The next hearing on the election case will be held in Trump’s trial, and this is a major flashpoint.

Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing Donald Trump’s election obstruction case, is expected to set a start date for the trial at an Aug. 28 hearing.

The federal judge who is overseeing Donald Trump’s obstruction of election case will likely set a date by the end the month for the trial of the former president.

Legal experts believe that neither the special prosecutor nor Trump’s lawyers are likely to achieve their desired outcome, but they also note that the case may still be tried before the next presidential election.

Federal prosecutors are pushing for the trial to begin within three months. However, a lawyer representing Trump suggested that a three-year period of preparation would be better.

The answer lies somewhere between these two dates, said NBC News’ legal analyst Barbara McQuade. She is a former federal prosecutor.

Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. district court, who was chosen at random to preside over this case, has announced that she will set a date for the trial on August 28. This is the first hearing in the proceedings she will oversee.

Glenn Kirschner is a former federal prosecutor, and legal analyst for NBC News. He said that the judge’s proclamation was “a sure indication” of an accelerated pace.

Chuck Rosenberg, former U.S. attorney, asked, “Can this be done before November’s election? Absolutely. When will it happen? “I don’t know.”

Prosecutor Thomas Windom said that at Trump’s Thursday arraignment , the case would benefit from a normal order and a speedy court trial.

According to the federal Speedy Trial Act that would mean a trial within 70-days of the arraignment. Trump’s attorney John Lauro called this proposition “absurd.”

Lauro said to the judge that “in a case this size, we might have a lot of information and discovery.”

He said that in order to understand the length of the trial and the time needed to prepare for it, we need to know from the government the size of discovery, how much electronic data we will be required to review, and the number of documents on paper that may exist. Most importantly, he wants to know if there is any exculpatory evidence against the president.

Sources familiar with the legal strategy of the former president have said that the lawyers are likely to file a motion for the trial to be moved out of Washington D.C. The source stated that the filing would not be done “right away, but later.”

Trump stated on his Truth Social social media platform that he hopes the trial will be moved to an “impartial” venue and mentioned West Virginia as an option.

McQuade stated that she expects Trump’s legal team will make many motions to try to delay the trial.

McQuade stated that “the strategy is now to try and delay the case and try it in the media”, while he continues to run for the office the prosecutors claimed he attempted to steal.

Lauro did not give a specific time frame at the arraignment, but he gave a rough timeline in an interview on NBC’s “TODAY” on Wednesday, a day after Trump’s indictment.

Aug. 2, 202305:02

Lauro refused to comment on whether or not the case should be tried before the election in 2024, but said that the special counsel’s office had three-and-a half years to investigate the matter.

Why don’t you make it equal?” They have 60 federal agents on the case. We have 60 lawyers and all types of government employees, but we still get an indictment, and they want a trial within 90 days. “Does that sound like justice?”

Smith was appointed special counsel in Novembre. The Justice Department has not yet revealed when it began its investigation into Trump’s conduct. However, the Capitol riot which led to a delayed certification of the Electoral College votes occurred on January 6, 2021 – two and a half years ago.

Kirschner stated that Lauro’s argument about extra time does not fit with judicial practice.

He said, “It just doesn’t work like that.” There’s no parity rule. It can take 20 years to solve some crimes. This does not mean that you get to prepare a defense for 20 years.

Windom responded to Lauro during the arraignment about the “massive amount” of discovery that Trump’s legal team would have to review before trial. He said that the government was prepared to provide a large volume of discovery as soon as an order for protective proceedings is issued in this case. This includes discovery we are not required to hand over at this time.

Windom said to the judge, “We will try to get this to the defense as quickly as possible.”

Upadhyaya instructed both sides to submit to Chutkan court filings with “your proposed trial date” prior to the August 28 hearing.

Rosenberg stated that Trump’s “busy schedule” of trials will be a major factor. Rosenberg said that Trump’s “busy trial schedule” will be a major factor.

Trump has entered a not guilty plea in this case. The trial is set for May 20th. In New York, he’s facing 34 counts for felony falsifications of business records. In the same case, he pleaded not-guilty and a March 25 trial date was set.

Rosenberg stated that the window was closing, as there were already two trials scheduled for 2024. There is not much time left between the May trial date and the November elections.

The political calendar is another complication that Trump faces. The primary season begins officially on January 15th with the Iowa Caucuses.

Kirschner stated that it is possible for the New York election case to be pushed back and the documents case to go before trial.

Kirschner stated that “State prosecutors almost always take a backseat to the feds, because they have a obscenely large conviction rate”. He added that the charges in New York are more serious than those in New York. Kirschner stated that the election case would take precedence over three civil cases Trump is facing.

McQuade stated that it would make sense to have the election case tried before the documents case even though the documents lawsuit was filed first.

McQuade stated that the Florida case was “logistically simpler” than the documents case because of the ” classifying complexities ” and the lengthy procedure to present the evidence to a juror.

Kirschner stated that he expected Chutkan will move the case efficiently. “Judge Chutkan don’t play,” he said.

More Stories

Stay informed by joining TruthRow

24/7 coverage from 1000+ journalists. Subscriber-exclusive events. Unmatched political and international news.

You can cancel anytime