She got the case back on Friday. She filed a denial of Trump's motion to dismiss on Saturday.
In a 16-page opinion, [Judge Tanya] Chutkan swept aside Trump’s attempt to dismiss his Washington, D.C., criminal case — which charges him with sweeping conspiracies to subvert the 2020 election — over claims that President Joe Biden pressured prosecutors to target his political rival. In the ruling, Chutkan said Trump repeatedly mischaracterized the charges against him, which describe far more than simply criminalizing his claimed belief that the 2020 election was stolen.
Rather, Chutkan ruled, the charges describe a sweeping attempt to manipulate and lie to government authorities in order to undermine the lawful 2020 election results. And Trump’s claim that Biden was secretly behind the prosecution relied on flimsy evidence and anonymously sourced articles that Chutkan said he described inaccurately.
Politico
Imagine that.
In an order earlier Saturday, she set deadlines for court filings next week and an Aug. 16 hearing to consider the future timing of the case.
The selective-prosecution ruling later in the day appeared to signal that she hasn’t been ignoring the unresolved legal issues in the case as Trump’s immunity-based appeal wended its way through the higher courts and that she is working through the weekend to swiftly resolve long-stalled motions in the case.
Chutkan is the anti-Cannon.
Much of Trump’s argument that the case was brought for political reasons is based on news accounts from The Washington Post and The New York Times detailing internal Justice Department deliberations ahead of the charges Trump faces in Washington, as well as Biden’s own frustration with the pace of the investigation.
Chutkan concluded that even if the anonymously sourced stories are accurate, they don’t demonstrate that prosecutors brought the charges in order to carry out a political directive from Biden or the White House.
[...]
Chutkan said a Post article detailing the probe’s deliberate pace “reflects conscientious investigation, not political animus.”
“Overall, the article suggests that the Justice Department was especially cautious about investigating a political figure like Defendant.”
[...]
Chutkan also rejected Trump’s arguments that prosecutors charged him in the election case because he pleaded not guilty in the classified information case and made public allegations that the investigations were politically motivated.
[...]
“If vindictiveness could be established by new charges following a not guilty plea or a defendant’s public criticism of the prosecution, then defendants could effectively immunize themselves from superseding indictments by taking such action,” Chutkan wrote. “That cannot be the law.”
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment