Replies

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2

LUNCH BREAK in Florida courtroom of Judge Cannon in classified documents case.

President Trump arrived at 9:55 along with his attorneys and co-defendants.

Special Counsel Jack Smith here too but did not speak during morning session.

Judge Cannon appears unfazed by yet another historic hearing in her courtroom. She peppered Smith’s team with questions about timing of new trial date—DOJ asking for early July—and the VERY contentious issue about scope of prosecution team.

At the outset, Judge Cannon stated the Special Counsel’s new proposed trial schedule (May 20 trial date will be vacated) leading to trial date of July 8 is “unrealistic” given at least 13 outstanding motions and intense CIPA litigation (special guidance on the handling/access to classified evidence before and during trial.)

Another issue is Alvin Bragg’s prosecution of Trump later this month; trial is expected to begin March 25 and last between 6-8 weeks, interrupting Trump’s ability to attend any court proceedings in FLA for almost two months.

When Smith’s team tried to blame Trump attorney Chris Kise for taking on both the Bragg case and the classified docs case and argued his work schedule related to both matters should not preclude the FLA trial from moving forward, Judge Cannon reminded DOJ that right to access all court proceedings doesn’t apply to the lawyers but “to the accused.”

Much of the debate centered around the definition of the scope of the prosecution team.

In January, Trump filed a lengthy motion detailing numerous government agencies including the Biden White House involved in the investigation and prosecution of the classified docs case.

Agencies include NARA, DOJ, FBI HQ, the intelligence community, DOD, DOE and the other usual suspects.

Contrary to public assertions and Jack Smith’s indictment, it appears NARA and DOJ and even the Biden White House general counsel were in cahoots as early as spring 2021 to concoct a documents charge against Trump.

DOJ says FBI opened an investigation into mishandling of classified docs in March 2022 after NARA sent a criminal referral following the alleged discovery of files with “classified markings” in the 15 boxes Team Trump gave to NARA in Jan 2022.

But the defense team has evidence—including emails and other records—to dispute that so they want an evidentiary hearing on the full scope of the prosecution team to determine which federal agencies or officials must meet Jencks, Giglio, and Brady discovery obligations.

Smith’s team claims the only members of the prosecution team are their prosecutors, some agents/investigators from Washington FBI field office, and a few agents from Miami FBI field office.

But Cannon pushed Jay Bratt, the lead prosecutor in classified docs case also involved in the investigation before Smith was appointed (he visited Mar-a-Lago with 3 FBI agents in June 2022) to admit at least 3 FBI officials from FBI HQ were involved as well.

Smith is fighting not just the motion to compel discovery based on Trump’s scope of prosecution team but doesn’t even want Judge Cannon to hold an evidentiary hearing on the matter.

And Bratt said very emphatically, “we need to bring this case to trial this summer.”

Judge Cannon again sounded skeptical. “There is a lot of pretrial work that has to be done and it needs to be done properly and correctly.”

The afternoon session should also be contentious as both sides argue about redactions and unsealing of evidence. Cannon repeatedly reminds DOJ about the need to make as much information accessible to the public and on several occasions has unsealed filings that Jack Smith wanted sealed.

She ordered some records unsealed last month from the motion to compel but put her order on temporary hold pending Smith’s motion for reconsideration. He wants most of redacted passages and sealed exhibits in the motion to compel discovery to remain secret.

Cannon is not so inclined so I am expecting some 🎇this afternoon.

Again no devices allowed in courthouse (!!) so I will report back later.

10:58 AM · Mar 1, 2024
·

One more item before I head back to courtroom: Jay Bratt confirmed that bringing this case to trial close to the election does not violate DOJ’s 60-day policy.

Merrick Garland also said this recently related to both trials against Trump. Basically, “it’s out of our hands.”

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1763616176867803600