• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

Giving up is unforgivable.

Their boy Ron is an empty plastic cup that will never know pudding.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

“Facilitate” is an active verb, not a weasel word.

You are either for trump or for democracy. Pick one.

There are no moderate republicans – only extremists and cowards.

People identifying as christian while ignoring christ and his teachings is a strange thing indeed.

“Until such time as the world ends, we will act as though it intends to spin on.”

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

“Perhaps I should have considered other options.” (head-desk)

“woke” is the new caravan.

Beware of advice from anyone for whom Democrats are “they” and not “we.”

It’s the corruption, stupid.

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

The words do not have to be perfect.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

Oh FFS you might as well trust a 6-year-old with a flamethrower.

“Just close your eyes and kiss the girl and go where the tilt-a-whirl takes you.” ~OzarkHillbilly

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

If a good thing happens for a bad reason, it’s still a good thing.

SCOTUS: It’s not “bribery” unless it comes from the Bribery region of France. Otherwise, it’s merely “sparkling malfeasance”.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Archives for Politics / Trump Indictments

Trump Indictments

First Felon Sentencing Day – Release of Jack Smith’s Report Day (hopefully) Coming Soon

by WaterGirl|  January 10, 202511:57 am| 85 Comments

This post is in: Politics, Trump Indictments

Bad news x2 for the pathetic incoming president!

Sentencing today.  Volume 1 of Jack Smith’s report could be released as soon as Sunday.

Let us savor.

That makes Trump the First Felon to be elected president.  lowtechcyclist suggested that in last night’s thread. It’s perfect.

FIRST FELON.

Does that make him FFOTUS?

Personally, I am hoping the incoming president FIRST FELON also gets slapped around by some of the countries he is threatening.

No, make that ALL OF THE COUNTRIES he is threatening.

From CNBC:

President-elect Donald Trump was sentenced without any penalties Friday in his New York criminal hush money case, 10 days before his inauguration for a second White House term.

Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump to “unconditional discharge,” meaning no jail, no probation and no fine.

But the sentence will still formally make Trump the first criminal convict ever to occupy the Oval Office.

“This has been a very terrible experience,” Trump, who attended the hearing remotely, said before receiving the sentence.

“This has been a political witch hunt,” he said, claiming the case was brought “to damage my reputation so I would lose the election.”

A jury in May found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 hush money payment his then-personal lawyer paid porn star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 presidential election. Daniels was paid for her silence about claims she had sex once with Trump a decade earlier, claims the president-elect has denied.

Merchan said that an unconditional discharge was the only lawful sentence he could deliver without encroaching on the office of the presidency.

The protection of that office “is a factor that overrides all others,” Merchan said.

“Donald Trump, the ordinary citizen, Donald Trump the criminal defendant, would not be entitled to such considerable protections,” he said.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass noted at the start of the hearing that the charges against Trump each carry a sentence of up to four years in state prison.

But “the People recommend a sentence of unconditional release,” said Steinglass.

“We must be respectful of the office of the presidency, and mindful of the fact that this defendant will be inaugurated as president in ten days,” he explained.

But the prosecutor also slammed Trump for his relentless attacks on the justice system throughout the case, saying the president-elect “caused enduring damage to the public perception of the criminal justice system.”

Trump, appearing on a monitor wearing a red striped tie and sitting in front of American flags, frowned and looked bored during Steinglass’ remarks.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche responded that he disagreed with the prosecutor about the validity of the case and about Trump’s conduct.

“It’s a sad day for President Trump and his family and his friends, but it’s also … a sad day for this country,” said Blanche, whom Trump picked to be deputy U.S. attorney general in the next administration.

Despite his complaints in the courtroom, Trump declared victory on social media after the hearing.

“The Radical Democrats have lost another pathetic, unAmerican Witch Hunt,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. His post claimed that the penalty-free sentence proved the case lacked merit, even though Merchan made clear that he gave an unconditional discharge because Trump will soon be president.

Thursday’s hearing came a day after Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, attended the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter in Washington. The Trumps sat with every other living former president.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday night lifted the final legal barrier to Trump’s sentencing, refusing his request to block proceedings in the case.

