Thread by @Brandi_Buchman

TODAY, I will be reporting LIVE for @lawcrimenews from the Prettyman courthouse in Washington, D.C. where it is expected that Judge Tanya Chutkan will set a trial date for Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 indictment. He wants April 2026, Special Counsel seeks Jan. 2024.
Join me at 10AM ET.

There is not a broadcast from the Prettyman courthouse. No cameras/photography permitted inside.

To my faithful readers asking: Yes, I was up early and yes, the first here and yes, the first in line for a spot in the media room. So, I should have a spot today where I can live tweet proceedings!

If you can't catch my live updates, not to worry. I will have a full report out later today for @lawcrimenews.

PREVIEW: Today Judge Chutkan is expected to set a trial date in Trump's Jan. 6 case here in D.C. Get yourself primed and catch up with my report for @lawcrimenews:
lawandcrime.com/trump/federal-…

If I had to guess, I would wager that Judge Chutkan will set a trial date in late February or early March.

What I would also wager: Federal prosecutors and Judge Chutkan aren't going to take terribly kindly to Trump going on Truth Social to attack prosecutors as "Fascist Thugs."
But let's see how it plays out, shall we?

We should be underway soon.

Judge Tanya Chutkan is on the bench.
She is wearing a bright blue blouse beneath her black robes, I spy from the collar.
Molly Gaston is here for the govt; for the defense, we also have attys John Lauro, Todd Blanche and Greg Singer. As you may know, Trump is not here today.

Chutkan says before we discuss the proposed trial schedule, she wants to discuss the defense's motion to exclude 25 days between Trump's initial appearance on 8/3 and today's conference under speedy trial.

Chutkan: A defendants trial must occur within 70 days from initial appearance/indictment, but exclude some days lost to delay.
Taking into account reasonable time, between arraignment and this hearing, I do find...

Chutkan: Accordingly, 25 days between Aug 3 and today's status conference will be excluded.

Govt proposes Jan. 2, 2024 trial date. Voir dire (for jury selection) would begin before that date in Dec.
Defense proposes April 2026.
Chutkan: These proposals are obviously very far apart and for reasons I'll discuss shortly, neither are acceptable.

Chutkan, citing Speedy Trial Act caselaw: The act provides that the appropriate judicial officer at earliest practicble time, shall, in consultation with counsel and govt, set a trial for certain day to ensure speedy trial

Factors that may influence speedy trial: complexity of the case, continuity of counsel concerns for effective preparation

Chutkan: Trump like any defendant will have to make the trial date work regardless of his schedule. If this case involved a profesional athlete for example, it would be inappropriate to set a trial date based on her game schedule

Chutkan, quoting Speedy Trial case law: Public has interest in fair, timely justice; delay can prejudice and it is not an uncommon defense tactic.
As trial lengthens, witnesses can become unavailable, or memory jeopardized

Chutkan: In US v Burton (DC Circuit), counsel is not entitled to unlimited prep time. Counsel is entitled to reasonable prep time.

In US v Cronick, SCOTUS held, neither pd of time govt spent investigating case nor # of docs agents reviewed during probe is relevant to q of whether competent lawyer could prepare to defend the case

Chutkan says she is aware of Trump's other indictments and matters; notes Blanche reps Trump in NY and FL; notes Blanche will be trying case with Lauro here in DC.

Chutkan will start addressing timing of other cases:
Def. contends median time is 29.4 months in conspiracy to defraud US cases.
That was from commencement to sentencing, not trial. Sentencing in this ct takes 90 days or more from verdict.
"That statistic is a bit misleading"

Chutkan also notes cases cited by defense all involved 6 and 17 co-defendants. There are no co-defendants in this case, Chutkan says.
Defense hasn't ID'ed any case where defendant was given over 2 years between indictment and trial, she adds

Chutkan notes too that examples used by defense weren't quite accurate because of the limitations the COVID-19 pandemic put on court schedule...

Chutkan: Defense here argues it needs years to review 11.5M pages in discovery (much of which govt has already said is duplicative)...
Prosecutors contend 65% are materials that Trump functionally has access are duplicative, 25% from entities associated with Trump and...

other documents, in thousands of pages, are from similar Trump entities that they would have access to already.
Now Chutkan asks Gaston to address discovery production notes in its recent motion....

How much of the discovery did Trump already have access to, including items in the Nat Archives?
Gaston: At this point, discovery is now substantially complete. We made a 5th production last night.. we are at 12.8M pages, generally. But as we described, # of pgs isn't best metric

More than 3M pages are associated with Trump's campaign, PACs; there are millions of pages from USSS; 102K+ pages from National Archives etc.
Chutkan: These would have been reviewed by Trump's counsel for privilege before they were turned over?
Gaston: That's correct.

