Trump Proposes April 2026 Trial In DC Election Prosecution
If the feds and Georgia were going to bring cases surrounding the 2020 election, they should have done it at least a year ago. Voters have a right to know the evidence and the outcomes before voting. At this point it does not appear that can happen without a massive interference in our primary and possibly general elections process.
The Department of Justice has requested a January 2, 2024, trial start in the prosecution of Donald Trump in the District of Columbia District Court for alleged unlawful attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
In addition to my observations that the alleged crime is not clear (overturning an election is not itself a crime), I’ve noted the outrageous delay of all the prosecutions until the cusp of Republican primary season considering that the conduct at issue took place almost exclusively in November-December 2020, and January 2021.
Donald Trump previously has sought to have the Florida national security information and obstruction of justice case delayed to after the 2024 election. That request, as least so far, has been denied by the Florida federal judge, who set trial for May 2024. As least in the Florida case the conduct at issue mostly took place in May-July 2022, so the feds can’t credibly be accused of undue delay.
But not so in the D.C. case (or the Georgia state case). In Georgia, the local prosecutor is seeking an early March 2024 trial in a case with 19 defendants plus 30 unindicted co-consiprators, covering over 40 counts including a wide-ranging RICO count, in a case that was just filed. Equally if not more outrageous than the D.C. request for a January 2, 2024 trial.
BREAKING: Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis is seeking for a March 4, 2024 trial date for Donald Trump, right in the middle of election season.
They are actively interfering in the 2024 election right in front of your eyes and they don't even care.
Earlier this week, Willis acted… pic.twitter.com/Q9T7ikLjNq
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 16, 2023
Trump has filed his response to the government’s request in the D.C. case for a January 2, 2024, trial start. The papers are well written (much higher quality than has been filed for Trump on the Florida case), and persuasively argue that a January 2, 2024, trial start is impossible without prejudicing Trump’s right to a fair defense. Whether kicking the trial off to April 2026 makes sense, is a different matter, and including such a long delay undermines Trump’s otherwise excellent Reponse.
From the Response:
This is an unprecedented case in American history. The incumbent administration has targeted its primary political opponent—and leading candidate in the upcoming presidential election—with criminal prosecution. The administration has devoted tens of millions of dollars to this effort, creating a special counsel’s office with dozens of employees, many of whom are apparently assigned full-time to this case and this case alone.
Taking full advantage of the administration’s blank check,1 the government spent over twoand-a-half years investigating this matter. It, among other things, interviewed and subpoenaed hundreds of witnesses, executed over 40 search warrants, and compiled information from countlessindividual sources. The government included some, but not all, of these materials in a massive, 8.5-terabyte initial production, totaling over 11.5 million pages, together with native files, recordings, and other electronic data not amenable to pagination.
In this District, ordinary order when faced with such overwhelming discovery is to set a reasonable trial schedule, commensurate with the size and scope of discovery and complexity of the legal issues. The government rejects this sensible approach. Instead, it seeks a trial calendar more rapid than most no-document misdemeanors, requesting just four months from the beginning of discovery to jury selection. The government’s objective is clear: to deny President Trump and his counsel a fair ability to prepare for trial. The Court should deny the government’s request.
The public interest lies in justice and fair trial, not a rush to judgment. Moreover, if the rights to due process and counsel are to mean anything, a defendant must have adequate time to defend himself. The Speedy Trial Act embraces these considerations and so, too, should the Court. Accordingly, President Trump respectfully requests the Court schedule this case to begin on the April 2026 trial calendar, with the following interim control dates:
• Week of December 4, 2023: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• Week of April 15, 2024: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• Week of August 5, 2024: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• August 1, 2024: Rule 12 and Other Dispositive Motions Due
• August 22, 2024: Oppositions to Rule 12 and Other Dispositive Motions Due
• September 5, 2024: Replies in Support of Rule 12 and Other Dispositive Motions Due
• Week of December 2, 2024: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• Week of April 7, 2025: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• Week of August 4, 2025: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• Week of December 1, 2025: Discovery Status Conference and Motions Hearing
• January 29, 2026: Motions in Limine Due
• February 12, 2026: Oppositions to Motions in Limine Due
• February 19, 2026: Replies in Support of Motions in Limine Due
• Week of March 2, 2026: Motions Hearing
• Week of March 23, 2026: Final Pretrial Conference
• April 2026: Jury Selection and Trial2
Civil lawyers who do don’t have to try those cases w/in 5 months of first getting the data (which is just the 1st drop, btw.) And criminal lawyers often have civil experience as well, but most civil lawyers don’t have criminal experience, esp. federal (former AUSAs excepted.) https://t.co/z4FNFiKb5v
— Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 (@McAdooGordon) August 18, 2023
Why weaken the papers with a pretty outrageous request for an April 2026 trial? That’s between Trump and his lawyers, but it sounds like Trump speaking.
If the feds and Georgia were going to bring cases surrounding the 2020 election, they should have done it at least a year ago. I wish they had not brought the cases, but having brought them, voters have a right to know the evidence and the outcomes before voting. At this point it does not appear that can happen without a massive interference in our primary and possibly general elections process.
.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Thanks for this. You misspelled “persecution” though!
The issue for Trump that Prof Jacobson alluded to is the totality of the cases. He’s in front of four different judges in four different jurisdictions. If he files motions to move the GA case to Federal CT it might be a fifth if the Fed CT doesn’t take all of it. That’s a whole lot things going on.
While these different Judges are obviously aware of the election calender and the other cases Trump faces outside their jurisdiction they aren’t operating in unison. They don’t have to play nice with their trial calendar which is one reason why some of us have harping on the serious impediment Trump would be facing while trying to campaign as the cases advanced past indictment stage.