The decision was narrow — 5-to-4 — with Trump appointee Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining fellow conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and three liberal justices to issue the majority decision.

All respect to Justice Merchan, who held all the ground he believed he legally could.

First Felon Sentencing Day – Release of Jack Smith’s Report Day (hopefully) Coming SoonPost + Comments (85)

Only 4 Lawless Supreme Court Justices Today, I’ll Call That a Victory!

by WaterGirl|  January 9, 20257:28 pm| 87 Comments

This post is in: Criminal Justice, Open Threads, Politics, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Corruption, Trump Indictments

Supreme Court denies Trump’s request to block his hush money sentencing Friday

The U.S. Supreme Court has narrowly denied Donald Trump’s request to delay his criminal hush money sentencing, Friday in New York.

Trump’s last hope to halt Friday’s sentencing in his New York criminal hush money case had rested with U.S. Supreme Court, after the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court in the state, on Thursday denied his request to block the sentencing.

Trump on Wednesday launched an eleventh-hour request to New York’s highest court to pause the hush money case, on the same day that he also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block his sentencing.

In a brief filed to the Supreme Court late Thursday, Trump’s lawyers reiterated their position that Trump is entitled to immunity as president-elect.

You get three guesses as to who the 4 justices are, and the first two don’t count.

I predict a tantrum from the soon to be president, and I don’t care.  I would not mind seeing someone punch any of Trump’s attorneys in their smug little faces.

Only 4 Lawless Supreme Court Justices Today, I’ll Call That a Victory!Post + Comments (87)

Jack Smith Brief Released! (Mostly in Full, Names Redacted)

by WaterGirl|  October 2, 20244:03 pm| 190 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments

DC Indictment NewsLink to PDF

Not all that redacted, except for names.  So far, it seems like the whole story could be there, minus names.

h/t everyone i the previous thread!

NEW: Judge Chutkan has unsealed Jack Smith’s 165-page motion for presidential immunity! storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us…

[image or embed]

— Joshua J. Friedman (@joshuajfriedman.com) October 2, 2024 at 2:38 PM

.h/t Omnes for the BlueSky link.

Jack Smith Brief Released! (Mostly in Full, Names Redacted)Post + Comments (190)

ProPublica – the Corrupt Aileen Cannon Is In the Spotlight

by WaterGirl|  September 17, 20244:12 pm| 53 Comments

This post is in: Activist Judges!, Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments

Cannon, whose oversight of the Donald Trump classified documents case has garnered widespread criticism, has repeatedly violated a rule requiring that federal judges disclose their attendance at private seminars.  (ProPublica)

I was hoping Cannon would have her time in the barrel!

In 2021 and 2022, Cannon took weeklong trips to the luxurious Sage Lodge in Pray, Montana, for legal colloquiums sponsored by George Mason, which named its law school for Scalia thanks to $30 million in gifts that conservative judicial kingmaker Leonard Leo helped organize.

Current rates for standard rooms at Sage Lodge can exceed $1,000 per night, depending on the season. With both Montana trips, Cannon’s required seminar disclosures were not posted until NPR reporters asked about the omissions this year as part of a broader national investigation of gaps in judicial disclosures.

.

Cannon’s annual disclosure form for 2023, which was due in May and offers another chance to report gifts and reimbursements from outside parties, has yet to be posted. (Cannon reported the two Montana trips on her annual disclosure forms, but the required 30-day privately funded seminar reports had not been posted. In 2021, Cannon incorrectly listed the school as “George Madison University.”)

The court’s administrative office declined to say if she requested a one-time extension to give her until Aug. 13 to file. A spokesperson would not discuss whether she met the deadline or the status of her disclosure, which must be reviewed internally.

Cannon’s performance during almost four years of a lifetime appointment has drawn criticism from lawyers, former federal judges and courtroom observers who told ProPublica that she doesn’t render timely decisions and has made unpredictable rulings in both civil and criminal matters. On July 15, she threw out the case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith that alleges Trump mishandled classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence; Cannon called Smith’s appointment unconstitutional since he was not nominated by the president and approved by the Senate.

