Special counsel says holding Trump trial before election would not violate DoJ policy
Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s office have said that holding Donald Trump’s classified documents trial before the November presidential election would not violate the justice department’s policy against taking actions close to an election.
US district judge Aileen Cannon, at the Florida hearing on Thursday, raised the question of whether or not a delay in the trial start would be in violation of the Justice department’s “60 day rule” that prevents them from engaging in actions that could influence an election.
Special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt told the judge a trial is permissible because the policy does not apply to post-indictments. “We are in full compliance with the justice manual,” Bratt said during the hearing.
As NBC News’ Garrett Haake writes, this means Trump’s federal trials could be ongoing during the election.
My colleague @KenDilanianNBC reports big news from documents scheduling hearing today is that DOJ says policy about not taking actions close to elections DOES NOT apply post-indictments (so, trials). That means federal Trump trials could be ongoing during fall campaign/voting
— Garrett Haake (@GarrettHaake) March 1, 2024
Key events
Donald Trump’s lawyer Steve Sadow has argued that Fani Willis should be disqualified from the election interference case because she may have lied to the court about her undisclosed affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
Sadow said Willis’s claim under oath that her relationship with Wade did not begin until after she hired him was not credible, Reuters reports. He told the judge:
Once you have the appearance of impropriety … the law in Georgia is clear: That’s enough to disqualify.
Biden signs stopgap bill to avert government shutdown
Joe Biden has signed into law a short-term stopgap spending bill to avert a partial government shutdown, the White House has said.
The bill was approved by the Senate on Thursday following a House vote that narrowly averted a shutdown that was due to occur this weekend.
The temporary extension funds the departments of agriculture, transportation, interior and others through 8 March. It funds the Pentagon, homeland security, health and state through 22 March.
A lawyer for one of Donald Trump’s co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case has argued that not removing Fani Willis, the Fulton county district attorney, would undermine public confidence in the legal system.
John Merchant, an attorney for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman, argued that just “an appearance of a conflict of interest” between Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade would be “sufficient” to disqualify her from the election subversion case.
Merchant told Judge Scott McAfee that “if the court allows this kind of behavior to go on … the entire public confidence in the system will be shot”, AP reported.
If the judge denies the bid to disqualify Willis, “there’s a good chance” an appeals court would overturn that ruling and order a new trial, Merchant argued, it writes.
Judge Scott McAfee has said he might be able to make a decision on the hearing on Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis as he hears closing arguments in the case. CNN quotes him as saying:
I think we’ve reached the point where I’d like to hear more of how the legal argument apply to what has already been presented, and it may already be possible for me to make a decision without those needing to be material to that decision.
Closing arguments began about half an hour ago over whether Willis should be disqualified from handling the election interference against Trump because of her romantic relationship with a deputy handling the case.
Special counsel says holding Trump trial before election would not violate DoJ policy
Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s office have said that holding Donald Trump’s classified documents trial before the November presidential election would not violate the justice department’s policy against taking actions close to an election.
US district judge Aileen Cannon, at the Florida hearing on Thursday, raised the question of whether or not a delay in the trial start would be in violation of the Justice department’s “60 day rule” that prevents them from engaging in actions that could influence an election.
Special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt told the judge a trial is permissible because the policy does not apply to post-indictments. “We are in full compliance with the justice manual,” Bratt said during the hearing.
As NBC News’ Garrett Haake writes, this means Trump’s federal trials could be ongoing during the election.
My colleague @KenDilanianNBC reports big news from documents scheduling hearing today is that DOJ says policy about not taking actions close to elections DOES NOT apply post-indictments (so, trials). That means federal Trump trials could be ongoing during fall campaign/voting
— Garrett Haake (@GarrettHaake) March 1, 2024
Hugo Lowell
Prosecutors complained at the Florida hearing that Donald Trump’s proposed schedule was too slow, which drew a sharp response from Trump’s legal team who told the judge it was impossible for Trump to be on trial in New York for his hush money case and attend hearings at the same time in Florida.
The special counsel’s office, exasperated by the situation, at one point added “we want to keep the case moving along” – which drew an instant rebuke from Cannon who replied that while it may not be apparent to them, “there’s a lot of working getting done behind the scenes”.
Trump’s lawyers reiterated that they wanted Cannon to delay the classified documents trial until after the 2024 election in November, claiming once again that it was unfair to his presidential campaign and unfair to him personally because he could not be in courtrooms in New York and in Florida.
The issue with a July trial date, Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche said, was that Trump would be stuck in a Manhattan courtroom for roughly six weeks starting on 25 March when he faces charges that he falsified business records in hiding hush-money payments before the 2016 election.
Adopting prosecutors’ schedule, Blanche said, would make it impossible for Trump and his lawyers, some of whom are involved in both cases, to attend both the New York trial and major hearings as he is entitled as a defendant during that period before Cannon.
Judge expresses skepticism over prosecution’s proposed timetable in Trump classified documents case
Hugo Lowell
The federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal case over his retention of classified documents appeared inclined to reject a proposal by special counsel prosecutors that she set a schedule culminating in a July trial, saying at a court hearing Friday she found the timeline unworkable.
The US district judge Aileen Cannon did not set a new trial date from the bench – it is currently set for May but almost certain to be scrapped given repeated delays – and it was unclear whether she would adopt competing schedules proposed by Trump and prosecutors, or set her own.
But Cannon expressed particular reservation with the proposed timetable submitted by prosecutors, saying part of their schedule was “unrealistic”, and putting in doubt the probability she would move forward with proceedings that would mean Trump going to trial in July.
The skepticism from Cannon came as prosecutors and lawyers for Trump sparred over forthcoming deadlines, which could have profound implications for the scope and viability of not just the documents case but also for the federal 2020 election interference case in Washington.
In the afternoon part of the hearing, Judge Cannon is set to focus on a prosecutors’ request that she reconsider a ruling they said would allow Donald Trump to make public FBI documents produced during discovery public, revealing potential witnesses’ names.
Prosecutors argued Cannon applied the wrong legal standard when she allowed Trump to file exhibits without redactions. If Cannon did not reverse her decision, the filing said, prosecutors were prepared to appeal to force the reversal.
In the filing, prosecutors contended it was wrong for Cannon to require public identification of more than two dozen people who participated in the investigation, including some who may never testify at trial.
Prosecutors also asked Cannon to force Trump to file under seal the most sensitive exhibits he wanted to make public – such as transcripts of grand jury witness testimony, confidential FBI reports, non-public details of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence – and redact less sensitive exhibits.
US district judge Aileen Cannon’s main priority in the Florida hearing is expected to be setting a new trial date.
Whether Cannon would set a trial date in a ruling from the bench, or write an order later, was unclear. Also uncertain was whether Cannon would decide to adopt a schedule suggested by Trump that would culminate in an August trial, or a schedule suggested by prosecutors, culminating in a July trial.
“The one thing I think the parties agree on is that the case can be tried this summer,” said Jay Bratt, a prosecutor from Smith’s office, to Cannon in court, according to CNN. It added that Cannon replied that some aspects of prosecutors’ proposed schedule were “unrealistic”.
The judge was also reported to have said she would consider Trump’s other trials – including the one over hush-money payments to an adult film star who claimed an affair, which is due to start in New York this month – given his right to attend each in person.
Cannon previously indicated that the morning part of the hearing would address a request from Trump lawyers that prosecutors provide them with reams of additional information, which they believe will help mount a defense against the sweeping indictment. Trump is charged with violating the Espionage Act.
Court adjourns for lunch with no new trial date set
The morning session of the hearing in the classified documents case has ended, with the court adjourning for one hour for lunch.
Judge Aileen Cannon has not yet set a new trial date.
