, or to delay the trial--not because he was a president or is going to run again.
Show time! Give trump live tv coverage in the courtroom. It would be a grand production. Wonder if he wants "Hail to the Chief" played as he enters. Perhaps a wrestling ring where he can go head to head with the Judge. A 3-ring circus is what he really wants. Too bad we can't skip to the end and know the outcome. Carry on.
They could get him an escalator.
Going Down, down, down, ...
Love it
The Art of the Trial !!
⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️
The best production. Everybody says so!
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Something I haven't seen discussed before is Trump's accusations toward Biden. According to Trump, Biden has "weaponized" the Justice Department against Trump.
We all know that this is not the case, but we should be clear that this is exactly what Trump would do if their places were reversed.
What Trump blithely ignores is that he has actually broken the law and committed crimes, and that's why he finds himself in courtroom after courtroom.
No one is empirically "out to get him". What is happening now is the consequence of his own misguided actions as a businessman and as a president. In the court of public opinion, he continues to claim total innocence ("it was a perfect phone call"), which he cannot claim in the courtroom, without perjuring himself.
This point needs to be stressed over and over to take up some of his oxygen.
This is totally consistent for Trump: he routinely accuses his opponents of things he's done or is doing himself. When his lawyers compare the Biden administration to an "authoritarian regime," I first choke on my breakfast then wonder if they've read about "Project 2025," the right wing's blueprint for what Trump would do if elected in 2024.
Project 2025 is about putting a Christian theocratic rule over the country. Trump is just a means to that end. He's a useful distraction. The only way to stop it is to defeat Republicans at the polls and expose the Heritage Society for the American Taliban organization it is.
Nailed it jerry
Trump is a proven vote-getter, and neither the Heritage Foundation, Leonard Leo, nor the Stephen Millers and Steve Bannons of the right can come anywhere close.. But Trump is also a potential liability: he doesn't take direction, he's 100% out for himself, and he can't shut up. I can see a scenario where the anti-democratic GOP ticket wins (which is NOT going to happen), and after a decent interval the plotters do away with Trump, or Trump does away with himself. IOW, pay close attention to the VP candidate on such a ticket. If anyone wants to see the public face of Project 2025, here it is: https://www.project2025.org/
Meanwhile -- what's your source for the "Christian theocratic rule" part? These people will absolutely pull the strings of the fundamentalist Christians, but as far as I can tell, they're realpolitik to the marrow and would do away with any hardcore fanatics as readily as Hitler did away with the SA.
Yes. They will do anything! And when Trump is out of the picture, they will sanction another leader and this time they will be smarter. My hope is anyone who wants to be this leader will get from it what he can at the expense of whoever gets in the way.
Every day in every way I thank all the gods, goddesses, and lucky stars that Trump is as stupid and self-absorbed as he is. (OK, he's canny, but IMO that's consistent with stupidity.)
And converting the US form of government to government of a man rather than of laws.-- what is usually called a dictatorship.
Many of the fright wing assume they’ll be able to trample over him to get their agenda. They’d find out, as they are now on abortion, that the only agenda hes committed to is his own wealth and power.
Anytime Trump accuses anyone of anything, its a usual indication that he’s guilty of it himself.
As a Christian, I shudder to see that description. This is not "Christian," it is right wing Christian Nationalism by white (mostly)men (mostly), rich (mostly)which has been in the works for maybe 50 years trying to rule the country and fight against a multi cultural people who want to be a community that works together. They want power.
I used to feel a sense of comfort when I would hear someone stating that they are Christian and follow Christian principles. However, you're right. That term has been co-opted by zealots who would impose their way of living on others, I fear with no kindness. I observed and separately experienced that lack of empathy for the other personally, borne of ignorance and naive certainty, but cruel just the same. This element of the "former Republican Party" shakes me.
My new focus message is, we must pay attention to the down ballot. I deeply believe Trump will not win, but that’s not the real problem. It’s the MAGAs. No MAGAs in congress or the senate. They’re are the real and continuing threat.
This is why we must begin paying closer attention who running throughout the country. I do believe were understanding that more and more.
Just because we cannot vote in a state running a MAGA, does not mean we can’t help defeat them. I donate, as I know many of you do also to races across the nation to defeat candidates unfit for office.
That such a fine statesman as Tim Ryan was abandoned over JD Vance just sticks in my craw. Maybe the DNC thinks Ryan was unelectable in OH, but I think otherwise. I’ll bet if Roe v Wade was overturned before the 2022 midterms it would have been a completely different outcome. We are seeing Republicans voting blue over the Dobbs decision because the wave of outrage over losing a constitutional right is only increasing in both parties and with Independents.
Now Republicans are proudly telling the residents of OH to f#ck off, they are going to fully ignore the will of the people, they’ll do as they please and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
Not right now, however I believe as more daylight shines upon their illegal and immoral practices, the voters will abandon them.
They want the freedom to make health decisions back in their own hands.