.

By contrast, Trump, who appointed Cannon in 2020 to the Fort Pierce courthouse, has praised her brilliance, and Federalist Society founder Steven Calabresi called her a heroine for throwing out the criminal case against Trump.

h/t Scout211

Open thread.

 

ProPublica – the Corrupt Aileen Cannon Is In the SpotlightPost + Comments (53)

Justice Merchan Decision – My Cake Eating Will Definitely Be of the Consoling Myself Variety

by WaterGirl|  September 6, 20243:07 pm| 118 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments

Cake or No Cake, that was the question!

Either way, I am pretty sure that Madame VP would approve of cake.

Justice Merchan Decision:

Here is the breakdown of Judge Merchan's decision to delay Trump's sentencing in the NY election interference trial: pic.twitter.com/ccVN4XbtH5

— Katie Phang (@KatiePhang) September 6, 2024

Justice Merchan Decision – My Cake Eating Will Definitely be

Justice Merchan Decision – My Cake Eating Will Definitely be 1

Justice Merchan Decision – My Cake Eating Will Definitely be 2

Justice Merchan Decision – My Cake Eating Will Definitely Be of the Consoling Myself VarietyPost + Comments (118)

Seems Like Cake Might Be In Order

by WaterGirl|  September 5, 20249:35 pm| 114 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments

One way or another, it sees like cake might be in order tomorrow!

Either to celebrate or to drown our sorrows.

It feels to me like sentencing for these crimes is the only consequences Trump is likely to experience before the election.  Is that crazy or wrong-headed thinking?

NEW: Judge Merchan, in Trump’s NY election interference case, will issue a decision TOMORROW (9/6) as to whether he will agree to delay his sentencing. pic.twitter.com/G74ongpjKv

— Katie Phang (@KatiePhang) September 5, 2024

I think Justice Merchan will NOT delay sentencing.

Anyone want to stake out a position on this?

Somewhat related:

BREAKING: Judge Chutkan sets a schedule for Jack Smith and Trump to make immunity-related filings.

Smith: Sept. 26
Trump: Oct. 17
Smith reply: Oct. 29. https://t.co/8kXMaUWsX6

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 5, 2024

I guess we already knew that this trial wouldn’t be happening before the election.  Any attorneys out there who want o share your thoughts on this?

Okay, here’s what Andrew Weissman had to say about this.  It seems like a long delay to me, but he thinks this is fast!  “in short order”.  Okay, Andrew, I will take your word for it.  Especially if Omnes agrees.

Judge Chutkan treats Trump like any other defendant, and orders simultaneous briefing on three issues: immunity, statutory grounds (meaning the new S Ct Fischer decision on the obstruction statute) and on appointment of the Special Counsel. All to be done in short order,…

— Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads/Insta)🌻 (@AWeissmann_) September 5, 2024

Speaking of the dumpster fire, how is it that two staffers are being identified as participants in the assault “that never happened”?   So were TWO men pushing around the woman who had the audacity to tell them the rules?  What is wrong with these people?  Did they not have parents to teach them values?

Justin Caporale. Named as one of the assaulters of the woman at Arlington Cemetery by NPR. Was also Jan 6 organizer. pic.twitter.com/aSQQI5nBHS

— BevMarie 🪷 (@evenbev) September 5, 2024

And totally unrelated, this is a great photograph.

a picture of the guy who says shootings are a "fact of life" https://t.co/sMMf9Ms3tT pic.twitter.com/3nfb68R2Kt

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 6, 2024

Is this guy TRYING TO LOSE?

I just looked up from the laptop.  Henry is standing on his back legs in front of me, demanding to be fed again.  Miss Willow is glaring at me from above, and when I laughed at them, Miss Willow was. not. amused.

Open thread.

Seems Like Cake Might Be In OrderPost + Comments (114)

Proceedings in Judge Chutkan’s Courtroom Today

by WaterGirl|  September 5, 202412:38 pm| 118 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments

DC Indictment News

Live blogging in Judge Chutkan’s Courtroom Today by Roger Parloff.

