Donald Trump’s legal team told a judge overseeing the election conspiracy case against him on Monday that prosecutors’ proposed protective order aimed at preventing the public disclosure of evidence is too broad and would restrict his First Amendment rights.

Lawyers for the early 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner said in court papers that the judge should impose a more limited order that would bar the public release only of materials deemed “sensitive” — such as grand jury documents — rather than all evidence handed over by the government in the case accusing Trump of conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss.

Prosecutors with special counsel Jack Smith’s team quickly countered with their own filing accusing Trump of objecting to their proposal because he wants to be able to use the government’s evidence to “try the case in the media rather than in the courtroom.”

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said later Monday that she would hold a hearing on the dueling proposals, and that Trump would not have to attend.

Prosecutors asked Friday for the protective order, which would impose rules on what Trump and his defense team can do with evidence shared by the government as they prepare for trial in the case unsealed last week.

Smith’s prosecution team has said a protective order — not unusual in criminal cases — is particularly important in Trump’s case because of his penchant for using social media. They have expressed concern that Trump could improperly share sensitive case information online that could have a “harmful chilling effect on witnesses.”

In their filing Friday seeking the order, prosecutors included a screenshot of a post from Trump’s Truth Social platform that same day in which he wrote, in all capital letters, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”

Trump’s lawyers said citing that post to claim there’s a danger that Trump might publish secret grand jury information was “a provocative claim when searching for headlines, perhaps, but one that falters under minimal scrutiny.”

The former president’s legal team said his post was “generalized political speech” and had nothing to do with the case. A Trump spokesperson said last week that the post was in response to “dishonest special interest groups and Super PACs.”

Trump’s lawyers, who have characterized the case as an attack on his right to free speech, told the judge that the need to protect sensitive information about the case “does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government.”

“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. “Worse, it does so against its administration’s primary political opponent, during an election season in which the administration, prominent party members and media allies have campaigned on the indictment and proliferated its false allegations.”

Trump’s lawyers accused President Joe Biden of trying to capitalize on the indictment in posting what they called a “thinly veiled reference” to Trump’s prosecution just hours before Trump’s court appearance last week. They included a screenshot in their court filing of a tweet from from Biden’s campaign account, which included a video of the president drinking from a mug emblazoned with “Dark Brandon” — a meme featuring Biden with lasers for eyes. The caption said, “A cup of Joe never tasted better.”

Trump’s lawyers on Saturday had asked for an extra three days to respond to prosecutors’ request for the protective order, saying they needed more time for discussion. But Chutkan who was nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama, swiftly denied that request.

Prosecutors said that they are ready to hand over a substantial amount of evidence to Trump’s legal team and that much of it includes sensitive and confidential information.

The prosecutors’ proposed order seeks to prevent Trump and his lawyers from disclosing materials provided by the government to anyone other than people on his legal team, possible witnesses, the witnesses’ lawyers or others approved by the court. It would put stricter limits on “sensitive materials,” which prosecutors said would include grand jury witness testimony and materials obtained through sealed search warrants.

Prosecutors noted in court papers Monday that Trump has made several comments about the case on social media even since they filed their protective order request. They referenced one Trump post about former Vice President Mike Pence — a potential witness in the case — in which Trump called Pence “delusional.”

Prosecutors said Trump’s proposal aims to allow for the release of transcripts and audio recordings of witness interviews conducted outside the grand jury process.

“The Government has proposed a standard, reasonable order that will streamline the flow of discovery to the defendant while preserving the integrity of these proceedings. The defendant has proposed an unreasonable order to facilitate his plan to litigate this case in the media, to the detriment of litigating this case in the courtroom. Normal order should prevail,” prosecutors wrote.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case, as well as another prosecution brought by Smith that accuses him of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.

He has has characterized all the cases against him as an effort to take down his 2024 campaign. His legal team has indicated that it will argue that he had relied on the advice of attorneys around him in 2020 and that Trump had a right to challenge an election that he believed had been stolen.