A group of pro-Israel House Democrats have written to Joe Biden backing “a temporary pause in fighting” between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
Nearly 30 Democratic lawmakers, led by Brad Schneider and Jimmy Panetta, are urging the president to continue talks for a temporary pause in fighting to allow for a hostage release and provide aid for civilians in Gaza. The letter writes that:
A temporary pause in fighting will not only help release the hostages and give desperately needed relief to the millions of civilians displaced by this war, it can also open a path to permanently ending the conflict.
The letter is signed by mostly moderate, pro-Israel Democrats, about half of whom voted for the Republican-led Israel-only aid package that failed last month, according to Punchbowl News.
Schneider, a Democratic congressman for Illinois, told the outlet that he was motivated to organize the effort after Biden expressed cautious optimism that a temporary ceasefire and hostage release deal was imminent.
“The war could end tomorrow if Hamas would release the hostages,” Schneider said. “We need to find a path to get to peace and that’s what this letter talks about.”
Hugo Lowell
Whether Judge Aileen Cannon will acquiesce to Donald Trump’s request for a later trial date remains uncertain.
Last year, she implicitly rejected Trump’s arguments concerning the election when she set a tentative trial date for May, finding a middle ground between the dueling schedules that Trump and prosecutors had proposed.
The judge could again attempt to find a middle ground as she weighs setting a new trial date, with the pre-trial phase of the documents case running roughly four months behind schedule, according to a Guardian analysis.
The documents case has been mired in delays as a result of how slowly Cannon has proceeded through the seven-step process laid out in the Classified Information Procedures Act, which governs how classified documents can be introduced at trial in Espionage Act cases.
Trump could have an advantage in trying to convince the judge to add further delays, after she expressed concern last year that Trump’s criminal cases in New York and Washington could “collide” with the documents case in Florida because they were scheduled to start between March and May.
But Trump’s legal calendar has shifted since Cannon made those remarks in November.
Trump’s first criminal case in New York, over hush-money payments made to the adult film star Stormy Daniels, will start on 25 March and is expected to last six weeks. Meanwhile, the 2020 election interference case in Washington is effectively delayed indefinitely until the US supreme court decides whether Trump has absolute immunity from prosecution.
In that sense, Trump’s legal calendar is now free of conflicts from May onwards, allowing Cannon to adopt either scheduling proposal from Trump or prosecutors, or again set a tentative trial start somewhere between the two suggested dates.
Hugo Lowell
Lawyers for Donald Trump have reluctantly proposed two trial dates, under orders from the US district judge Aileen Cannon: a 12 August trial date for Trump and the Mar-a-Lago club maintenance chief Carlos De Oliveira, and a 9 September trial date for Trump’s valet Walt Nauta.
But Thursday’s nine-page court filing from Trump was clear in its tone and reasoning that a trial should not take place until 2025, claiming that prosecutors were seeking to rush to trial on an unprecedented schedule because they wanted an outcome before the presidential election in November.
Trump’s request marked his latest attempt to push back the case, having taken every opportunity to ask Cannon to delay proceedings since he was indicted last year for violating the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice.
In their first request to delay the trial indefinitely, Trump claimed he could not get a fair trial while he was running for office, asking the judge to also take into account the political calendar in the months before the election.
That argument was repeated again in the new filing, which also claimed that Trump’s status as the presumptive GOP nominee meant prosecutors would be violating justice department rules that prohibit overt investigative steps close to an election if a trial took place this year.
Trump’s attorney argue July trial date is ‘unfair’
Attorneys for Donald Trump have argued that the prosecution’s proposed trial start date of 8 July for the former president’s classified documents case is “unfair”.
Todd Blanche, at the pre-trial hearing in Florida, pushed for his client’s trial to take place after the 2024 presidential election, CNN reported. He is quoted as saying:
A trial that takes place before the election is a mistake and should not happen.
Trump’s legal team have proposed a 12 August trial date instead. Blanche said starting the trial any closer to the November election would be “more damaging” and “more harmful”, the report says.
He also argued that even without the election, “we still wouldn’t be ready for this trial” before November, adding:
There’s no reason this trial can’t start until late November.
The proposed July start date is “an impossibility for the defendant”, NBC quoted Trump’s defense attorneys as saying.