I believe by Nov 2024 all other issues will pale in comparison with abortion being the driving force for Democratic candidates. By that time, the Democratic Party could run Huey, Dewey and Louie and they’d win in a landslide as long as Roe is codified.
He doesn't see it that way because he thinks he is above the law and he has never been held accountable! Even when he has been taken to court , he lies and manipulates and bullies his accusers or he just pays a fine . Now he is being indicated and all his old tricks and bullying isn't working so now more chaos and threats to everyone !! I wish he would just go away !
Yes, I thought this as I read the request. How can he, and his attorneys, get away with the constant lies about this being Biden's fault. It's HIS fault for being a criminal! But the more he says this, the more it is perceived by some that this is all Biden's fault. It's his mode of repeating it long enough and they'll believe it. For the lawyers to say this seems another step into illegality. I know they are his "minions" but I don't get how they get away with it.
The justice system is by its nature a weapon to be deployed against lawbreakers. Due process is that by which, under law, not by direction of a few people in government but by investigations and citizens ( grand juries, juries etc). What we are talking about “weaponizing” it is subverting the due process of law in aiming the system. There is zero evidence this has been done in the case of Trump. There is, however, direct evidence -- his own statements-- that it is how Trump will run the system. When there’s someone who is a thtreat to him he will turn to the DOJ and say “ indict him” and the Doj will. Shockingly he doesnt even mention finding a credible charge other than disloyalty or challenge to him. That’s governmnment by a man, not by law. .
Thank you so much for your clear explanation of what is going on here. I appreciate your newsletters and admire your "big picture" view.
My personal opinion is that he wants to be on record asking for camera so that when they are inevitably denied he can say the system is rigged against him and the administration that argued against camera and the court system system are trying to hide their corruption from The People. Basically it helps his sham trial narrative.
I think Chutkan may just give him what he says Jp he wants. After all, the rule regarding no cameras is ostensibly to protect defendants. Let er rip..
It’s because the Government filed a brief opposing it. If they filed a brief in favor of cameras he would file a brief opposing. If the judge disapproves the request for cameras he’ll be the persecuted one.
The judge at the beginning of the trial should admonish trump that she will remove him from the court if he tries to behave improperly.
It could also be possible that making an issue that will delay the trial is all he's doing.
Chutkan won’t allow that. I bet she goes along with him. His little fans will be so happy.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Thanks Jonathan, I have signed and forwarded to several people.
signed and shared
Oh no! He needs to be there and sulk and squirm and pout.
But yeah, this might happen. And then it just reinforces his witless followers’ assertion of how unfair it is.
Maybe tfg is planning to do just that.
Idk. Women have been much more effective dealing with him for some reason. Especially black women, he just can’t bear it.
“Trump says he now favors cameras.” Trump being Trump, I actually think he means it. He’s always been “red light Don.” His lawyers write: “this case has all the unfortunate badges of a trial in an authoritarian regime, lacking legitimacy or due process.” This sentence, like so many voiced by Trump, his lawyers and friends, convinces me these people do not know the meaning of words.
It's all projection, all the time, with these people. I can't believe how many people seem to be blind to this.
At any rate, I hope that the government allows what he says he wants to happen and allows the cameras in. He will try to turn the proceedings into a circus; narcissists always do (I remember Ted Bundy's trial videos!), but people need to see him LOSE so he can't say he won and the government is lying.
I’ve been working my way through Jack Smith’s team filing this week responding to the dumpster’s motion for dismissal.
That filing makes it clear that the dumpster can’t hire lawyers that can read an indictment nor grasp the elements of the laws that bear.
If Jack Smith ever turns his eye toward Aileen Cannon, nothing of her will remain beyond a grease spot on I-95.
Isn't Habba-Habba your favorite? My God.
I believe you Joyce. He will find some way of twisting it to his advantage if the court doesn’t allow cameras into it’s proceeding. After all, he will be in court instead of out on the campaign trail. What better way to muck it up.
Be afraid, be very afraid (said in an Elmer Fudd voice)🤣
Peace and prayers for our country and democracy☮️👏
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
My "only" concern about cameras in the courtroom is
the jury. This applies to cell
phones as well. They must
be protected from Trump and
his MAGA. If that can happen,
then by all means, shine a bright light on this trial and
bleach our nation of this virus.
I've been told that when court proceedings are televised, the jury is not shown -- for good reason! I just checked the cell phone rules for my state (MA), and they say that cell phones are allowed in the courtHOUSE, but in the courtROOM, they must be turned off or muted and out of sight. Journalists and members of the public may use their cells IF the judge permits it. Not sure about other jurisdictions, but I'm pretty sure most of them have rules & regs about cameras and cell phones.
The problem with cell phones
are the new cameras in them.
If allowed in the court, they could get a good photo of the
jury and publish it. Then the
doxing would start.