Gaston: What is in the other 5M pages that we're really talking about? They are things like every grand jury transcript in this case up to indictment and accompanying exhibits that defendant has already

There are a lot of reproductions in these millions of pages, Gaston notes; same thing is true in witness interviews.
Chutkan: That's what I was going to ask. How much of discovery could be categorized as witness statements and notes?

Gaston has asked for a moment and is now flipping through some papers on the dais. Chutkan is busily taking notes as she does.

Gaston: Approx 58k pages are from witness interview folders that includes the transcripts of those interviews, most of them were audio recorded, so defense has been provided with audio recs and transcripts for convenience of review + all exhibits used in those interviews

Gaston: Those were presented in an organized fashion. They include the transcript of either grand jury testimony or interview, agent notes, if it was an interview, and then the exhibits associated or any interview report of the interview

Chutkan: how much of the material is defense created, such as tweets
Gaston: open source would include publicly available litigation, so not sure I have a breakdown of his tweets but could get it for you.

Chutkan: That's fine. You said at least 25% of 1st production and 20% of second production came from entities associated with Trump. You mentioned a PAC. What else?

Gaston: There is the defendant's campaign and a few different PACs....In terms of open source materials, including campaign stmts, tweets, Truth Social posts, that's about 27K pages.

Gaston: Key docs are 47k pages, that includes all the case agent summary testimony, any exhibits intro'd through her to grand jury, that includes things like transcripts of witness testimony or testimony before Jan. 6 cmte. It also includes...

Gaston cont:... a file that is essentially an annotation of the indictment. And that is almost 300 different docs that are labeled and named according to the paragraph of the indictment they support. So it is essentially a road map to our case, you honor.

Gaston also notes how all of this is searchable in database for defense to review.
Chutkan says this answers most of her questions about discovery being substantially complete and notes how it is highly organized.

Chutkan: I'll note that many years ago, when I was trying murder and conspiracy case in superior court, we got witness names on the date of trial, and testimony in grand jury sometimes after a witness testified. Rules here provide for far more disclosure...

Chutkan cont:... the manner in which the discovery has been organized indicate the govt has made a considerable effort to expedite review certainly beyond their normal obligations.

Chutkan asks Lauro why this isn't enough time.
Lauro is coming in hot. Voice raised a bit. Calls Trump "Mr. Trump" and then immediately corrects himself to "President Trump"
Lauro calls this is a "show trial"
"We have to do our job as defense lawyers"
He is a bit shrill.

For a federal prosecutor to suggest we could go to trial in four months is not only absurd but it is a violation of an oath to justice, Lauro says, voice booming.
Chutkan says, let's take the temperature down here

Lauro: Trump stands before you an innocent man. he's entitled to 6th Amendment; He's entitled to counsel that can prepare adequately... what this case means - we're talking about 9 terabytes of information. I have to go through it, sort it by more than 250 witnesses...

Lauro: i need to think about corrobrative material... for govt to suggest I can do that in four months is an outrage to justice. Not once have they talked about justice. They can give me key documents in this case, and that's very kind of them -
Chutkan stops him. Raises hand.

Chutkan says, again, let's take the temperature down.
her voice is even and calm.
She says, Trump is not like every other defendant given his access to lawyers, resources.
And given that much of this has already been reviewed by Trump or his team, turned over, speed up review?

Lauro: We, as criminal defense lawyers, have not had access to what is in Nat Archives, USSS (etc)
(He has lowered his voice)
But some of that material is not new to you -
Lauro cuts in, says how is not new to him?

Chutkan: Some of these are stmts of your client's own creation. You personally, it may be new to you, but this is material that has been reviewed at least by privilege and some are stmts of your client and materials created by your client or entities associated with him.

Chutkan:...that's not brand new information is it?
Lauro (very emphatically): of course it is.

Chutkan: There's a lot you may personally need to eyeball. But you, at the first cut, personally, are not going to review 12M pages. Some of those documents are going to be reviewed electronically.
Lauro: No doc gets reviewed electronically. We can do searches for it [that way]

Lauro says he's not telling Chutkan something she doesn't already know, but then goes on to explain that he will have to search files, look for things to prepare him for trial. Including docs and videos.
So, you know, 101 trial prep.

"I like to be prepared for trial" Lauro says

If we were big corporations in America, where only thing at stake is $, no one would blink an eye for a 2 year delay, Lauro says. But this man's freedom is at stake... (very emotional)
Chutkan: I understand. But you're not getting 2 more yrs. This is not going to trial in '26.

Chutkan notes that the grand jury investigation has been ongoing for more than a year.
Lauro: We cant be charged or hindered because we couldn't do an investigation during the grand jury...
Chutkan rests her head on her hand for a very brief moment as she listens to Lauro...

Chutkan: I'm asking you about review necessary in this case. I'm well acquainted with Gideon and [Trump's] 6A rights. I intend to ensure he gets it. But I'm not going to give -- this case isn't going to trial in 2026.

Chutkan: I'd like to know, given rhetoric in your response, realistically, how much time it will take for you to prepare.

Chutkan says they have known this is coming and a lot of this material was in Trump's hands, or in his counsel's hands for a significant period of time before GJ was convened
Chut: "You can keep taking about 12M pg and his right to a fair trial. He has a right to a fair trial...

Chutkan cont: "...but what is a fair amount of time to prepare? And the 12M pages here are not truly indicative of how much time he needs to prepare..."

She's not buying it. She keeps telling Lauro: he will be given reasonable time, but two years is not it.

Lauro's tone today is telling. He's hungry, he sounds desperate. Inflection is high.
Lauro: "I'm pleading your honor. This is a question of one man, one US citizen gets a fair trial or not and I'm telling you, it's a gargantuan task. I understand we have modern search tools...."

Lauro says none of this takes into consideration how much work defense has to do to prepare its own witnesses, materials.

"We have to ensure the system works for every American... he should not be treated any different... we cannot be ready under circumstances of this case until we have a reasonable amount of time under the system of justice..." Lauro says

Chutkan calmly, voice very even, tells Lauro she has no doubt he is capable and wants to provide capable representation but they are not going to agree on what is necessary for time to prepare

Chutkan now addressing the "novelty" of this case. Spoiler: It ain't that novel, when you consider the charges alone.
She notes, a former president being charged is historic but the alleged conduct, the charges itself, are not that complex.
Why is this case complex, legally?

Lauro says they expect to serve Rule 17 subpoenas, there will be a selective prosecution motion filed given that "the prosecutors boss is running a presidential campaign" (This is Biden, but Lauro doesn't say Biden outright). This makes the case novel.

Joe Biden didn't recommend an indictment against Trump. A grand jury did.
But this is the conflation that Lauro and Trump and the parrots on cable news will repeat.

Lauro: We're going to be busy w/very complex legal issues. This is one of the most unique cases from a legal perspective ever brought in the United States.

(Again, the legal theory at play is not complex, this is Chutkan's arg. Yes, he's former prez, but laws not that complex)

Now Gaston is up.
Gaston: I think there's a reason Mr. Lauro avoided answering your exact question on how much time to review. He doesn't want to admit that search tools used in modern criminal trials means its possible to be ready much sooner than April 2026

Gaston notes how Trump posted many video and messages online addressing this probe, showing he knew for a long time this was coming.
Then she notes: "The night the indictment was unsealed, Mr. Lauro called the indictment a regurgitation of the Jan. 6 Cmte report."

Gaston: Trump has 4 counsels of record, 2 attys who attended arraignment and one involved with pre-indictment prep; When Lauro went on air, podcasts, he described a number of motions he plans to raise, said he read Pence's book twice and knew what witnesses to call, what to ask

Gaston: As for defense claim they will file Rule 17 - that's not an exculpatory tool.
She continues: The best way to find out if defense can meet the standards for trial prep is to set a schedule and see if they can meet it.

Gaston notes, selective prosecution motions are not novel in DC
"I'm sure your honor knows this," she adds
Fraud conspiracy, not new, not complex legal issue.
G: The thing that all of this shows, is the importance of setting a trial date and working backwards with a schedule

Gaston: The defendant, formerly, the senior most official in our federal government is accused of historic crimes, attempting to overturn presidential election, disenfranchise millions of Americans, disrupt peaceful transfer of power ...

Gaston cont: there's a strong need in public interest to hear this in open court, and proceed to fair open trial...

Gaston notes that Trump continues to disparage proceedings online, potentially intimidates witnesses, potentially mucking up jury pool as a result in DC...

Gaston ends and Chutkan moves next to "the small amount of classified materials in this case." She wants to discuss it now, Lauro agrees.
CIPA doesn't guarantee additional rights to discovery disclosure. Just relates to procedure during discovery and lead up to trial.

