Chutkan Thinks It’s a Possibility Trump D.C. Case Could Start Late 2024
“I hope not to be in the country on August 5. I’m in trial in another matter that has not yet returned to my calendar.”
Judge Tanya Chutkan already scrapped the March 4 starting date of President Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case in D.C.
Chutkan mentioned a case without a name when discussing her future calendar. It’s obvious she meant the Trump case:
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan told attorneys in another criminal case that she intended to be out of the country in early August — unless Trump’s trial is underway.
“I hope not to be in the country on August 5,” Chutkan said in a sparsely attended conference for the other criminal case, one of more than 1,200 stemming from the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. If she is stateside, Chutkan added, that will be because “I’m in trial in another matter that has not yet returned to my calendar.”
The comment puts the case after the Republican primary and the RNC, which takes place from July 15 to 18.
On Friday, Chutkan said she would reschedule when the courts settle the immunity case.
A reschedule depends on Chutkan’s schedule. At the time, She acknowledged she doesn’t know what her “schedule will be in mid-April.”
I would love to see Special Counsel Jack Smith’s face right now.
Smith has tried so hard to keep the trial on time.
Smith even asked the Supreme Court to bypass the lower courts and rule on presidential immunity.
Thank goodness SCOTUS said no way. In other words, you have to follow the same process as everyone else.
An August start could possibly conflict with Trump’s case in Georgia.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Bitch slapped again. Jack
L. BeriaSmith and Tanya Shitcan must be pissed.I will have a massive “O” the day that Trump tells Beria he’s fired.
You don’t seem to want to know whether Trump is guilty of serious crimes or not. Pretty telling given the overwhelming evidence against him and the nature of Trumps defence.
We KNOW Biden has….but the Deep State is letting HIM off scot-free.
NO, that’s just factually absurd. Nor is that related to whether or not Trump himself is guilty which is pretty obviously the case based on the evidence.
God your nuts
Advanced case TDS.
Anyone with an IQ higher than the temperature of an ice cube knows that Trump has violated no statute, federal or state
@MarkS
Its factually the case that Trump has already been shown by grand juries to be on the preponderance of the evidence guilty of a number of crimes. The case against him is very well evidenced. This is why you see Trump engage in tactics to try and delay the trials as far as possible. His only play is to become president again and avoid trial all together. Its pretty obvious from the indictments that there is a substantive case against him.
The government indictment itself is evidence of guilt? What kind of totalitarian hell do you live in exactly? N. Korea? China?
Grand Juries do not find Guilt or Innocence.
A Grand Jury decides if inditchments should be levied.
They are an investigative body not a finder of fact.
Also, Grand Juries are only presented the “evidence” produced by the prosecution and no defense is allowed.
So just because a Grand Jury hands down an indictment doesn’t mean Guilty or Innocent. It means that from hearing a one sided argument that charges should be filed and and investigation/trial perused.
In fact there is an old Legal joke that even a middling attorney could get a ham sandwich indicted. Als0, Grand Juries have something like a 99.9% indictment rate.
So basically you have no idea what you are talking about and being indicted doesn’t prove anything.
Looks like you found your ham sandwich.
OK Barky. Line a puppy, you shit and the floor and are now barking about how proud you are.
Um, no, that’s not what grand juries do. Your statement betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of a grand jury’s role.
BartE: preponderance of the evidence guilty of a number of crimes.
Actually, by the stronger condition of probable cause.
milhouse: Um, no, that’s not what grand juries do.
A federal grand jury indictment means they have found probable cause that the individual has committed a federal crime. See Title 9-11.101 of the Justice Manual: “a grand jury has but two functions—to indict or, in the alternative, to return a ‘no-bill’.”
Bzzzt. Probable cause is not a higher standard than preponderance of the evidence.
But a grand jury doesn’t find probable cause either. That’s the standard for a search warrant, not for an indictment.
To put someone through the ordeal and expense of a trial, you need a prima facie case, and that’s what a grand jury finds. Or, in most cases, “finds”.
They never saw a ham sandwich they didn’t indict.
Justice Manual: 9-11.101
You are correct that probable cause is a lower standard than preponderance of the evidence.
A serious crime is something you can explain to a four year old who will then understand why that person should be in jail.
Can you explain to us what the serious crime is?
