The government is not wrong that it’s in the public interest to have an early trial, before people start voting in Iowa in mid January, but then the feds should have brought this case (if at all) a year ago. The timing of all these trials, possibly 4 in 2024, is election interference.
The trial in DC against Trump relating to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election involves allegations of a scheme that spanned dozens if not hundreds of people across multiple state lines. The evidence that needs to be reviewed for a proper defense must be monumental, including video, tex messages, emails, audio/video, and so one. The indictment alleges a scheme in multiple states and there must be upwards of 100 witnesses.
Yet the government wants the trial to start January 2, 2024, with jury selection in mid-December, as stated in its filing in response to the Judge’s request for both parties to propose a schedule:
In its August 3, 2023, Minute Order, the Court directed the Government to “file a brief proposing a trial date and providing an estimate of the time required to set forth the prosecution’s case in chief” at trial. The Government proposes that trial begin on January 2, 2024, and estimates that its case in chief will take no longer than four to six weeks. This trial date, and the proposed schedule outlined below, would give the defendant time to review the discovery in this case and prepare a defense, and would allow the Court and parties to fully litigate any pre-trial legal issues. Most importantly, a January 2 trial date would vindicate the public’s strong interest in a speedy trial—an interest guaranteed by the Constitution and federal law in all cases, but of particular significance here, where the defendant, a former president, is charged with conspiring to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election, obstruct the certification of the election results, and discount citizens’ legitimate votes.
The government is not wrong that it’s in the public interest to have an early trial. Voters should know the evidence against Trump before voting, and whether it backs up or doesn’t back up the indictment. That’s why the government should have brought this case a year ago (if at all), considering the events at issue took place in late 2020 and the first half of January 2021.
There could be at least three, maybe four, trial in 2024. The timing is election interference (which may help Trump in the primaries, but will hurt him in a general election if he is the nominee.)
Additionally, the defendant, any defendant, has a right to a fair trial and I expect that Trump’s team will object to such a quick schedule.
Here is the pretrial schedule proposed by the feds:
• September 25, 2023: Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• October 16, 2023: Oppositions to Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• October 25, 2023: Replies in Support of Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• TBD: Motions Hearing
• November 13, 2023: Motions in Limine
• November 27, 2023: Oppositions to Motions in Limine
• December 4, 2023: Replies in Support of Motions in Limine
• December 8, 2023: Final Pretrial Conference
• December 11, 2023: Jury Selection
• January 2, 2024: Trial
Trump’s response is due in a week.
Trump criticizes federal prosecutors for requesting a Jan. 2, 2024 trial date in the special counsel's criminal case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election
A Jan. 2 start date means Trump may need to spend weekdays in court in the crucial first 2 months the election year pic.twitter.com/VEiL24R2ca
— Alayna Treene (@alaynatreene) August 10, 2023
SCO Smith is going to end up asking for the DC case to be double-set with the FL case. If the FL case goes, then they will agree to continue this case.
If the FL case is continued off of the May trial date, they are banking on Judge Chutken making this case start on that date…
— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) August 10, 2023
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.