Chut: There are 3 steps governing handling of classified info. 1) Defense must file pretrial notice IDing classified info to use at trial, 2) upon govt motion, court shall hold hearing to determine use/relevance/admiss. and 3) after that, govt cant move to sub in redacted info

Thomas Windom for govt: says it does not intend to use a lot of classified mats in its case & whatever happens with CIPA, they don't expect it to impact trial date Chutkan sets.

Windom: There are 5-10 nonduplicative documents totaling less than 100 pages that contain classified materials. Transcript is 125 pages (it is a witness interview)
Again, Windom says this wont be used in case in chief

Windom also notes that it is not up to govt to set schedule in which Lauro/Blanche get their security clearances.
(Sounds like this is in the works, but unclear exact schedule Lauro/Blanche are on here)

Windom says it could take govt just 2 weeks to prepare classified materials for open court once the review process is done by defense

Todd Blanche for Trump now up.

Blanche says as far as security clearance process is going for him, he's not clear when it could end. But expects it could be in October, since that's when he's understood it could be wrapped up in Florida case. (He, Chutkan acknowledge DC case contains far less classified mat)

Windom responds: I would propose court keep CIPA deadline at 30 days after Blanche gets his final clearance, if Blanche is able to review, he may able to speak to Lauro (who has interim clearance)

Windom: What I don't want to happen, is to keep things around a date we don't know, (when Lauro gets final approval)...

Lauro back up and takes another shot at the "integrity" of the charges. (Giving Proud Boys, Oath Keepers defense lawyer deja vu); he expects defense will file motions to dismiss, among others...

Now Chutkan says she will take 10 minute recess and then reconvene with trial date.

And we are back.

Chutkan: I understand all too well the need for counsel to have enough time to investigate and prepare for trial. That need is even more compelling in a case such as this, where def. faces serious charges and penalties...

Chutkan: I take seriously request that he be treated like any other defendant and I tend to do so... but I also want to point out that most defendants do not receive this organized summary of discovery...nonetheless Jan. 2, 2024 doesn't give enough time to prepare...

Chutk: On other hand, defense's proposed date of April 2026 is far beyond what is necessary. The offenses given rise in this case occurred at end of 2020 and beginning of 2021, to try it 5 years later, poses real danger that witnesses become unavail. or memory fades

Chutkan says it is in the interest of public to a speedy trial but in so many words, she again, says, none of this is to strip Trump of his right to prepare his defense.

The grand jury investigating this case was convened in Sept. 2022. Meaning Trump has known about the govt's investigation for a year. I've seen many cases delayed because defendants lack representation or they are detained. That is not the case here.

NOW: Judge Chutkan proposes March 4, 2024 for Donald Trump to face his federal Jan. 6 indictment here in D.C.

Chutkan notes she has consulted competing cases on Trump's docket to arrive at this date. And she notes that even with March 4 start date, that would still mean this trial will start 3 years+ after Jan. 6.

Lauro says they will abide by Chutkan's order because they must but he says this date will still deny Trump effective counsel.

Chutkan notes Lauro's objection on the rec. A pre-trial schedule will be made, Chutkan will issue a minute order with pre-trial schedule.
Gaston, before things wrap up, notes to Chutkan that she believes defense will poll prospective jurors in DC. She wants a motion hearing

Defense wants to move this trial out of D.C.
Chutkan doesn't seem inclined as it is. She notes Trump's statements openly that DC can't provide a fair jury pool.
"I'm watching carefully for anything that might effect that jury pool or poison that jury pool..."

Chutkan: If you file a motion to transfer and you haven't, but you're doing polling on the other, it might affect the same jury pool you're claiming is not fair. And there's a problem. I cant tell you what info you can gather but I am concerned that...

Chutkan cont:...gauging views through veneer of jury pool, you may actually affect their ability to render a fair verdict because questions can be asked all sorts of ways. Are you intending to do this polling?
Lauro hesitates: we were going to do that as we got closer to trial...

If and when defense decides to undertake this, there will be a hearing first. Again Chutkan reminds Lauro, light paraphrase: they're not treating Trump any different, but there are concerns that pressing here and unique given his public commentary on the prospective jury

MARCH 4, 2024 is the trial date Judge Chutkan set today for Trump's Jan. 6 indictment in D.C.
Story UPDATED:
lawandcrime.com/trump/federal-…

Judge Chutkan's pretrial order with key dates below. I'd expect over time, some of these may shift here and there, but this is what prosecutors suggested and Chutkan found prudent: give a shape to the schedule, set the deadlines first, and work from there
documentcloud.org/documents/2392…