Trump pleaded not guilty last week to four felony counts, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and conspiracy to obstruct Congress’ certification of Biden’s electoral victory. The charges could lead to a lengthy prison sentence in the event of a conviction, with the most serious counts calling for up to 20 years.

It’s the third criminal case brought this year against Trump, but the first to try to hold him responsible for his efforts to remain in power during the chaotic weeks between his election loss and the attack by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Smith also charged Trump in June with dozens of felony counts alleging the former president illegally kept classified records after he left the White House and obstructed government efforts to get them back. A new indictment recently unsealed in that case accuses Trump of scheming with Mar-a-Lago staffers to try to delete security footage sought by investigators.

Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart in that case imposed a similar protective order in June that prohibits Trump and his legal team from publicly disclosing evidence turned over to them by prosecutors without prior approval.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Trump lawyers urge judge to narrow proposed rules on evidence sharing in election subversion case appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawyers for Donald Trump on Tuesday asked for a meeting with Attorney General Merrick Garland as a Justice Department investigation into the former president’s handling of classified documents shows signs of winding down.

In the letter, which Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, attorneys John Rowley and James Trusty asserted that Trump is “being treated unfairly” and asked for a meeting to discuss “the ongoing injustice that is being perpetrated by your Special Counsel and his prosecutors.” The language echoed some of Trump’s own complaints in recent months about the investigations being led by special counsel Jack Smith.

It was not immediately clear what specifically prompted the letter, but the yearlong documents probe appears to be nearing an end. Agents and prosecutors have interviewed a broad cross-section of witnesses, including attorneys for Trump, former White House officials and other close aides.

The investigation is seeking to determine whether Trump illegally retained hundreds of classified documents taken with him from the White House to his Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, after the end of his tenure and whether he sought to obstruct government efforts to get the records back.

It is not uncommon for defense lawyers to seek meetings with senior Justice Department officials to argue against potential indictments of their clients, though it is unusual for such meetings to include the attorney general.

Special counsels enjoy broad autonomy within the Justice Department, and officials have repeatedly signaled that the recommendation on whether to pursue charges against Trump or anyone else in the investigation belongs with Smith and his team. Garland did not move once to overrule any of the actions taken in the recently concluded probe by another special counsel, John Durham, into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation in 2016.

Trump’s lawyers and a Trump spokesperson did not respond Tuesday to requests for comment. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

In addition to the documents investigation, Smith is separately investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to undo the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Trump lawyers seek meeting with Garland as Mar-a-Lago investigation shows signs of winding down appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawyers for Donald Trump on Monday blasted the impeachment case against him as an act of “political theater” and accused House Democrats on the eve of the former president’s trial of exploiting the chaos and trauma of last month’s Capitol riot for their party’s gain.

Trump’s legal brief is a wide-ranging attack on the House case, foreshadowing the claims his lawyers intend to present on the same Senate floor that was invaded by rioters on Jan. 6. The sharp-tongued tone, with accusations that Democrats are making “patently absurd” arguments and trying to “silence a political opponent,” makes clear that Trump’s lawyers are preparing to challenge both the constitutionality of the trial and any suggestion that he was to blame for the insurrection.

“While never willing to allow a ‘good crisis’ to go to waste, the Democratic leadership is incapable of understanding that not everything can always be blamed on their political adversaries, no matter how very badly they may wish to exploit any moment of uncertainty on the part of the American people,” the defense lawyers say.

In their brief, they suggest that Trump was simply exercising his First Amendment rights when he disputed the election results and argue that he explicitly encouraged his supporters to have a peaceful protest and therefore cannot be responsible for the actions of the rioters. They also say the Senate is not entitled to try Trump now that he has left office, an argument contested by even some conservative legal scholars, and they deny that the goal of the Democrats’ case is justice.

“Instead, this was only ever a selfish attempt by Democratic leadership in the House to prey upon the feelings of horror and confusion that fell upon all Americans across the entire political spectrum upon seeing the destruction at the Capitol on Jan. 6 by a few hundred people,” the lawyers wrote.

