DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Government’s Proposed Trial Date and Schedule:

To estimate a prompt trial date that serves the public’s interest and the interests of justice,
while also protecting the defendant’s rights and ability to prepare for trial, the Government outlines
below suggested interim dates subject to the Court’s schedule and availability

• September 25, 2023: Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• October 16, 2023: Oppositions to Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• October 25, 2023: Replies in Support of Rule 12 and other dispositive motions
• TBD: Motions Hearing
• November 13, 2023: Motions in Limine
• November 27, 2023: Oppositions to Motions in Limine
• December 4, 2023: Replies in Support of Motions in Limine
• December 8, 2023: Final Pretrial Conference
• December 11, 2023: Jury Selection
• January 2, 2024: Trial

Thank you.

I can see that following this case is going to provide an education on legal terms and procedures. Lots to learn. First up, figuring out what "Rule 12" and "limine" are. :)

jmo
 
Epshteyn, who had worked with Arizona politicians to overturn Trump's 2020 election loss, was accused of sexually assaulting the women at the Bottled Blonde nightclub early in the morning of Oct. 10, 2021.


Epshteyn was charged with “assault touching,” “attempted sexual abuse,” “harassment-repeated acts” and “disorderly conduct-disruptive behavior or fighting.”

The first three charges were dismissed, but Epshteyn pleaded guilty in Scottsdale City Court to disorderly conduct and served probation. The conviction was set aside by the court in January 2023…

Unlike the prior incident, the plea deal did not prohibit him from returning to the venue. But representatives from Evening Entertainment Group, which runs Bottled Blonde, said Epshteyn would not be welcomed back.

"If this person approached our door and was recognized, they would not be allowed entrance going forward," the company said.

At one point in the video, Epshteyn signaled to someone off-camera and waved the person over to where he was sitting on the curb. Then he pointed in that direction and told the officer, “That’s my attorney. My attorney is over there.”


Epshteyn’s actions in Arizona, including communications with a lawyer who helped coordinate the “fake” electors from the state, are similar to actions described as “Co-Conspirator 6.”




Wow! So now Trump, Co-conspirator #1 (Rudy), #6 (Boris) have been accused of groping women or worse. Classy! (not)

JMO
 

A Wisconsin judge on Thursday allowed a civil lawsuit filed against 10 fake electors for former President Donald Trump and two of his attorneys to proceed, rejecting a move to dismiss the case.

The lawsuit is moving ahead in Wisconsin after Michigan’s attorney general filed felony charges on July 18 against 16 Republicans who acted as fake electors for Trump, accusing them of submitting false certificates that confirmed they were legitimate electors despite Joe Biden’s victory in the state.

The fake elector plan was central to the federal indictment filed against Trump earlier this month that alleged he tried to overturn results of the 2020 election. Federal prosecutors said the scheme originated in Wisconsin.
 

When deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin had told Jeffrey Clark, a former top Justice Department official in the Trump administration listed as “Co-Conspirator 4” in the indictment, that there was no way Trump could stay in power beyond Inauguration Day, Clark had another idea.

“Well, that’s why there’s an Insurrection Act,” Clark told Philbin, according to the indictment.

Lofgren said the House panel didn’t obtain the “contemporaneous notes” former Vice President Mike Pence took of discussions with Trump and his allies in the days leading up to the Capitol riot. That’s because Pence, now a 2024 GOP presidential candidate, defied a congressional subpoena for testimony and documents.

Lofgren is not the only one to express shock at the idea of mobilizing the military.

Kevin Carroll, who advised former White House chief of staff John Kelly during the Trump administration, said the military was nearly placed in an “unthinkable” position.

Commanders would have been “forced to choose whether to abandon an unbroken tradition of American military obedience to civilian control, or turn their guns on civilians to facilitate a losing candidate remaining in the White House beyond Inauguration Day,” Carroll said.
 

U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan gave Trump’s team until Monday to make its own request and scheduled an Aug. 28 hearing in D.C. to set a trial date.

Chutkan will hold her first hearing in the special counsel’s election subversion case Friday to resolve a related dispute over finalizing a protective order limiting public disclosure of evidence in the case, which Trump’s team says it needs before making trial plans.

In a court filing, prosecutors wrote, “It is difficult to imagine a public interest stronger than the one in this case, in which the defendant — the former president of the United States — is charged with three criminal conspiracies intended to undermine the federal government, obstruct the certification of the 2020 presidential election, and disenfranchise voters.” They added, “Trial in this case is clearly a matter of public importance, which merits in favor of a prompt resolution.”

