Attorneys for former President Donald Trump requested the adjournment of pre-trial deadlines as they prepare to file several motions to dismiss the case that arose out of the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago resort.
Last year, President Trump was charged with 40 counts related to allegedly mishandling classified documents. He has maintained that he did nothing wrong and is protected by the Presidential Records Act.
Defense attorneys revealed they plan to file motions, including to dismiss the indictment, relating to “presidential immunity, the Presidential Records Act, President Trump’s security clearances, the vagueness doctrine, impermissible preindictment delay, and selective and vindictive prosecution,” reads the Feb. 6 motion.
The defense also had filed a motion recently to compel evidence from the prosecutors, which they say may result in additional “motions to suppress evidence and/or dismiss the Superseding Indictment based on prosecutorial misconduct, due process violations, unlawful disregard of President Trump’s attorney-client privilege, the Mar-a-Lago raid, and the searches of defendants’ electronic devices.”
Special counsel Jack Smith is leading the prosecution of the case, and attorneys for President Trump have, in two separate cases, accused him of acting in bad faith.
In a separate case, attorneys formally alleged that indicting President Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, was “election interference” on behalf of the Biden administration in the middle of campaign season, and it appears they may do it again here.
They have also argued that prosecutors are not meeting discovery obligations.
Most recently, prosecutors on Jan. 26 produced 2,000 pages that were previously sealed after the defense made special demands. Defense attorneys argued that these materials were subject to discovery that was produced much earlier, and that the special counsel “failed to produce these materials until President Trump specifically requested them.”
“Although the motions to compel seek evidence that is relevant to selective and vindictive prosecution, the defendants will demonstrate on February 22, 2024, that there is an adequate basis in the record to require not only full discovery but also an evidentiary hearing on these issues,” the filings read.
Currently, the parties are litigating issues related to the Classified Information Procedures Act, and those court filings are sealed.
The resolution of this motion, and the evidence produced by motions to compel, will inform the defense’s next move, attorneys argued, requesting an extension of deadlines.
They predicted additional extensions, noting that it will take time for litigation over evidence the prosecutors possess that still needs to be turned over to the defense, as well as what evidence can be used in the case.
They also said they will seek to dismiss the case entirely in the near future.
Motion to Compel
Last month, the defense came into a tranche of emails from 2021 that were released under the Freedom of Information Act. The 22 emails involve the White House, the Department of Justice, the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA), and other executive branch departments.
The special counsel has claimed to be acting independently in the prosecution of President Trump, but defense attorneys argued that the emails, which were only partially quoted in redacted form in court filings, showed wider coordination between departments.
“Though the Special Counsel’s Office has suppressed these communications, we know from FOIA releases that NARA started to coordinate with the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community by Jan. 25, 2022,” the defense argued.
The special counsel responded by arguing that defense attorneys had painted an “inaccurate and distorted picture of events.”
They argued that the motion to compel was misleading and “their apparent aim is to cast a cloud of suspicion over responsible actions by government officials diligently doing their jobs.”
The prosecutors said they had already turned over extensive information to the defense and that the requests were too wide-ranging.
However, they did not address or refute allegations of collusion with the Biden administration, instead repeating the argument that much of what President Trump is seeking is not in the special counsel’s possession.
They asked the court to deny the defense’s requests for evidence of “improper coordination” and “bias and investigative misconduct,” evidence related to President Trump’s security clearance, evidence related to secure facilities at President Trump’s residences, materials concerning the August 8, 2022, Mar-a-Lago raid, additional security video footage, and unredacted copies of materials that were already produced in redacted form.
Trial Date?
This is one of four criminal indictments President Trump faces, and for a time it seemed that all four might go to trial during the 2024 election season.
However, most of these trials may be delayed, and if President Trump wins the nomination before they go to trial, it is unclear whether some of these cases could go to trial at all.
The classified documents case was originally meant to go to trial in May. Late last year, the judge reset certain deadlines and indicated that a delay was likely necessary. If the new requests for deadline delays are granted, it would further push back the schedule.
Another case led by Mr. Smith was set for trial on March 4 until President Trump appealed in a motion to dismiss.
That put the case schedule in limbo, and although the appeals court recently rejected President Trump’s presidential immunity defense, the order came with a provision to withhold the mandate if President Trump appeals to the Supreme Court by Feb. 12.
A campaign spokesperson stated that President Trump would appeal, but did not reveal specifics as to whether he would head to the high court directly or seek rehearing in the appellate court first.
From The Epoch Times
