Trump pleads not guilty to 34 felony counts

Trump's lawyers have pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts in a New York courtroom, sparking a heated debate over whether to broadcast his arraignment live on television.

The former president and his team claim that allowing cameras into the court room would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise security concerns. In a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant, they argued that any video or photography of Trump's arraignment could heighten these serious concerns, including Secret Service-related issues.

The Manhattan District Attorney's office has also responded to the media outlets' request for camera access, stating that it would be "defensible" to exclude or restrict videography and photography. However, they noted that there does not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law.

In a similar vein, the prosecutors pointed out that when Trump Organization's CFO Allen Weisselberg was arraigned last year for tax fraud, a limited number of still photographs were allowed. However, they also acknowledged that this was not a comprehensive ban on cameras.

As the debate rages on, CNN - one of the outlets requesting camera access for Tuesday's arraignment - is now opposing Trump's lawyers' request to deny media coverage. This move has sparked concerns among some that it could undermine the integrity of the proceedings and create an uneven playing field for all parties involved.

The outcome of this contentious debate will likely have significant implications for the way in which high-profile court cases are handled, particularly when it comes to issues of free speech and press access.

I'm surprised they didn't think of this one already . I mean, come on, a live arraignment is basically a publicity stunt, right? It's not like Trump is going to be in any real danger or anything... like he was during that stormy night in January . And another thing, what's the big deal about cameras in the courtroom? It's just people taking notes and recording it for their shows. The Secret Service can handle a few paparazzi, no worries . I think allowing cameras is the way to go, actually. It's all about transparency and keeping an eye on the proceedings... or lack thereof, depending on how you look at it .

I'm so down for live streaming Trump's arraignment - I mean who doesn't want to see the former Prez get held accountable for his actions? But at the same time, can you blame Trump's lawyers on being concerned about a "circus-like atmosphere"? I'd be like "What if the Secret Service gets overwhelmed and can't secure the area?" On the other hand, isn't it everyone's right to know what's going down in our courts of justice? It's all about finding that balance, you know? Maybe the Manhattan DA could just let us all watch from a designated area outside the courtroom? That way we get a glimpse of what's happening without compromising anyone's security

I gotta wonder if they're trying to hide something from us . I mean, come on, it's not like we haven't seen arraignments go down before without cameras. And what's with the security concerns? Can't a little transparency hurt anyone? It feels like they're just trying to spin this as some sort of spectacle rather than actual justice being served .

I remember when I was younger and news would come out of court cases slowly, but now it seems like everything is so fast-paced. I think we need to find that balance between keeping people informed and maintaining the integrity of the process. Maybe let us see what's going on behind closed doors once in a while?

come on folks! cant we just watch him get arraigned already? its not like hes gonna do anything crazy... but noooo lets make this into a circus. newsflash: trump is used to being in the spotlight so whats the diff now? if the manny district attorney thinks they need more security, that's legit reason to restrict cameras. but whats the harm in letting us see how this plays out live on tv? its not like hes gonna incite a riot or anything... btw, have u seen those pics of allen weiselberg getting arraigned last year? thats all they wanted then

I don't get why they're making such a big deal about whether or not cameras can be in the courtroom . I mean, it's just another arraignment, right? And what's wrong with having a little bit of transparency? It'd actually help keep things transparent and accountable, you know? But noooo, Trump's team is all "circus-like atmosphere" and security concerns... like they're the first ones to ever try to hide something . And CNN just switched sides now because Trump's lawyers asked them nicely . The real question should be why are we even debating this in the first place? It's not like it's some revolutionary new concept or anything...

Ugh, arraignments can be so boring . I mean, I know they're important and all that, but can't we just get a good selfie out of it? Anyway, back to the topic at hand... have you ever noticed how weird it is when you're trying to cook dinner and your internet keeps dropping? Like, what's the deal with that?! I swear, it's like the world's most annoying little joke. Oh wait, what was we talking about again?

omg what a drama!! i'm literally on the edge of my seat thinking about trump's arraignment i mean who wants to deny media coverage?? its all about transparency right?? the manna from heaven for journalists is all about uncovering the truth and giving the public a glimpse into what's going down inside that courtroom let's hope they don't make it some circus like atmosphere but at the same time i'm worried about security concerns i just wanna see trump get charged and bring some closure to america btw can we talk about how this is all so juicy??

I'm so curious about how this is going to go down . I mean, come on, Trump's team wants to keep everything behind closed doors like he's some kinda fugitive or something . But at the same time, it's not like they're expecting us to just ignore what's happening in that courtroom. It's all about balance, you know? We need to see how this plays out on live TV - will it be a circus, or just another day of justice being served? I'm keeping my popcorn ready for Tuesday

I mean, who needs transparency in a courtroom anyway? It's not like the public has a right to know what's going on or anything . I'm sure it's totally fine that Trump's lawyers just want to keep everything under wraps... for their own "security" reasons. Meanwhile, we're supposed to just blindly trust them when they say that cameras would create a "circus-like atmosphere". Give me a break! It's not like there have been any instances of courtroom drama or scandals in the past that might actually warrant some scrutiny. Let's just stick with good old-fashioned hearsay and rumors, shall we?

idk why trumps team is being so dramatic about this . if we cant even get footage of him getting arraigned live on tv then isnt that kinda rigged against the public? like, what are they hiding or something? also, news outlets have been saying it would be defensible to let cameras in and all the prosecutors are just now opposing it after trumps team makes a fuss about it? seems fishy to me . why shouldnt we get to see this high-profile case play out live on tv like we do with other courts? its not like there wont be enough security measures in place . btw, what is the point of even having arraignments if we cant watch them on live stream then?!