Federal judge schedules Trump’s election interference trial just before Super Tuesday.
Opening Trial Date Set for Trump’s Alleged Crimes
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan set an opening trial date of March 4, 2024, for former President Donald J. Trump’s alleged crimes as part of his efforts to challenge the 2020 election results. That date is one day before Super Tuesday in the GOP Primary — earning the ire of many conservatives on social media.
Chutkan heard arguments and requested dates from federal prosecutors and Trump’s attorneys Monday morning in Washington, D.C., but said neither side had suggested an appropriate date for the trial. The federal government wanted it to go to trial in January, while Trump’s team pushed for April 2026.
“These proposals are obviously very far apart,” Chutkan said in court. “Neither of them is acceptable.”
According to NBC News, Chutkan dismissed the notion that the date should accommodate Trump’s third bid for the presidency. Chutkan reportedly said that the GOP frontrunner would have to prioritize his legal obligations in this case.
Meanwhile, Trump attorney John Lauro blasted the Special Counsel’s suggested date, saying that the federal government was running a “show trial, not a speedy trial.”
The former president’s legal team has also argued that an early 2024 date did not provide ample time to examine evidence during discovery.
“Discovery in 2023 is not sitting in a warehouse with boxes of paper looking at every single page,” Chutkan noted.
Earlier this month, Trump was officially indicted on a series of federal charges related to election interference, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction, and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted. He also faces three other criminal cases.
Many notable figures on the Right argued the trial date set by Chutkan was “election interference.”
“Unfortunately, Tanya Chutkan delivered for the Biden regime yet again, while pretending she’s meeting both sides halfway,” Fox News host Mark Levin said. “March next year is a PREPOSTEROUS date to set for trial.”
“The DOJ has gone from strongly admonishing prosecutors not to interfere with elections, to doing everything possible to sabotage the Trump campaign and the presidential election,” he continued.
“Judge Chutkan is a political operative in a robe,” Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL) posted on social media. “We should set her censure for a vote ASAP to expose this sham and restore our republic.”
Judge Chutkan is a political operative in a robe.
We should set her censure for a vote ASAP to expose this sham and restore our republic. https://t.co/mwdUljM8UQ
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) August 28, 2023
“J6 defendants have been rotting away in solitary awaiting trial for YEARS, but somehow Trump’s documents trial—which involves something like 60 million documents—magically gets scheduled for mid-2024? Mmmk.” The Federalist’s Sean Davis said.
In reaction to Davis, podcast host Steve Deace, who has endorsed Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in the GOP primary, concurred that the feds “just wanna put him in prison, folks.”
I was just about to tweet this exact point, but @seanmdav beat me to it. They’re just wanna put him in prison, folks. https://t.co/i4lVEXxRNZ
— Steve Deace (@SteveDeaceShow) August 28, 2023
Not all protestations were from conservatives. Law professor Jonathan Turley also voiced his concerns over the date.
“This daisy-chaining of trials presents unnecessary and unfair challenges for the defense,” Turley said, noting the trial date is “only 20 days before Trump is scheduled to be tried in New York” in another criminal case.
Judge Chutkan has set a trial date of March 4, 2024. However, that is only 20 days before Trump is scheduled to be tried in New York. This daisy-chaining of trials presents unnecessary and unfair challenges for the defense. https://t.co/tvOtAQflJt
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 28, 2023
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