The Florida doc case going forward is not too out there in terms of timeline; if it wasn’t a Presidential candidate. The rest are unreasonable.
None of these are, IMO, cases that should have been brought. The fact is that they were, indictments came down and here we are. Unfair or not they exist and will be at minimum a distraction for the Trump campaign. At worst there is potential for conviction and I am not sure Trump himself nor some of his most ardent supporters have internalized the potential for that. I am convinced that some folks view these cases as purely political in nature v having the potential to convict Trump. IMO, they were brought by ideological, partisan hacks who absolutely want to interfere with the ability of Trump to campaign but that doesn’t lessen the danger of a conviction.
They’re all garbage and if anything, they show the depth of fascism that has been insinuated into our government.
Again: if ‘they’ can do this to President Trump, imagine what they can do to you and I.
I don’t disagree that they are 99% garbage but you seem to be returning to the stance that these prosecutions are only political in nature or only have the potential for a political consequence. The prosecution teams all seem to be ideologically motivated, partisan hacks but that hasn’t slowed them down much less stopped them.
Trump and his supporters need to come to terms with the possibility of not only a trial amidst campaign season but a very real chance of conviction. We are well past the point of abstract discussions about fairness, norms or whether the cases should have been brought. They have been brought, indictments have been returned and very soon the trial schedules will be finalized in these cases.
It sucks that this is how our political opposition is choosing to operate. Someday, hopefully soon, we should repay this decision with interest onto some prominent d/prog. They began the tit for tat and the escalation and other consequences of this is on them not us, but that isn’t gonna help Trump out the jam he is in right now.
Point taken. The ham sandwiches have been indicted, and with some of the jury pools in play, a fair trial is not likely.
If we are past that point, then what is the remedy? Is there one other than a trial of strength?
Remedy for Trump? Go to Court and win either at trial or on appeal. There will truly be no substitute for victory at trial or on appeal for Trump.
Remedy for the d/prog dirty pool? Find half a dozen or so prominent d/prog doing something shady and indict them in deep Red States. Then find another dozen and do the same thing just in case the first batch didn’t send the signal clearly enough. Repeat until the d/prog cry uncle.
“”will be at minimum a distraction for the Trump campaign.””
Not to mention that they’re sucking up vast amounts of his campaign funds, which cuts into his ability to attack DeSantis.
I agree that while none of these cases appear to have validity, given the circumstances,many involve a degree of risk that Trump supporters are unwilling to address.
“ Not to mention that they’re sucking up vast amounts of his campaign funds, which cuts into his ability to attack DeSantis.”
As opposed to addressing issues plaguing the country.
I agree. As perverted as these cases are, they demonstrate the derangement of those in power on the left. And they are proving they have control of the legal system as well as the MSM and will allow no one to interfere with their plan to convert the country to a communist/socialist construct. Only brute force can stop this machine.
“At worst there is potential for conviction…”
Given the venue in three of these cases (I’m not familiar with the FL court’s juror base), there is a distinct possibility of conviction regardless of the quality of the prosecution’s case presentation. With a voting population which voted Biden 92.5% and Chutkan presiding, the DC case and presentation could smell worse than a dead skunk in the middle of the road and still result in conviction.
Seems like a coordinate effort: conspiracy?
Conspiracy requires a criminal objective. What crime are they conspiring to commit? (Well, according to them “election interference” is a crime, and they’re definitely conspiring to do that. But in reality that’s not a crime.)
Collusion is not a crime at all. (Which is why the whole Russia hoax was so ridiculous. Even if everything they were alleging were true, there would have been no crime.)
Is it not a crime to conspire to use the power of government corruptly to attempt to deprive Trump of his rights (e.g. free association)?
Prosecuting republican opponents in DC is easy when you can just make up the crime.
Test
F. You didn’t show your work.
I don’t know. If it took the government 2.5 years to put its case together it stands to reason that it should take the defense at least as long to digest all the material, investigate it all, and figure out how to rebut it.
Plus, as a political candidate he should be allowed to concentrate on the campaign until it’s over before turning his attention to his case. So, assuming he loses in November, he’s only asking for 17 months to prepare a defense.
Not to mention all the attention he’ll have to give to his other cases.
with as many motions ( dismiss on several counts, recuse, transfer venue), and the appeals after the corrupt judge Chutkan denies the motions, it will most likely be at least 2026 until the trial could start
They shouldn’t have made it so clear in their filing that a January 2, 2024, trial start is impossible without prejudicing President Trump’s right to a fair defense. That will convince this hack judge to deny the motion. She might even move the date up.
I think I see what Trump’s lawyers are up to. How can two trials take place at almost the same time without each of the prosecutors stepping on each other’s toes?
Answer: if the prosecutors are conspiring. A conspiracy to interfere with the 2024 presidential election. Wouldn’t that be a kick?
US courts, from the Supreme Court down, have always taken the position that the remedy for political chicanery is in the voting booth. Since the judges could not be bothered to even peruse copious evidence of blatant cheating, both before and immediately after the 2020 election, they cannot fairly claim that these issues must be litigated during the 2024 election season.
Ty Valerie. Great points. The courts chose not to step into the fray. There is nothing left of fairness in them,
I don’t know how lawyers keep a straight face when responding to such blatantly politicized benches. I guess it is their secret power or something.
I think Trump is pushing the Fulton DA out because all this was about was election interference and hiding Biden’s foreign dealings. The Fulton DA’s case is weak.
How about a speedy trial to clear his name before the election? If Trump beats the rap (outright acquittal or hung jury), that would give him a huge boost.