Do we still call it live-blogging when presenting the material when  the even is over?

It’s Sep 5 and I’m at Prettyman US Courthouse in DC for today’s 10am hearing in US v Trump before Judge Tanya Chutkan. I’ll be live-tweeting for @lawfare from the media room, while colleague @annabower will be in the courtroom. …
/1

Trump’s attys & Special Counsel will be arguing over the timing & nature of the path forward after SCOTUS’s immunity ruling. This afternoon, at 4pm, @lawfare editor-in-chief Ben Wittes will interview @AnnaBower and me about today’s events. …
/2

Join the Lawfare team tomorrow for a discussion of the trials of Donald Trump.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/lawfare-live–trump’s-trials-and-tribulations–sept.-5
@lawfare @AnnaBower Trump will probably also be arraigned today on the new “superseding” indictment, but he has waived his appearance, so that will probably be very pro forma. …
/3

@lawfare @AnnaBower Incidentally, Judge Chutkan sits in Courtroom 9, on the 4th floor of the older part of the bldg (1952), pictured in tweet 1. The stolid govt’l style is called “stripped classicism,” which I assumes means classicism but stripped of most ornamentation. …
/4

@lawfare @AnnaBower For those of you who followed along during the Oath Keepers & Proud Boys trials—those took place in the beautiful annex (2005) to the right, designed by Michael Graves, which features a 6-floor atrium & reddish “curly” maple paneling everywhere. We’re 3 blocks from Capitol…
/5

show full post on front page

@lawfare @AnnaBower The media room has also been upgraded since the OK and PB trials. There are now 2 media rooms, at least for big events like today’s, and the old one, where I am, has been upgraded, with plugs galore & one huge HD screen (> 8 feet diagonally?) instead of 2 smaller ones. …
/6

So the enormous screen has just illuminated with views of the courtroom, which is always a relief. As in the past, it’s split into 4 quadrants. One shows the bench; two show counsel tables; the 4th is black now, but typically shows exhibits.
/7

At the moment, we can’t see the prosecution table well. At defense table we see John Lauro, Todd Blanche, Emil Bove, a man I assume is Lauro partner Gregory Singer, and another male I can’t identify.
/8

All rise. Chutkan takes bench.
criminal case 23 dash 257 is called.
govt counsel: Thomas Windom & Molly Gaston. there’s an fbi agent at their table.
defense: John Lauro identifies Trump’s crew, which includes a paralegal.
/9

Lauro: life has been almost meaningless without seeing you.
Judge: enjoy it while it lasts.
…
Chutkan now summarizing the SCOTUS ruling.
Chutkan: purpose of this hearing is to confirm trump’s arraignment & 2d to discuss schedule going forward.

/10

she says she hopes to issue a schedule today, tho not at the hearing itself.
Now Chutkan is describing the superseding indictment & fact that Trump has waived his appearance. He pleas not guilty on all 4 counts. She’s confirming all that on the record now.
/11

Chutkan now summarizing the 4 charges. Lauro confirms Trump rec’d indictment, reviewed it, entering plea of not guilty to all 4 counts. waiving full formal reading.
Chutkan accepts the waiver. arraignment complete.
/12

Judge: let’s go over scheduling …
She’s now listing pending motions before SCOTUS ruling.
Judge: def’s reply brief to discovery motions needs to be reset. …
She’s discussing how much time was remaining on various deadlines at time of stay. …
/13

… E.g., motions in limine were due in about 3 weeks at the time everything was stayed due to the immunity challenge.
Now she turns to parties proposals for how to move forward.
Some common ground. Agree on issues to be resolved. …
/14

Both sides contemplate that at least some issues be resolved concurrenty.
Govt proposes that it files first filing relating to immunity. Defense could respond. govt would reply.
Govt wants other motions decided concurrently. AUSA Windom confirms that’s their position.
/15

Chutkan now describes Trump’s proposed approach.