(Hint: we already know. Trump committed the serious crime of running for president)
With respect to the DC case
• Conspiracy to defraud the United States
• Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding
• Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding
• Conspiracy against rights
So its crimes not a crime. Its not obvious to me why I should have to explain basic facts to you, that you should know.
Trump has already been found to be barred from the presidency by the Colorado supreme court. That said given what a shit show the Supreme court is it wouldn’t surprise me that he would be put back on the ballot for spurious reasons.
If the Supremes rule against the charges of “obstructing an official proceeding,” as a “creative” misapplication of SarbOx, that will be another sh*t show, right?
You left out the word :”Alleged”. I would also point out that other than in your delusional mind Trump hasn’t been convicted of anything.
As far as the Colorado decision there is basically zero chance it survives review. “Insurrection” is a charge that you have to be found Guilty of being involved. Not only has Trump never been convicted of “Insurrection” he has never even been charged with the crime of “Insurrection”.
But don’t worry I know you won’t let facts bother you.
None of the things he’s accused of doing are crimes at all. The charges are contrived because they couldn’t find any statute that says he can’t do what they say he did, so they had to act like contortionists to come up with this sorry excuse for a charge sheet.
Conspiracy to defraud the USA of what?
“Obstructing an official proceeding” means tampering with documents. Until about February 2021 everyone understood that. Of all the people who literally disrupted congressional proceedings, such as the Kavanaugh hearings (just to pick one egregious example), none were ever charged with this, and nobody ever thought of charging them with it, because everyone knew that’s not what it means. When the crime was created, in Sarbanes-Oxley, there was no discussion of disrupting congress as an example of it. This is a brand new theory that the supreme court is likely to throw in the garbage where it belongs. That takes care of both #2 and #3 on your list.
Finally, conspiracy against whose rights? This is less than meaningless.
BartE, your reasoning seems similar to Omar’s.
Milhouse: Conspiracy to defraud the USA of what?
That’s been hashed out in the courts, such as in Hammerschmidt v. United States: “to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions”.
Milhouse: “Obstructing an official proceeding” means tampering with documents.
While still being adjudicated, 18 U.S. Code § 1505 includes “obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law”.
The definition in Hammerschmidt seems like dicta. The court said what Hammerschmidt did was not fraud, even under that definition, so it didn’t have to examine the definition closely.
See the long line of cases on the bogus concept of “honest services fraud”, and especially the concurrences in the ones from last year.
That’s Sarbanes-Oxley, and until February 2021 nobody thought it meant anything other than destroying documents.
Justice Manual: 9-11.101
While grand juries are sometimes described as performing accusatory and investigatory functions, the grand jury’s principal function is to determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain Federal offense within the venue of the district court.
. . .
Milhouse: That’s Sarbanes-Oxley, and until February 2021 nobody thought it meant anything other than destroying documents.
There are two clauses. If you were correct, then the second clause would be superfluous. When a second clause is included, it must have an additional meaning.
“(Hint: we already know. Trump committed the serious crime of running for president)”
Even more serious he Won when it should have been Hillary’s turn.
Guilty of what?
You and the rest of your retarded friends keep saying “THIS IS THE BIG ONE MAN! THIS IS THE ONE THAT WILL GET HIM IN JAIL, MAN!!!!
Seven years of harassing Trump and his supporters, two bullshit impeachments, loads and loads of indictments, and what do you have to show for it?
Your flaccid dick in your hand. Unfulfilled and not even a premature “O.”
So yeah, he has NEVER been found guilty of anything.
What an asshat.
Are you sure BartE can can get it in his hand?
The evidence is against him is damning if you move the goalposts of what he did to be an actual crime.
That’s the fundamental problem here.
There is no evidence against him you retard
Sure there is. He did most of the things they say he did. The problem is that they’re not crimes.
We already know that the case is nothing but a bunch of bullshit election interference.
No, Bart, at least in the case before Chutkan the things he’s accused of are not crimes, and it took the prosecutors a lot of work to squeeze and distort them into the contrived charges that they laid against him.
The Florida case is different, because there at least there is a crime, of which he may or may not be guilty. In all the other cases he can readily admit the behavior, because there’s no crime in it. The indictments are garbage from the get-go.
Biden’s crimes, on the other hand, are very real and obvious. But he’s not being charged. Yet. If this goes ahead, it will set the precedent for the next president (whether it’s Trump or not) to charge Biden.
It will be Nov, first Tuesday 2024
There are no actual rules for political trials.
