Post

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288818160389558273

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1288825925308686337?s=21

More from @KatiePhang

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Sep 11

Now Trump is asked about January 6th.

His response is to defend the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol.

Holy smokes: Trump just says he had nothing to do with 1/6 and was only asked to give a speech.

Harris: On 1/6, Trump incited a violent mob and they desecrated the Capitol.

She then honors the officers who were injured that day and reminds America that some officers died because of 1/6.

Read 4 tweets

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Sep 6

Here is the breakdown of Judge Merchan's decision to delay Trump's sentencing in the NY election interference trial:

As an initial matter, the Prosecution did NOT oppose Trump's request for an adjournment of his sentencing. Instead, they told Judge Merchan that they would "defer to the Court" when it came to deciding when to sentence Trump, in light of the recent SCOTUS immunity decision.

Judge Merchan notes that even if the Prosecution claims that they are remaining neutral on Trump's requested delay, "[the Prosecution presents] concerns in their letter of August 16, 2024, in a manner which seemingly supports Defendant's application for an adjournment. The People certainly do not oppose, and a careful reading of their response can fairly be construed as a joinder of the motion."

Read 12 tweets

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Sep 5

JUST IN: Judge Chutkan enters deadlines for Trump’s DC election interference case.

Notably:

*September 26: Special Counsel Jack Smith files his opening brief.
*October 17: Trump’s files his response to that opening brief
*October 29: Smith files his reply brief

All of this briefing is done before Election Day.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

This briefing is for the presidential immunity issue.

Recall: In the Joint Status Report, Smith advised the court that his opening brief would reference evidence not disclosed in the superseding indictment. 👀

Read 4 tweets

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Sep 5

[Starting a new thread about today's Chutkan hearing:]

Govt: Regardless of DC Circuit precedent the defense could have filed this motion and they didn’t.

Chutkan: I do think this motion could have been followed prior to the deadline. But I’m going to allow the defense to file for leave to file the motion. She wants to defense to include their argument for why DC Circuit precedent doesn’t foreclose such a motion.

Now moving on to the defense’s anticipated motion to dismiss the case based on the grand jury being exposed to immunized conduct.

Chutkan: Will that be related just to the Pence evidence or other stuff as well?

Lauro: It will be focused on the Pence issue, but there might be some others.

Govt.: First the court must make those immunity determinations. If there’s no immunity then there’s no basis to their argument to dismiss the indictment based on exposure to immune conduct.

Chutkan: Now let's talk about the motion to dismiss on statutory grounds.

(This motion was filed before the case was stayed and was fully briefed. Chutkan dismissed the motion after the Supreme Court’s ruling pending further litigation. Now she says she will vacate her previous dismissal and reopen the motion for additional briefing.)

Lauro: I think immunity should be resolved first before we get to the statutory issues.

Chutkan: I agree, but I think we can do a number of things concurrently.

Read 6 tweets

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Sep 5

The hearing began at 10:01 am with Judge Chutkan. She arraigned Trump (recall he was allowed to waive his appearance) on the superseding indictment.

She’s now addressing the scheduling proposals set forth in the Joint Status Report.

Gov’t.: We should address the immunity issue first and our opening brief would include all facts relating to immunity.

Gov.t: We were thinking a comprehensive brief where we would set forth the facts. That part of the brief would include things that are in and outside the indictment. We believe the brief would have a substantial number of exhibits. That could include grand jury transcripts, documents, etc. That would allow the court to consider all the relevant facts needed to make immunity decisions. We would lay out why the conduct in the brief is private and not subject to immunity. Regarding the Pence allegations in the indictment, we would lay out why that is not subject to a presumption of innocence.

Read 20 tweets

Katie Phang

@KatiePhang

Aug 31

Ok here we go:

• SC Jack Smith wants to file an “opening brief” within which Smith will explain why the immunity set forth in the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling does NOT apply to the “categories of allegations in the superseding indictment” nor does it apply to the “additional unpled evidence” Smith intends to introduce at trial.

• Smith says he can file this opening brief “promptly at any time the Court seems appropriate.”

• SC Smith proposes that all motions be filed and fully briefed at the same time as the immunity litigation. Smith notes that Judge Chutkan can then decide when to consider those motions, but at least they’re already done and ready to go.

• Smith finally proposes that there be a separate scheduling track for discovery & motions relating to discovery issues b/c he doesn’t want to delay immunity determinations by Judge Chutkan.

Read 9 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Katie Phang

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @KatiePhang

Katie Phang

Katie Phang

Katie Phang

Katie Phang

Katie Phang

Katie Phang

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!