Chutkan: let’s first talk about the immunity issue, just want to nail down what that approach would look like. Some questions for Windom.
J: you propose filing before def moves to dismiss. not ordinary course. why depart?
/16

Windom: we’re not in a typical situation. SCOTUS has created new law. … looking for most efficient practical way forward. indictment doesn’t include all the categories of info we believe may be subject to immunity litigation. that’s why we propose to go first.
/17

we should structure a schedule that leads to only one interlocutory appeal. Def proposes several interlocutory appeals. we know there will be an interlocutory appeal. trhying to limit it to one.
we’d file a comprehensive description of both pled & unpled facts. …
/18

Chutkan: would include a “proffer.” be more specific? form it would take. written?
Windom: our initial view is this: comprehensive brief setting forth facts. in and outside indictment. substantial number of exhibits. GJ transcripts, interview transcripts, 302s …
/19

would allow court to continue context . in addition we’d set forth why we believe conduct is private in nature and not subject to immunity.
then with respect to allegations re Vice President–why we believe presumption of immunity is rebutted. benefit of us going first …
/20

… is you’d have everything in one place. cleaner docket for you and for any appellate court.
Chutkan: not proffering any actual [oral] evidence. would be written.
Windom: that’s right. … put forth papers. review them. decide whether court needs additional info …
/21

… then court can decide whatever [additional] it needs.
Chutkan: you said you’re prepared to file promptly. days? weeks?
Windom: we do have to write this thing. that will take a little time but we’ve begun. it’s under way. anticipate it would take 2-3 weeks–closer to 3.
/22

Judge: last week of September?
Windom: 9/26 [-ish]. Defense has suggested it will take substantial amount of time for them to put for their views. another reason for us to go first. we can go promptly.
Judge asks to speak to Lauro.
/23

Judge: beyond fact the govt’s proposal is procedurally irregular, is that in and of itsself a problem or is there some other prejudice.
Lauro: enormously prejudicial to Trump. … [govt] proposes approach that turns rules on their head. have to look at discovery issues …
/24

… that are outstanding.
Judge: why can’t you do that at same time. … during the briefing schedule?
Lauro: to address what they submit we have to have all the discovery. everything we’re entitled.
other problem, SCOTUS has already decided discussions with VP were official
/25

… so as an initial matter. the issue before court is whether govt can overcome presumption. no way, no possible way lack of immunity would result in intrusion on an important govt function. if they can’t show that, entire indictment improper & illegitimate. gateway issue
/26

that needs to be decided–
Judge: i actually dont think so. scotus ruled on 3 categories. certainly VP conversations may be subject to presumptive immunity. but i have to decide if those conversations are somehow outside his official duties. …
/27

Lauro: i ask you to re-review that opinion. scotus decided they are [presumptively] immune. has to see if govt can overcome presumptive immunity. … if in fact communications are immune, entire indictment fails. entire indictment based on immune info. …
/28

Judge: i’m not sure that’s my reading of the [SCOTUS] ruling. but it’s subject to a lot of different readings.
Lauro: it’s a legal decision we can provide guidance to the court without full evidentiary hearing.
we get opportunity to go first under Rule 12.
/29

Judge: in one way of looking on it, your motion to dismiss is still pending. Govt is just seeking supplemental briefing.
Lauro: they’re asking for an asymmetric protocol.
Judge: courts rule on the time based on evidentiary proffers. I’m the one to decide whether …
/30

I ultimately need an evidentiary hearing. are you saying i don’t have that power?
Lauro: you should scrupulously follow SCOTUS ruling
Judge: i dont think they addressed details of how i do it.
you want witnesses?
Lauro: ultimately we do want that. but first we want …
/31

to resolve other pending motions.
we want to advance our arguments first. this is our motion.
Judge Chutkan suggests he doesn’t want to go forward till next year. He denies it, but she says that’s what your schedule says.
/32

Judge: as i read it, SCOTUS expects us decide the immunity issue forthwith. as early as possible. your schedule, we wouldn’t begin briefing immunity until december.
Lauro: because we’d be filing our briefing based on info we receive from the govt. … These important issues
/33

should not be decided based on an asymmetrical proffer.
Judge: not unfair. govt files open brief, you get a look, chance to address. nothing unfair, just a matter of who goes first.
Lauro: incredibly unfair that they get to put into the record at this terribly sensitive time /34

in our nation’s history …

Now Lauro suggesting that if govt puts in proffer, maybe it should be done under seal. And if it does, Lauro wants chance to make public exculpatory material that he says is currently under protective order.
/35