The rules for ALL trials should be the same. It is infuriating that we have blatantly political trials that follow no rules. I thought we left the kangaroo courts to the commies. Maybe we did.
Its pretty hilarious that you pretend there are no rules for the trials when that’s exactly what’s been demonstrated by the process.
It’s hilarious that you are pretending to be Bart, when you sound like Hunter Biden.
Hunter Biden sounds like someone pointing out that there are rules and they have been followed? You’re just weird
Here’s something to chew on from GP
“While the TSA is mandating most travelers use new facial recognition technology, why are they allowing migrants to opt out?”
I have a photo of a similar notice that I took at PHX in august 2022. Surprised that it got no attention until recently.
Hope they all leave
Same reason they didn’t have to take the clot shot, you’re being replaced by future democrat voters.
You’ll never see me coming /
You’ll never know my name /
Try to remember, try to forget /
But you’ll never be the same…
I could do anything, I could go anywhere /
I could be anything, for anyone, tonight…
I’m already going, I’m already gone /
There’s a stranger in my place /
You’ll never find me, but I’ll get along /
Cause the angels know my face…
That is not true. I see you sourced it from the Hoft brother’s lie-sheet. As usual they are lying to you, and you are repeating their lies.
Facial recognition is voluntary. Nobody has to use it. And yes, you can fly without valid ID, it will just take you longer because they have to verify your identity by other means, so if you discover that your ID has expired arrive early or you’ll miss your flight.
Because then you gotta go through the facial recognition system that you just deemed voluntary righ, Law Jesus? 😂😂
No, you don’t have to go through it. If that were an option you wouldn’t have to arrive early because that takes almost no time at all.
You’re bending yourself in half to turn yourself in to a pretzel over this Law Jesus 😂
No, I’m telling it as it is. The facial recognition system is completely voluntary. And your suggestion that if you come to the airport without ID then it’s no longer voluntary is not only false, as I pointed out it makes no sense, because if that were the case then you wouldn’t need to come early as I said. The fact is that if you show up for your flight without ID they will verify who you are through other means, and if it checks out they will let you board your flight, assuming it hasn’t left yet. But if you show up at the normal time and then have to go through that procedure, you will miss the flight, precisely because it’s not as simple as facing into a camera that already knows who you are.
I wonder why the judge feels the need to leave the country? Could she be worried about what will happen if Trump wins?
Huh? August 5 is long before the election, and even longer before next Jan 20.
And where did you get the idea that she “feels a need” to travel? That’s not what the article says at all. Do you “feel a need to leave the country” every time you do so?! Is it because you’re worried about something that won’t happen until more than five months after you return???
She is afraid she will get the Fat Fani treatment.
Let me begin by saying I am not a fan of this judge. However, she still has the right to take vacations and to plan those for whenever she wants. As a Judge I would imagine you have to be very particular about those arrangements.
Considering her J^ and Trump actions, she should expect a day or two of reckoning.
I wasn’t aware the right to a speedy trial belonged to the government prosecutors. Live and learn.
There is a massive public interest in knowing whether or not the probable Republican candidate is a criminal. This should be obvious.
Meanwhile, we KNOW the current occupant IS…and so are many in the Progressive wings of BOTH parties.
When you say KNOW I think you’ll find you mean IMAGINED. The criminal case is for Trump, no amount of deflecting changes that FACT.
No, that Biden is a criminal is not in doubt. Whether Trump is also a criminal is very much in doubt.
It’s obvious he isn’t amd this is a political witch hunt
WE know that Biden family is a criminal enterprise.
Nothing that occurs in a DC court room will answer that question.
What’s obvious is that you are a moron who shows up from nowhere spouting your nonsense.
Are we dealing with one moron using more than one alias? JR, Thad Jarvis, etc?
A sentiment shared by many a police state.
Wait but you said earlier that he was already proven to be a criminal, so which is it?
WE know that Biden family is a criminal enterprise.
Delaying until late 2024? Blatant election interference.
Chutkan is a documented racist who blames all her problems in life on white people. Woke trash.
Well, she is an inferior person. She has psychological problems due to being a liberal, living and working in an echo chamber where the din is so oppressive, it creates mental health issues.
Of course she’s going to blame anyone who lives and works outside that echo chamber.
DC is a hornets nest of inbreeding pigs who have an overinflated sense of self importance. I know this personally, since I was born in Baltimore and raised on the outskirts of DC.