Cameras aren't allowed in federal courtrooms either, and haven't been since long before cell phones. Apparently they're sometimes allowed in civil cases but not in criminal ones. My strong hunch is that Judge Chutkan (who along with every other judge associated with a Trump case has been getting death threats) will be very strict about this.
I watched a good bit of the Chauvin trial. We never saw the morons, but we saw witnesses and the defendant. It would be the same here.
"And Trump’s lawyers may have inadvertently provided Judge Chutkan with some cover by asking for cameras and claiming Trump’s due process rights would otherwise be violated." My sediment <g> exactly.
For T, it's a win-win. (It's not, but that's how he sees it.)
If cameras are allowed in, his rabid base can see how he's being mistreated by an evil government. If cameras are not allowed in, it's a conspiratorial plot to hide what an evil government is doing to him.
Either way, he gets to play the victim card, which is his favorite game.
And I think it will backfire. When everyone sees the same thing, which is ever true at his rally, you get mob mentality there, truth will out. His witless followers mostly didn’t watch the Jan6 hearings. But tfg wasn’t there.
They’ll turn out for this. And I bet many will start to have the fog lift.
Is it possible that Trump wants cameras in Judge Cannon's courtroom where she may let him get away with campaigning, whereas federal judges would not let him get away with that?
"Judge" Cannon would let him get away with it, Judge Chutkan will not.
Exactly my fear Laura! Even if one judge, Cannon permits his antics, maga supporters will believe that was the only “fair” judge?!
As a consequence of Trump's filing last night, the legal issues pertaining to whether the court can order the Jan. 6 prosecution televised are now very different. Rule 53 absolutely prohibits broadcasting a criminal case. But as Chad Bowman argues, the First Amendment right to a public trial trumps that rule of procedure. The government responds that federal courts have universally held that Rule 53 is constitutional and its limitations are consistent with the First Amendment. But there is no reason why those limitations cannot be addressed by the alternatives suggested by the Media Coalition. Because of advances in technology, and the experience of state courts that have televised criminal trials, Judge Chutkan can easily distinguish all of the prior cases cited by the government where this issue has been addressed.
Now, on top of that, we have Trump's demand that his case be televised. I disagree with the idea that he really does not want the proceedings televised. I don't think he believes that a trial will undermine his chances of being elected. He depends upon theater to keep his constituency riled up. But even so, his lawyers certainly know that his position greatly increases the likelihood that Judge Chutkan will grant Midea Coalition's motion.
This is because Trump has now eliminated one of the most powerful arguments that have influenced the courts in the past: the defendant's due process rights. Of course, the government argues that it is entitled to a fair trial as well. Certainly, some courts have recognized such a right, but that "right" has no basis in the constitution, unlike a defendant's 5th and 14th Amendment due process rights.
Things Judge Chutkan knows:
1. This is the most important prosecution in the history of the United States.
2. The importance of the cases cited by the government pales by comparison because the country was not divided over whether the crimes took place. Nor did a large number of Americans believe that those cases were politically motivated show trials.
3. As it currently stands, everything that 350 million Americans will learn about the case will be secondhand. They will only hear accounts of the parties' opening statements, the direct and cross-examination of witnesses, the contents of documents, and the closing arguments and jury instructions from the media.
4. Those accounts will differ significantly based on the media outlet presenting them. Unquestionably, accounts by reporters and personalities working for MSNBC will be very different from those presented by Fox. Twenty years ago that might not have been so significant because people got their information from various (albeit far fewer) sources. But because of our nation's polarization, people only listen to sources that represent a particular ideology.
Based upon all of these factors, Judge Chutkan may believe that the only way to ensure the legitimacy of the jury's verdict is to televise the proceedings so that the American people will hear and see the evidence and make up their own minds.
The government argues that this is a policy decision. Not so, this is a constitutional question that is ripe for the court to consider. To the extent that prior to last night, the court had to balance competing constitutional rights, there is no longer anything to balance.
Your identification of this issue as a constitutional question is accurate, I expect. I have only experience in state courts as a cop; from what I do know, the advances in electronic technology should be pushing the courts to reevaluate this prohibition.
Well done Jon. As for me, I say televise the thing. I want to feel like I know for myself the why and the how of whatever transpires.
Well said, Jon. And Jack Smith said the news organizations should lobby the Judicial Conference. That's exactly what I'm doing.
Please join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised: https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!
Televise it. Federal judges will give him 15 seconds of his tom foolery and usual chicanery. Even Judge Cannon will have to rein him in or face future defendants and lawyers following his example.
Join me and more than 50,000 others who are calling on the U.S. Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Roberts to allow US v. Trump to be televised.
As Jack Smith’s indictment laid out, 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden are victims of Trump’s conspiracy against our right to vote and to have our vote counted.
If you agree that we have a right to watch the trial live, please add your name and share the petition with your friends. https://www.change.org/televise-trump-trial
I'm serious about making this happen. I've already sent two letters to all 28 members of the Conference with petitioners' names. I will keep doing so. Thanks!