We therefore demand that you immediately provide and publicly release the full, unedited transcript of the 60 Minutes Interview with Kamala Harris. Additionally, in contemplation of possible litigation, we demand that you preserve all communications and documents relating to this Interview, together with any edits of the Interview's content, and that you refrain from destroying any relevant communications or documents.
Such a "demand" letter contemplates the legal process of "discovery," in this case presumably for purposes of proving that the interview was edited to make Harris look better than she would have in un-edited form.
So far as I know, it's not illegal to edit interviews for any reasons the media outlets running those interviews might have. But let's assume that this goes to court.
Has Trump's attorney mentioned to him that "discovery" runs in both directions?
As defendant in such hypothetical litigation, CBS would presumably be interested in the conduct and content of every media appearance Trump has ever made -- if those appearances were edited, how they were edited, and why they were edited, and would be entitled to all that material as "discovery," to defend themselves if, on no other grounds, that his interviewers do that all the time too, often at his behest and per his direction.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. But one piece of legal advice I've heard from numerous attorneys on numerous subjects is "never forget that discovery is a bitch."
No comments:
Post a Comment