Judge is saying she won’t take the election into account in terms of timing.
Lauro: letting prosecution go first limits our ability to structure our arguments … we’ve had 14M pp of documents we’ve had to look through–
Judge: you’re own proposed schedule says you …
/36

can resolve discovery issues simultaneously with resolving the immunity issues.
Lauro: there’s something unseemly about a rush to judgment only in this case–
Judge: hardly a rush to judgment. case been pending over a year. we can’t even contemplate a trial date …
/37

Lauro: new SCOTUS ruling changes complexion of case completely.
Judge: we haven’t even discussed how long you need to respond. you can have time to respond. Not prejudicial to you at all.
Lauro: it’s a quagmire. completely prejudicial. We’re going to unseal GJ material
/38

that is very exonerative of president trump because it needs to be on the record and public immediately. we will do that if that’s how govt wants to proceed. but for them to selectively portray how they want to proceed with their case shows fundamental unfairness.
/39

Lauro: this has to be done in a very deliberative way. not back-of-the-envelope. we’re saying, deal with legal issues first. your honor may decide that comms with VP were immune and, if so, indictment needs to be dismissed. right away. let’s deal with gateway issues 1st.
/40

Judge: SCOTUS had indictment before them with comms with VP. they could’ve ruled then. they didn’t. they sent it back to me. so not sure i can agree with you that as a matter of law i can dismiss the superseding indictment at all.
Lauro: of course you can. it’s crystal clear
/41

Lauro: only issue is whether they can overcome the presumption which is an incredibly high bar. prove no chance of intrusion. incredibly high bar. if they fail, then whole indictment craters. it goes away. this is logical way to deal with these issues.
/42

Lauro: they’re suggesting they leapfrog into merits arguments over all the official acts. all that is wasted time if Your Honor decides that pence communications are immune.
Judge: alright, you’ve made your argument. …
Lauro: we need the discovery we’ve requested —
/42

Lauro: discovery issues were stayed almost a year ago. we’re being put it an incredibly unfair position for no reason at all. in light of SCOTUS ruling … we’re talking about a president of the US.
Judge: I’m not talking about a president of the US … it strikes me …
/43

that you’re [trying to time the displaying of evidence based on the timing of the election and Chutkan’s not going to take the election into account.] Judge: thank you. Mr Windom?
Windom: 5 quick points.
1. discovery: big reveal. no additional discovery we anticipate.
/44

Windom: 2 days ago we provided grand jury transcripts & exhibits for superseding indictment. they have that.
2. motions to dismiss with respect to VP’s allegations–SCOTUS was all about fact-found analysis and fact determinations. Impossible for court to do that without
/45

… info we plan to put forward. …
Chutkan asks about defense wanting to unseal certain material. Windom says there are provision in the protective order that they can follow to litigate that.
3. SCOTUS doesn’t anticipate automatic dismissal of indictment
/46

[I missed something in there. sorry.] 4. grand jury struck 9 full pages from original indictment.
Now Windom talking about how defense filed 52 page brief in NY just nine days after SCOTUS ruling, showing how quickly they can move.
Judge: congratulations, Mr. Blanche.
/47

[sorry I missed point 5.] Judge: don’t need any more rhetoric on how grave and important this is.
Lauro: it’s not rhetoric, it’s legal argument. … the very first thing your honor needs to do is decide whether that presumption of immunity [for VP comms] can be overcome. …
/48

Judge: why can’t I address that in a single brief? Why does it have to be piecemeal, other than to extend the schedule?
Lauro: if you decide this issue, all that briefing never has to take place. why should we engage in mos and mos of briefing if your honor can decide …
/49

Lauro: … this issue and it will end the case.
They made a calculated risk. they bet the VP material were going to be held immune. Once that’s determined,
[case ends]. we have an illegitimate prosecutor–we haven’t talked about that–and an illegitimate indictment. …
/50

