An overhead view of Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida is shown in a photo from Aug. 10, 2022.
Trump's lawyers informed the judge in the Mar-a-Lago case that they can't make the proposed trial dates in the next few months due to the recent delay in his New York hush-money prosecution, which they helped create.
Defense lawyers Todd Blanche and Christopher Kise in a two-page filing informed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that they’re going to be busy the next two months, making a Mar-a-Lago trial date in late May or early June a complete impossibility.
Noting that the judge in the New York case set jury selection for April 15 and that “religious observances” will factor into the length of that trial, the lawyers predicted that Trump’s falsification of business records prosecution will drag out “through the end of May 2024.”
As a result, they said, a Mar-a-Lago trial date should remain up in the air for the foreseeable future, pushing the Espionage Act case ever closer to the 2024 election — and perhaps beyond. The judge has already indicated a July trial date would also be “unrealistic.”
“Our initial proposed schedule anticipated a March 25 trial date in People v. Trump, and therefore the dates that we proposed to the Court [for the Mar-a-Lago trial], particularly in late May and early June 2024, are no longer workable for President Trump in light of the adjourned trial date,” the lawyers concluded.
In the New York case, the defense recently criticized Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg (D) “significant and ongoing discovery violations” following the the “untimely production” of Michael Cohen-related documents obtained from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO).
When Bragg responded by blaming the defense, calling the timing of the USAO’s document productions “a result solely of defendant’s delay despite the People’s diligence,” the Trump team responded that it was “wrong, but not surprising” that the state would blame the defense for prosecution’s shortcomings.
The DA said it was telling that the defense “waited until January 18, 2024 to subpoena additional materials” from the USAO when it has had a “subset” of documents since June 2023 but “raised no concerns to the People about the sufficiency of our efforts to obtain materials from the USAO before last week.” The defense even “consented to repeated extensions of the deadline for the USAO’s determination,” revealing the purpose of the belated subpoena, Bragg further suggested.
After that, Bragg urged Acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan told to not allow any trial delay past mid-April.
“The majority of the production is not important, repetitive, or substantially repetitive of previously disclosed materials, or adds to evidence about Michael Cohen’s unrelated federal convictions that defendant has known about for months,” the DA’s office said about the discovery at issue. “Because there is little new information in the recent productions and the USAO has completed its productions, no additional adjournment beyond the one ordered by the Court is necessary.”
Merchan agreed. He urged Blanche to provide a “single case” supporting the defense position that the DA’s office neglected its obligations to obtain the documents from the USAO.
“It’s really unsettling that you don’t have a case right now because the accusation the defense makes in all of your papers is incredibly serious. Unbelievably serious,” Merchan said, according to The Associated Press. “You’re accusing the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and the people involved in this case of prosecutorial misconduct and of trying to make me complicit in it. And you don’t have a single reference to support that position.”
The judge then asked the defense why they waited until January to subpoena the documents.
“Why did you wait two months before trial? Why didn’t you do it in June or July?” he asked, before commenting that Bragg’s office “went so far above and beyond what they were required to do that it’s odd that we’re even here.”