@Niner dates for you
 
Last edited:
He posted on his Truth Social platform that the Justice Department “secretly attacked” his Twitter account, and he characterized the investigation as an attempt to “infringe” on his bid to reclaim the White House in 2024.

It's a complete cult of personality and there are people who genuinely believe this. It's very scary, no matter where someone's political loyalties lie..if they have any loyalties
 
Another long one - will shorten this up!

Friday, August 11th:
*Motions Hearing (@ 10am ET) - DC Donald John Trump has been indicted & charged (8/1/23) & arraigned (8/3/23) with four counts re 2020 election: conspiracy to defraud the United States "by using dishonesty, fraud & deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting & certifying the results of the presidential election"; conspiracy to impede the Jan. 6 congressional proceeding; a conspiracy against the right to vote & to have that vote counted; and obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct & impede, the certification of the electoral vote. Plead not guilty. Conditions of release: agreed to by both sides. No violations of federal law. Must appear in court as required. Must sign appearance bond. Shall not communicate about the facts of the case to any individual known to the defendant to be a witness except through attorneys.
Five of the six alleged co-conspirators, based on details provided in transcripts of testimony to the Jan. 6 Committee and other records, appear to be: longtime Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani; lawyer John Eastman, who helped architect the "fake electors scheme"; attorney Sidney Powell, who helped lead Trump's post-campaign legal efforts; former Justice Dept. official Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump considered making his attorney general; and Kenneth Chesebro, another attorney pushing the "fake electors scheme." It is not clear who co-conspirator 6 is.
Trump's alleged role in the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, when a mob of his supporters stormed the building in an effort to stop the confirmation of President Joe Biden's election victory, is under scrutiny from several federal government bodies. The most visible has been a congressional committee that spent 18 months looking into Trump's actions. They held a series of televised hearings laying out their case that his election fraud claims led directly to the riot. Following these hearings, the committee accused Trump of inciting insurrection & other crimes.
Defense attorneys: John Lauro & Todd Blanche. Prosecution: Tom Windom & Molly Gaston.
Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya / District Judge Tanya Chutkan
Trial set to begin on 1/2/24.

Case info from 3/25/23 thru 7/24/23 reference post #229 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/...l-jan-6-investigation-aug-2023.686121/page-12

8/1/23 Update: Trump has been charged with four counts: conspiracy to defraud the United States "by using dishonesty, fraud & deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting & certifying the results of the presidential election"; conspiracy to impede the Jan. 6 congressional proceeding; a conspiracy against the right to vote & to have that vote counted; and obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct and impede, the certification of the electoral vote. Five of the six alleged co-conspirators, based on details provided in transcripts of testimony to the Jan. 6 Committee and other records, appear to be: longtime Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani; lawyer John Eastman, who helped architect the "fake electors scheme"; attorney Sidney Powell, who helped lead Trump's post-campaign legal efforts; former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump considered making his attorney general; and Kenneth Chesebro, another attorney pushing the "fake electors scheme." It is not clear who co-conspirator 6 is. Trump is scheduled to appear at the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse in Washington on Thursday, 8/3/23 after being indicted in connection with efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election before Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya.
8/1/23: Motion to seal case by USA as to Trump. Order granting Motion to Seal Case as to Trump. Signed by Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya on 8/1/2023. 8/3/23: Notice of attorney appearance: John F. Lauro appearing for Trump. Trump will appear before Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya’s courtroom on 8/3/23. The Judge read out the charges & the maximum penalties. Judge Upadhyaya informs Trump of his rights, including his right to remain silent. Trump plead not guilty to all four charges. Conditions of release... agreed to by both sides - no violations of federal law. Must appear in court as required. Must sign appearance bond. Shall not communicate about the facts of the case to any individual known to the defendant to be a witness except through attorneys. Judge Upadhyaya warns Trump that under the conditions of his release he must not retaliate against anyone providing information to the prosecution or otherwise obstruct justice. Next hearing on 8/28/23 @ 10am.
8/3/23: Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Todd Blanche. Motion for Speedy Trial. Initial appearance. Minute OrderTrump: As required by Rule 5(f), the United States is ordered to produce all exculpatory evidence to the defendant pursuant to Brady v. Maryland & its progeny. Not doing so in a timely manner may result in sanctions, including exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges and contempt proceedings.Signed by Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya on 8/3/2023. Oral Motion for Speedy Trial by USA as to Trump. Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya: Return on Summons/Initial Appearance/Arraignment as to Counts 1,2,3,4 held on 8/3/23. Plea of Not Guilty entered as to all counts. The Court advised the Government of its due process obligation under Rule 5(f). Status Conference set for 8/28/23 at 10am in Courtroom 9- In Person before Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. Bond Status of Defendant: Defendant Remain on Personal Recognizance; Court Reporter: Jeff Hook; Defense Attorney: John Lauro & Todd Blanche; US Attorney: Thomas Windom & Molly Gaston; Pretrial Officer: Takeysha Robinson. Minute Order as to Trump: A status conference will be held in this matter on August 28, 2023 at 10am in Courtroom 9 before Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. The court waives the requirement for Defendant to appear at that conference. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant shall file any motion for excluding the time until the next status conference from the Speedy Trial Act clock by August 8, 2023; & that the government shall file any opposition to that motion by August 13, 2023. It is FURTHER ORDERED that by August 10, 2023, the government shall file a brief proposing a trial date & providing an estimate of the time required to set forth the prosecution's case in chief during that trial; and that by August 17, 2023, Defendant shall file a response brief likewise proposing a trial date & estimating, to the extent possible, the time required to set forth the defense at trial. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/3/2023. Summons Returned Executed on 8/3/23 as to Trump. Summons Returned Executed.
8/4/23: MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filzah I. Pavalon. Appear Pro Hac Vice. MOTION for Protective Order by USA as to Trump. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Gaston, Molly). Protective Order. Text of Proposed Order. Speedy Trial. Order. Order & ~Util - Set/Reset Deadlines. Arraignment & Initial Appearance & ~Util - Plea Entered & ~Util - Set/Reset Hearings. Minute Order as to Trump. As required by Rule 5(f), the United States is ordered to produce all exculpatory evidence to the defendant pursuant to Brady v. Maryland and its progeny. Not doing so in a timely manner may result in sanctions, including exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges & contempt proceedings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya on 8/3/23. ORAL MOTION for Speedy Trial by USA as to Trump. Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya: Return on Summons/Initial Appearance/Arraignment as to Counts 1,2,3,4 held on 8/3/2023. Plea of Not Guilty entered as to all counts. The Court advised the Government of its due process obligation under Rule 5(f).Status Conference set for 8/28/23 at 10am in Courtroom 9- In Person before Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. Bond Status of Defendant: Defendant Remain on Personal Recognizance; Court Reporter: Jeff Hook; Defense Attorney: John Lauro and Todd Blanche; US Attorney: Thomas Windom and Molly Gaston; Pretrial Officer: Takeysha Robinson. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant shall file any motion for excluding the time until the next status conference from the Speedy Trial Act clock by August 8, 2023; and that the government shall file any opposition to that motion by August 13, 2023. It is FURTHER ORDERED that by August 10, 2023, the government shall file a brief proposing a trial date and providing an estimate of the time required to set forth the prosecution's case in chief during that trial; and that by August 17, 2023, Defendant shall file a response brief likewise proposing a trial date and estimating, to the extent possible, the time required to set forth the defense at trial. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/3/23.
8/4/23 Update: The special counsel overseeing a Trump indictment has sought an emergency protective order just hours after Trump made a social media post viewed as threatening to witnesses. Jack Smith entered Trump's post - saying 'IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU' - into evidence on Friday night, shortly after it was posted. Smith says the post shows Trump cannot be trusted to keep confidential information disclosed to defendants ahead of a criminal trial confidential.
8/5/23 Update: Order (10) on motion for extension of time to file response/reply & Order on motion for hearing. Minute Order to Trump. It is hereby ORDERED that by 5:00pm on August 7, 2023, Defendant shall file a response to the government's 10 Motion for Protective Order, stating Defendant's position on the Motion. If Defendant disagrees with any portion of the government's proposed Protective Order, ECF No. 10-1, his response shall include a revised version of that Protective Order with any modifications in redline. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/5/23. Minute Order as to Trump: Granting 9 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Filzah I. Pavalon is hereby admitted pro hac vice to appear in this matter on behalf of Defendant. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER & file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCrR 44.5(a). Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/5/23. Order on Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Motion (11) for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 10 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION for Hearing by Trump. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Lauro, John). Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Text of Proposed Order. Response (12) by USA as to Trump 11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 10 MOTION for Protective Order MOTION for Hearing (Gaston, Molly). Response to motion. Minute Order as to Trump: Defendant's 11 Motion for Extension of Time is hereby DENIED. Defendant may continue to confer with the government regarding its proposed protective order before or after the August 7, 2023 5:00pm deadline for his response. The court will determine whether to schedule a hearing to discuss the proposed protective order after reviewing Defendant's response and, if included, his revised proposed protective order with modifications in redline. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/5/23.
8/6/23: Set/Reset Deadline as to Trump: Defendant shall file a response to the government's 10 Motion for Protective Order, stating Defendant's position on the Motion by 5:00pm on August 7, 2023. If Defendant disagrees with any portion of the government's proposed Protective Order, (Dkt. #10-1), his response shall include a revised version of that Protective Order with any modifications in redline.
8/7/23: Government's reply in Support of Motion for Protective Order filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Defendant's argument filed on 8/7/23: The defendant’s proposed order would lead to the public dissemination of discovery material. Indeed, that is the defendant’s stated goal; the defendant seeks to use the discovery material to litigate this case in the media. But that is contrary to the purpose of criminal discovery, which is to afford defendants the ability to prepare for and mount a defense in court—not to wage a media campaign. The Court should instead enter the Government’s proposed order. Judge ordered a hearing on the protective order to happen by the end of this week. "It is hereby ORDERED that no later than 3:00pm on August 8, 2023, the parties shall meet & confer & file a joint notice of two dates & times on or before August 11, 2023 when both parties are available for a hearing."
Link: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.15.0_2.pdf

8/8/23 Update: House Resolution 644 is sponsored by Representative Brendan Boyle from Pennsylvania. The resolution is supported by six other lawmakers, including former impeachment manager Adam Schiff who took part in Trump's impeachment hearings. The resolution calls on the Judicial Conference to "authorize that the trial of former President Donald J. Trump for his alleged crimes related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection be broadcast to the American public."
8/8/23 Update: Joint Notice in Response to Court's 8/7/23 Minute Order. The Government is available at any time on 8/9, 8/10 & 8/11/23. The defense represents the following: Trump will not appear. However, he would like to have both his counsel John Lauro & Todd Blanche at the hearing. Todd Blanche is not available on Thursday, 8/10/23 since he must appear for a court proceeding in the prosecution brought against the same defendant, Trump, by the Special Counsel in SD Florida. Mr. Lauro is available on Thursday, with a preference for an afternoon setting. However, since we lost Friday as an option, we would respectfully request a setting on Monday, 8/14/23 (after 12:00pm) or Tuesday, 8/15/23 (all day) to allow for both Mr. Blanche & Mr. Lauro to be present. Respectfully submitted.
8/9/23 Update: Judge Chutkan: Minute Order: The court hereby schedules a hearing on the parties' respective protective order proposals on 8/11/23 @ 10am. The requirement of defendant's appearance is waived for this hearing.
8/10/23 Update: Court’s schedule & availability. September 25, 2023: Rule 12 & other dispositive motions; October 16, 2023: Oppositions to Rule 12 & other dispositive motions; October 25, 2023: Replies in Support of Rule 12 & other dispositive motions; TBD: Motions Hearing; November 13, 2023: Motions in Limine; November 27, 2023: Oppositions to Motions in Limine; December 4, 2023: Replies in Support of Motions in Limine; December 8, 2023: Final Pretrial Conference; December 11, 2023: Jury Selection; January 2, 2024: Trial.
 
Last edited:
"Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office."

They state "'It is unquestionably fair to say that Trump ‘engaged in’ the Jan. 6 insurrection through both his actions and his inaction,' the article said."

"The provision in question is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment....Congress can remove the prohibition, the provision says, but only by a two-thirds vote in each House."

"'Trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, and each of the 50 state secretaries of state has an obligation to print ballots without his name on them,” he said, adding that they may be sued for refusing to do so."

NYTimes allows subscribers to gift links to articles. The link will work for two weeks: Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6

14 Amendment of the Constitution, scroll down at the link for Section 3: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/
 
"Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office."

They state "'It is unquestionably fair to say that Trump ‘engaged in’ the Jan. 6 insurrection through both his actions and his inaction,' the article said."

"The provision in question is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment....Congress can remove the prohibition, the provision says, but only by a two-thirds vote in each House."

"'Trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, and each of the 50 state secretaries of state has an obligation to print ballots without his name on them,” he said, adding that they may be sued for refusing to do so."

NYTimes allows subscribers to gift links to articles. The link will work for two weeks: Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6

14 Amendment of the Constitution, scroll down at the link for Section 3: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/
One can only hope! One would think that it is pretty clear that Trump "engaged" in an insurrection-- note: it does not say "incited" an insurrection, but "engaged": there has to be a way to keep some one that "engages" in an insurrection from running for the office of the presidency.
 
Thank you.

I can see that following this case is going to provide an education on legal terms and procedures. Lots to learn. First up, figuring out what "Rule 12" and "limine" are. :)

jmo
I love details, but legal details are a bit boring, gotta admit. It's like playing a complicated board game you really don't want to play, where everyone else knows all the intricate rules and you just want your turn with the dice even though you don't know what to do after you roll them.

Rule 12 looks like it has to do with rules about defense responding to motions. Rule 12. Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

Limine means "a motion made at the start of a trial requesting that the judge rule that certain evidence may not be introduced in trial."

jmo
 
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A federal judge on Friday granted former U.S. President Donald Trump leeway to publicly share some non-sensitive evidence that will be used in his trial on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, but she also warned him to tread carefully about making inflammatory public statements.

 

The more a party makes “inflammatory” statements that could taint a jury pool, she said, “the greater the urgency will be that we proceed to trial quickly” to ensure a fair trial.
 
"The federal judge overseeing the DOJ's January 6 case against former President Donald Trump ruled that he can't have his phone with him while reviewing documents in the case to keep him from copying evidence.

Prosecutors at a hearing Friday pointed out that the former president has a 'tendency to desire to hold onto material he knows he should not have.'"

 

Judge Chuktan warns Trump against 'inflammatory' remarks before trial​

A federal judge has warned former US President Donald Trump against making "inflammatory" statements which could taint the jury pool ahead of his trial for conspiring to overturn the result of the 2020 election.

But Judge Tanya Chuktan ruled that Mr Trump can publicly share some of the non-sensitive evidence which prosecutors disclose to his legal team.

Friday's ruling was a blow to the special counsel who had expressed concern Mr Trump might reveal secret material and intimidate witnesses.

At a 90-minute hearing in Washington DC, the judge said the historic case was proceeding as normal.

"He is a criminal defendant. He is going to have restrictions like every single other defendant," she said.

"The fact that the defendant is engaged in a political campaign is not going to allow him any greater or lesser latitude than any defendant in a criminal case."

What Mr Trump can reveal publicly is one of several battles being fought between the former president's legal team and federal prosecutors.

[...]

 
AUG 11, 2023
Judge Tanya Chutkan says Donald Trump's right to free speech in January 6 case is 'not absolute' | CNN Politics
[...]

Chutkan adopted restrictions proposed by prosecutors that would bar Trump from publicly disclosing “sensitive information” – including witness interviews – that are turned over to his legal team by special counsel investigators in the case.

She also rejected Trump demands for broader language in the order that would allow people not directly employed on the defense team – including volunteers – to access discovery.

While Chutkan declined a broader protective order sought by prosecutors who wanted to lock down all evidence turned over in discovery, she did restrict how Trump and his legal team can handle and publicly share sensitive information.

Her order defines sensitive information as grand jury secrets, including subpoenaed information and witness testimony; transcripts and recordings of witness interviews done by investigators outside of the grand jury; evidence obtained through court-approved searches; and sealed orders related to the investigation. The evidence Trump cannot share publicly also includes material from other government agencies, such as the Secret Service.

Prosecutors said the sensitive information represents a large amount of the evidence they’ve collected.

[...]
 

Special counsel Jack Smith on Thursday proposed a start date of Jan. 2, 2024 for the trial on former President Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, according to a court filing.

A spokesperson for Trump's campaign slammed the proposed trial start date, writing in a statement that "deranged Jack Smith and the Biden Department of Justice are blatantly playing political games."
I was really hoping the trial would take place sooner than that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
1,577
Total visitors
1,714

Forum statistics

Threads
598,514
Messages
18,082,499
Members
230,650
Latest member
TabithaTindle84
Back
Top