House impeachment managers filed their own document Monday, asserting that Trump had “betrayed the American people” and that there is no valid excuse or defense.

“His incitement of insurrection against the United States government — which disrupted the peaceful transfer of power — is the most grievous constitutional crime ever committed by a president,” the Democrats said.

The trial will begin Tuesday with a debate and vote on whether it’s even constitutional to prosecute the former president, an argument that could resonate with Republicans keen on voting to acquit Trump without being seen as condoning his behavior. Opening arguments would begin Wednesday at noon, with up to 16 hours per side for presentations.

Under a draft agreement between Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, the proceedings will break Friday evening for the Jewish Sabbath at the request of Trump’s defense team and resume on Sunday. There will likely be no witnesses, and the former president has declined a request to testify.

This impeachment trial will be different because of COVID-19 restrictions.

Rather than sitting at their desks through the trial, senators may be spread out, including in the “marble room” just off the Senate floor, where proceedings will be shown on TV, and in the public galleries above the chamber, to accommodate social distancing, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

Trump’s second impeachment trial is opening with a sense of urgency — by Democrats who want to hold him accountable for the violent Capitol siege and Republicans who want it over as quickly as possible.

The proceedings are expected to diverge from the lengthy, complicated trial that resulted in Trump’s acquittal a year ago on charges that he privately pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on a Democratic rival, Joe Biden, now the president. This time, Trump’s rally cry to “fight like hell” and the storming of the Capitol played out for the world to see. Trump very well could be acquitted again, and the trial could be over in half the time.

Biden will be busy with the business of the presidency and won’t spend “too much time watching,” press secretary Jen Psaki said when asked on Monday.

Trump is the first president to be twice impeached, and the only one to face trial after leaving the White House. The Democratic-led House approved a sole charge, “incitement of insurrection,” acting swiftly one week after the riot, the most violent attack on Congress in more than 200 years. Five people died, including a woman shot by police inside the building and a police officer who died of injuries the next day.

So far, it appears there will be few witnesses called, as the prosecutors and defense attorneys speak directly to senators who have been sworn to deliver “impartial justice” as jurors. Most are also witnesses to the siege, having fled for safety that day as the rioters broke into the Capitol and temporarily halted the electoral count certifying Biden’s victory.

Instead, House managers prosecuting the case are expected to rely on videos from the siege, along with Trump’s incendiary rhetoric refusing to concede the election, to make their case. His new defense team has said it plans to counter with its own cache of videos of Democratic politicians making fiery speeches.

“We have the unusual circumstance where on the very first day of the trial, when those managers walk on the floor of the Senate, there will already be over 100 witnesses present,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who led Trump’s first impeachment, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Whether you need additional witnesses will be a strategic call.”

Democrats argue it’s all about holding the former president accountable for his actions, even though he’s out of office. For Republicans, the trial will test their political loyalty to Trump and his enduring grip on the GOP.

Initially repulsed by the graphic images of the siege, Republican senators including Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell denounced the violence and pointed fingers of blame at Trump. But in recent weeks they have rallied around Trump, arguing his comments do not make him responsible for the violence and questioning the legitimacy of trying someone no longer in office.

Senators were sworn in as jurors late last month, shortly after Biden was inaugurated, but the trial proceedings were delayed as Democrats focused on confirming the new president’s initial Cabinet picks and Republicans sought to put as much distance as possible from the bloody riot.

At the time, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky forced a vote to set aside the trial as unconstitutional because Trump is no longer in office, drawing 44 other Republicans to his argument.

The 45 votes in favor of Paul’s measure suggest the near impossibility of reaching a conviction in a Senate where Democrats hold 50 seats but a two-thirds vote — or 67 senators — would be needed to convict Trump. Only five Republicans joined with Democrats to reject Paul’s motion: Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Trump lawyers blast impeachment trial as ‘political theater’ appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.