OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has been getting a ton of news that he has not wanted to hear recently.
And on Friday he got some more as it appeared that Judge Aileen Cannon, who is the presiding judge in former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case, is inclined to give the former president and his attorneys what they want by delaying the start of the trial.
“Right now, Donald Trump is inside a Florida courtroom for a crucial hearing,” CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer said to start the segment.
“It could decide when the criminal case over his handling of classified documents goes to trial. The judge is set to determine whether it will move forward as planned in May or be delayed. Trump’s lawyers now say they would accept the trial in August. That’s three months before Election Day here in the United States. CNN’s chief legal affairs correspondent, Paula Reid, is outside the courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, for us. Paula, have you heard anything yet from inside the court?” he said before Reid began her report.
“Yes. Well, if we just got our first update, a handwritten note from inside the courthouse. We’re learning from our colleagues who are inside watching these proceedings that so far, the special counsel and Trump’s lawyers, they have been discussing this larger question of timing, such a consequential issue in this case, because we know the special counsel is keen to try this case as soon as possible,” she said.
“Trump’s lawyers want to delay it. Now, so far, the judge, Aileen Cannon, she has not signaled if she will definitely reschedule this trial or delay it. But she has given us some clues. Now, prosecutors apparently told her that they believe the one thing both parties agree on is that this can go this summer. Technically, that is true,” the reporter said.
“The special counsel said they’d like this to start on July 8th. Trump lawyers said that if it has to go, it could start on August 12th. But they also argue that their client should not be sitting in a federal courtroom when they believe he should be out campaigning. They believe this would be a violation of his First Amendment right,” she said.
“But in an ominous sign for prosecutors, we’re learning that Judge Cannon called some aspects of the government’s proposed schedule unrealistic, suggesting that she may delay this and may delay it further than the special counsel would like,” she said.
“But, Wolf, I want to talk about why I’m holding a handwritten note here right behind me in this federal courthouse, there is a proceeding of enormous national significance, questions about the former president allegedly mishandling classified documents and a judge. A federal judge is hearing arguments about when this trial will go, but the press is allowed to be in there and observe the proceedings. But they’re not allowed to transmit electronically as they are in most other courthouses. So we are relying on a team of reporters inside the courthouse right now, taking handwritten notes and then running down those stairs and across four lanes of traffic to bring us these updates. This is the first note we’ve gotten this morning, and hopefully we’ll get some more notes soon,” she said.
Former President Donald Trump seemed certain that the three justices he appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, among others, would rule in his favor, allowing him to remain on the ballot in Colorado for the 2024 election.
“We put on three great justices, and you have some other great justices up there, and they’re not going to take the vote away from the people. I’m sure the Supreme Court is going to say, ‘We’re not going to take the vote away from the people,’” Trump said, charging that President Joe Biden is the real “threat to democracy.”
“But I don’t think the Supreme Court would do it because you can’t take the vote. You know, I’m leading in every poll. I’m leading Biden, but I’m leading the remaining Republicans … they’re barely hanging on. How can you possibly take the vote away?” he said.
The former president also suggested that his immunity case would eventually wind up in the Supreme Court, saying, “They have another important [case] and that’s immunity for the president, the president of the United States. And I’m not talking about myself.”
“I’m talking about any president has to have immunity, because if you take immunity away from the president, so important, you will have – you have a president that’s not going to be able to do anything, because when he leaves office, the opposing party president, if it’s the opposing party, will indict the president for doing something that should have been good.”