Judge: you want your opening brief to deal solely with the issues about the VP comms?
Lauro: exactly. … I’m an originalist….
Judge: you may be an originalist but i’m a trial judge.
/51

Now discussing defense request to challenge propriety of appointment of special counsel. Chutkan wants to know why it wasn’t filed when dispositive motions were due.
Lauro explains that there was binding DC precedent against them at time. But now very persuasive …
/52

… ruling handed down by a district court judge [Cannon].
there’s certainly no waiver here.
Judge: this expired well before the appeal in this case. there’s binding DC precedent on this. you have an opinion by a district jduge in another circuit which frankly this court …/53

doesn’t find persuasive.
Lauro: court should consider this issue. justice thomas in effect directed us to do this.
Judge: he directed you?
Lauro: well if you read that opinion it’s something we need to do to preserve that issue.
Judge: Mr. Windom?
/54

Windom: despite binding circuit precedent, defs in this court file motions all the time to preserve issues. [they didn’t do that.] so long as it does not affect briefing schedule for immunity issue, hard to see how govt is prejudiced. but dont see basis for why …
/55

… defendant should not be found to have waived.
Judge: i’m going to allow defense to file that motion. Want you to explain why you think you have enough so that binding DC precedent doesn’t preclude my [granting it].
/56

Judge: is it your position that if contacts with VP are out, whole indictment is out?
Lauro: yes. they used immune evidence in connection with grand jury indictment. that’s what SCOTUS says.
/57

Chutkan: now let’s talk about motion to dismiss based on statutory grounds. … now we have superseding indictment. …
Lauro: I think immunity should be resolved first before we get to other issues.
Judge: may be so, but we can work concurrently.
Lauro: no objection …
/58

Windom agrees that all these things can be going on concurrently.
Judge Chutkan now brings up the Fischer ruling, which narrowed “corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding” (18 USC 1512c2), which is the basis for two counts against Trump. Lauro wants to file an entirely
/59

… new motion but Chutkan sees it more as a supplemental brief to what he’s already filed.
Chutkan: I’m inclined to vacate my denial of motion to dismiss on statutory grounds and to simply seek supplemental briefing. …
/60

Lauro is now saying that when he talks about discovery issues, he’s talking about discovery relating to immunity. But he’s also asking for “Brady material” which is any evidence that exonerates the defendant.
Judge: Brady is an ongoing obligation. Any reason to believe …
/61

… there’s Brady material they haven’t already turned over? [I don’t understand the answer.] Lauro: there’s also a CIPA [Classified Info Procedures Act] issue that’s pending.
Judge: yes.
Windom: we took comprehensive view of what should be produced. we’ve met our obligations/62
Judge: I’m going to assume parties will continue to meet and confer and discuss discovery issues.
AUSA Windom: there are 2 pending discovery motions: motion to compel and motion to define the “scope of the prosecution team.”
/63

Windom: . Defense suggested taking up “scope of prosecution team” motion first. But the two can’t be disentangled.
Judge: I agree.
Judge now saying that setting a trial date doesn’t make sense because of the pending immunity issues (subject to interlocutory appeal).
/64

Judge: that’s all i have for today. Anything else Mr. Windom? Mr. Lauro? [no, no] Hearing concludes.
Thanks for following. Please consider listening to @annabower, Ben Wittes & me discuss at 4pm.
/65-end

Proceedings in Judge Chutkan’s Courtroom TodayPost + Comments (118)

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 30
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - Albatrossity - Serengeti Day 2, Round 3 9
Image by Albatrossity (6/12/25)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

We did it!

We raised the 25,000 for The Civics Center, and with the external matches, that gives them $60,000 for this Spring effort!

You guys rock!

Recent Comments

  • Odie Hugh Manatee on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 3:04am)
  • Bruce K in ATH-GR on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:59am)
  • prostratedragon on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:24am)
  • No One of Consequence on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:20am)
  • columbusqueen on Thursday Night Open Thread (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:00am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc