Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Special Counsel Jack Smith asks judge to delay start of Trump trial by 4 months
NY Post ^ | 23 June 2023 | Victor Nava

Posted on 06/24/2023 3:45:08 AM PDT by NautiNurse

Special Counsel Jack Smith on Friday asked a federal judge to push back the start of former President Donald Trump’s trial on charges that he willfully retained national security secrets and obstructed justice.

In a court filing, Smith requested US District Judge Aileen Cannon to delay the trial by nearly four months — from Aug. 14 to Dec. 11 — arguing that both the prosecution and the defense need more time to prepare.

The special counsel noted that the 77-year-old president’s defense team does not object to moving the date.

Smith argued that the Aug. 14 date “would deny counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the Government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation.”

[Snip]

Smith also asked Cannon on Friday to prohibit Trump and his co-defendant Walt Nauta from discussing the trial with a list of witnesses in the government’s case against them.

[Snip]

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aileencannon; crookedbureaucrats; crookedpoliticians; crookedprosecutors; delay; docsgate; dojiscrookcentral; harassment; maralago; persecution; showtrial; smith; trial; trump; waltnauta; witchhunt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
Four month delay requested by the special prosecutor. Smith tries to appear magnanimous, helping the defense by asking for extra time to prepare. Sounds shaky.
1 posted on 06/24/2023 3:45:08 AM PDT by NautiNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

He has a crappy case and needs time for more shenanigans. He is already up to no good because that is what he does.


2 posted on 06/24/2023 3:49:08 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

He’s obviously getting his order from Rat Party Headquarters. And what would they want? Maximum damage to DJT in the summer/fall of ‘24 would be my guess.


3 posted on 06/24/2023 3:53:52 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Two Words: BANANA REPUBLIC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Strange move. All the legal analysts I’ve seen discuss this have said he wanted to speed things up as much as possible while Trump had every incentive to delay it until well after the election.


4 posted on 06/24/2023 3:57:51 AM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FLT-bird

Agree, it is a surprising move with my limited trial strategy knowledge.


5 posted on 06/24/2023 4:01:56 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Don't be obtuse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Hell. Extend it past the inauguration date in 2025.


6 posted on 06/24/2023 4:02:22 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

The DEMONIC Jack Smith needs to have More time to MANUFACTURE more “crimes”!


7 posted on 06/24/2023 4:05:03 AM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion....... The HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Smith also noted additional time needed for defense counsel to obtain security clearance. This set off the BS alarms.


8 posted on 06/24/2023 4:06:39 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Don't be obtuse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Will be funny if the Trumps team says they don’t want to delay it. He has no case so let’s get it over. Do not give him time to make stuff up.


9 posted on 06/24/2023 4:17:49 AM PDT by glimmerman70
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
Extend it past the inauguration date in 2025.

Interesting thought. I can see positives and negatives for extended delays.

10 posted on 06/24/2023 4:18:01 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Don't be obtuse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

The judge should defer to the defense and if they say nah…. Then lets go.


11 posted on 06/24/2023 4:19:50 AM PDT by MrRelevant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Trump should just say speedy trial act. I am ready to go NOW.


12 posted on 06/24/2023 4:19:51 AM PDT by Mouton (US Home to one party rule)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: glimmerman70

One reason to delay it is to keep a cloud over Trump. It is likely a Florida jury will promptly acquit, and Jack Smith will look like the jackass he is.


13 posted on 06/24/2023 4:21:55 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (If Kitty Genovese had a gun, she’d be in jail today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FLT-bird; NautiNurse
I would advise anyone to take anything you see or hear from media “legal analysts” with a lot of skepticism.

Even many Freepers here on this site with no legal background were saying there was no way in hell the trial would start in August. We were basing that on our own experience with the legal system.

I have news for y’all, too … this trial ain’t starting four months later, either.

14 posted on 06/24/2023 4:22:53 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've just pissed in my pants and nobody can do anything about it." -- Major Fambrough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

This would probably be the best thing to do. I say that because if Trump would win, he can pardon himself. If he doesn’t, the charges would probably be dropped because Trump is no threat anymore to them and too much time has gone by.

Best thing would be for this case to be thrown out because it is bogus.


15 posted on 06/24/2023 4:23:01 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

They need to stall it out until the election gets closer. Then have 24/7 news coverage of the trial depicting Trump as the next Hitler.


16 posted on 06/24/2023 4:43:20 AM PDT by redfreedom (Joseph Stalin: "It does not mater how anyone votes, how votes are counted is what matters.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse
I notice that NONE of the mainstream news media EVER report that Trump - in fact - is charged with Espionage crimes.

I think they withhold that fact because it would energize the pro-Trump opposition.

17 posted on 06/24/2023 4:48:00 AM PDT by zeestephen (Trump "Lost" By 43,000 Votes - Spread Across Three States - GA, WI, AZ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I was hoping the judge would dismiss with prejudice. He has no evidence and is stretching the wrong law to make it fit. Same with the case in ny.


18 posted on 06/24/2023 4:48:00 AM PDT by glimmerman70
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

The case should just be thrown out on its face. Even if everything alleged by prosecution happened the law they cite does not apply anyway.


19 posted on 06/24/2023 4:52:36 AM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

“NSA, along with its IC partners, spent over two years, from 2014 to 2016 looking for Hajji Iman. This search was ultimately successful, primarily because of Section 702. Indeed, based almost exclusively on intelligence activities under Section 702, NSA collected a significant body of foreign intelligence about the activities of Hajji Iman and his associates.”

“Based on Section 702 collection, CIA alerted a foreign partner to the presence within its borders of an al-Qaeda sympathizer. The foreign partner investigated the individual and subsequently recruited him as a source. Since his recruitment, the individual has continued to work with the foreign partner against al-Qaeda and ISIS affiliates within the country.”

https://www.dni.gov/files/icotr/Section702-Basics-Infographic.pdf

Keep that under your hats, or between two newspapers.


20 posted on 06/24/2023 4:57:57 AM PDT by Brian Griffin (ARTICLE I SECTION 2....The President...may require the opinion, in writing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson