A judge in the Trump subversion case will not be influenced by the election schedule

A U.S. judge on Thursday charged Donald Trump’s attorneys with trying to keep potentially harmful new information from being made public prior to the election on November 5th in the 2020 election subversion case against the Republican former president.

Prosecutors wanted to provide a list of their supporting documents, but Trump attorney John Lauro shot down the idea. Prosecutors claim the case is still pending because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant former presidents sweeping immunity from prosecution.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan told Lauro, “It strikes me that what you’re trying to do is affect presentation of evidence in this case so as not to impinge on an election.” She also stated that she is “not concerned with the electoral schedule.”

Trump, who skipped the hearing, is accused of utilizing fraudulent allegations of voter fraud to sabotage the election results and prevent Democratic President Joe Biden from being certified as the winner.

Lauro stated that it would be “unfair” to permit U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith to give a thorough analysis of the case, particularly at this “sensitive time” in the run-up to the presidential election, in which Trump is running against Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.

During the hearing, Chutkan did not provide a deadline for settling the matter.

Lauro stated that the first step for Trump’s defense should be to drop the charges, citing the fact that a grand jury that returned a revised indictment against the president last month heard material that was suppressed by the Supreme Court’s decision.

The four accusations in the August indictment were the same as those in the one Smith received the previous year; however, the Supreme Court removed several allegations that it determined could not be included in the case.

Trump entered a not guilty plea through his attorneys to the accusations included in the amended indictment.

Chutkan considered opposing ideas from Trump, who wants to postpone action until after the election, and Smith, who wants to pursue the issue further. Chutkan was given a directive by the Supreme Court to determine whether any more parts of the lawsuit need to be dismissed.

Months had passed while Trump pressed for his claim of immunity. He has maintained that attempts to sabotage his presidential candidacy are being made with political motivations by the prosecution and other judicial actions against him.

In July, the Supreme Court decided, 6-3, that former presidents are generally exempt from criminal prosecution for activities they took while carrying out their official duties as head of state.

According to Smith, all of the other accusations are unaffected by the immunity ruling and can go to trial.

According to the prosecution, they are ready to submit court documents outlining their case “whenever the court deems appropriate.”

Chutkan should wait until December, following the election, to start considering the implications of the immunity verdict, according to suggestions made by Trump’s legal team.