Those people believe they have the very heartbeat of Americans in their hands, and that every decision they make is of epic proportion.
I have news for them. Those bureaucrats in DC are worthless pieces of shit who demand that others bow to them and kiss their feet.
It is nothing but Sodom on the Potomac, waiting for G-D to rain down fire from above. You couldn’t find ten people worth saving there.
You are right. YOUR projection is crazy…just like the Progressives you believe the lying talking points from. How does it feel to be a useful idiot?
Facts aren’t belief. Fact – Trump is a fraudster, Fact – Trump is a rapist, Fact – Trump has been found to be an insurrectionist. Fact – Trump tried to hide classified documents from a subpoena. What facts do you have lol.
When you call someone else a useful idiot its a good idea to make sure you can have the vaguest justification of your own position which itself is based on pure MAGA talking points. Do better
I spent a lot of time in and around DC, I did meet some decent people, but many more were conniving glad handers and when the veil was pulled back down right putrid.
Good thing DOJ has those policies in place to avoid election interference.
If only he was a Democrat eh. The those policies would protect him.
They are working on gang tat recognition software for the illegals.
Too bad we can’t trust them enough to actually believe that. If the federal government says a thing it’s a lie until they prove otherwise. They’ve earned that
Why do we have a federal judge whose real life is in Jamaica, judging full-time Americans?
Anyway, by August it should be too close to the election to try Trump, assuming he’s then the nominee. Chutkan may just be pretending she doesn’t expect Trump will have the status of Republican nominee by then, after all it’s not officially decided yet. And when it’s official, then obviously the trial cannot start before the election. That’s what seems reasonable to me.
Huh? What is this supposed to mean? In what way is she not a full-time American? What “real life” do you claim she has in Jamaica?
George S: A serious crime is something you can explain to a four year old who will then understand why that person should be in jail.
The law has never been like that. Even homicide has degrees and exceptions.
Concise: The government indictment itself is evidence of guilt?
The indictment indicates probable cause evidence as determined by a grand jury. The crimes remain alleged until adjudicated at trial.
George S: Can you explain to us what the serious crime is?
There’s a number of alleged crimes, including probable cause of defying a court order to return government property, including documents marked classified and documents relating to the national security.
Concise: I wasn’t aware the right to a speedy trial belonged to the government prosecutors. Live and learn.
The Courts have long recognized a public interest in a speedy trial and is also recognized by federal statute. See Bloate v. United States and 18 U.S. Code § 3161.
—
There may be a long delay in responding as our comments often languish in the moderation queue for extended periods of time.
You got a mouse in your pocket, Emperor?
The prosecution (and judge) are trying to dance a delicate dance in which they declare that actions taken by Trump while in office are *not* immune from Federal and State prosecution, while every action taken by every other President are immune. They really need to have a bowling ball dropped on their delicate flower, as in a court decision that states in plain, unmistakable language
— Presidents are immune from their actions *unless* they are impeached in the House and *convicted* in the Senate, period.
— Presidential immunity lasts after they leave office (duh)
–Presidents determine what are their personal papers and what are Presidential records, not NARA or any other subordinate agency, period.
–Records removed from the White House by outgoing Presidents and stored as personal records are presumed declassified by that action, and if the next administration wants any of those documents back, they have to *ask* for them, and if refused, pound sand.
Any more?
georgfelis: Presidents are immune from their actions *unless* they are impeached in the House and *convicted* in the Senate, period.
Impeachment is independent of criminal proceedings. Congress may decide to allow a President to continue in office, even if they have committed a crime that doesn’t meet the standard for impeachment. Or Congress may remove a President, even if they haven’t committed a prosecutable offense, but have met the standard for removal.
georgfelis: Presidents determine what are their personal papers and what are Presidential records, not NARA or any other subordinate agency, period.
The law says otherwise. Government property remains government property. Willfully retaining such property can be prosecuted.
georgfelis: if the next administration wants any of those documents back, they have to *ask* for them, and if refused, pound sand.
Or go to court, and after a hearing where the parties present their case with an opportunity for appeal, get a court order for their return.
No, that is not correct. As I understand it presidents, like all officials, are immune for all official acts, regardless of whether they’re impeached or convicted. And they’re not immune for private acts, again regardless of what congress may or may not choose to do about them. The dispute in this case is over the definition of “official acts”.