I usually do not weigh in directly in the Comments, but my inbox is filled this morning with worried emails about Judge Cannon delaying the trial until after the election. That is very likely to happen. Any defense team worth its salt can file enough pretrial motions and interlocutory appeals to delay a criminal trial for sixteen months (the two-month minimum required, plus sixteen months to get to November), so Cannon need not give Trump an unfair assist to delay the trial beyond November 2024.
I don't think we should stress over that fact. Convicting Trump is not a substitute for beating him at the ballot box. Indeed, if we don't beat him at the ballot box, a conviction will be irrelevant, regardless of whether it occurs before or after the election in November.
Also, many have mentioned the absence of cameras in the courtroom to curtail Cannon's impulse to unfairness. That is true, but in the prior proceeding, Cannon issued all of her orders from in chambers. She was on the bench for a few minutes. Not so in the trial. She will be under the constant scrutiny of the press--and subject to criticism for her obvious inexperience, ignorance of the law, and bias. I don't think we should underestimate the pressure of intense scrutiny from the press or the capabilities of Jack Smith's team.
Finally, many people have expressed concern over the Miami jury pool. The DOJ has obtained multiple convictions with Trump supporters on the jury--Paul Manafort, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers. And Durham suffered two acquittals of defendants he charged even with the presence of Trump supporters on the jury.
And let's clear one thing up: Trump WILL NOT be acquitted. He may achieve a hung jury, but no jury will find him innocent of the charges. The DOJ can try him a second time if there is a hung jury.
In the end, we are not entitled to a conviction of Trump. The public is entitled to a fair trial of Trump on the charges in the indictment, nothing more. A fair trial should result in a conviction, but there is no guarantee of that outcome, so let's stop stressing over every bump in the road that might decrease the likelihood of a conviction. We have a long way to go and this process will be challenging for us all. For now, Smith has filed a stronger than expected indictment that shows Trump lied to his own attorneys and the FBI to conceal the documents and suggested that his lawyer destroy documents after receiving a subpoena from a grand jury. It doesn't get much worse than that!
Robert, if there should be a hung jury, can the venue be changed to D.C.? Should it be?
On the other hand, let's not go there. Let's hope the trial will end before the election and that DJT will be convicted and sent to prison for a long time.
My heart sank when I read this post, Robert. Our legal system does not protect us by holding people accountable if they are running for or hold high office. Jack Smith promised a speedy trial, but you, as an attorney, are saying that this won't happen. Once again it is upon the electorate to defeat Trump at a time when his acolytes have put in place voter suppression, gerrymandering, officials pledged to subvert elections, and a propaganda system that supports an alternate reality for MAGAs and discourages many others from voting. I am so weary of this fight, and although I won't give up, I fear for our democracy more than ever.
The trial is not a substitute for beating Trump at the ballot box, so I don't think we should be concerned about delay. Our only option is to beat Trump at the ballot box.
Smith can promise a speedy trial, but the Speedy Trial Act sets minimum times to trial. Excluded from those minimum times are pretrial motions and interlocutory appeals. Smith can't do anything about exclusions.
I really appreciate your ability to walk those of us who have no legal training through the legalities in all of this. It can be overwhelming. Watching Jack Smith’s announcement yesterday was a relief.
I was just commenting to my wife yesterday that for all of the accusations of Jack Smith politicizing and weaponizing this, I'd never heard a word from him or heard his voice. A few minutes later I heard him on the radio and said, "I think that's him!" His brief statement was very reassuring and my confidence level is rising by the minute!
I’ve become increasingly concerned about the outcome of Smith’s case after reading the Atlantic article, “The Three Biggest Obstacles to Convicting Trump”. The judge is leeway in this case is an enormous issue with obstacles difficult to overcome.
I am new to the newsletter, and I just want to say thank you all and especially to Mr. Hubbell for your clear thinking and dispassionate, but deeply felt and thoughtful analyses. Thank you and all who who support this work.
Let no one be mistaken, the road ahead will be challenging. TFG is on a tear using the same modis operandi - with great drama. "The Final Battle to take down the corrupt. Talk about gaslighting. Those who are coming after him are the ultimate enemy - his enemy and the enemy of all his supporters." Perhaps someone can post this article without a paywall. Ugh! Maybe best to move on through the weekend and recognize this is what we are in for, find ways to move beyond the moment and believe that justice will prevail. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/us/politics/trump-georgia-north-carolina.html?smid=url-share
Robert, you need to enjoy the rest of your weekend. So, do so. Yet, reading Trumps comments and how the Georgia Republican convention responded was like listening to his, “be there, it will be wild,” that summoned a mob to the The Capitol. I hope people higher up than me heard it. Such rhetoric always reminds me of Justice Michael Luttig’s final comments at the January 6 hearings. “They are going to do it again in 2024. How do I know? They are telling us.” The man is a loose cannon. I’ll look forward to you continuing to walk us through these times. We’ve already said they will be at times rough and we’ll have to stay focused and take care of ourselves. Surely that and get out the vote are our focus. Thanks for your steady hand.
Robert, I would like you to comment on WHY Trump stole the documents? It could only be a money motive. Imagine the value of military secrets: Billions!!! And Trump had plenty of time to
sell any of it to the highest bidder. If it can be proven that he sold our secrets to any of our adversaries, I think that would be the final straw to put him away for good!
I have no proof, but I believe his motivation was monetary. We don't know if all of the documents have been returned. some may have been sold. At least he planned to do so. whether he succeeded, we may never know.
I agree, and while he may not have sold the documents themselves, he probably sold the information in them (or peeks at them), or exchanged it for something of personal benefit (like $2B investments in his son-in-law's business). It's probably one of the things that was strongly suggested by evidence, but not as provable as what was charged.
As for Judge Cannon and not worrying about recusal because the verdict will be rendered by a jury: Trump can waive trial by jury and leave the verdict to Cannon. Oh My!!
For those focused on what Trump's motive may have been for keeping the documents, I suggest 2 things to allay your concerns...1. It is not necessary to render a conviction on the charges spelled out in the indictment. 2. Just ask him. While it may take him a minute or two to extract other of his feet stuck in his mouth, he will gladly share his preposterous reasoning with anyone willing to listen.
That was exactly my reaction. He didn’t gas on and he explained things clearly, including how dangerous to all of us Trump’s behavior continues to be. The silence of the Republicans is deafening.
It’s been suggested that each of us take the time to read the indictment. Reading it doesn’t take long, perhaps an hour. While Roberts writing is excellent, informative, and very good to read, please do not limit your reading to Robert’s and/ or others Substack writing (HCR’s LFAA, etc.) Please read the indictment! You’ll be glad you did!
I usually do not weigh in directly in the Comments, but my inbox is filled this morning with worried emails about Judge Cannon delaying the trial until after the election. That is very likely to happen. Any defense team worth its salt can file enough pretrial motions and interlocutory appeals to delay a criminal trial for sixteen months (the two-month minimum required, plus sixteen months to get to November), so Cannon need not give Trump an unfair assist to delay the trial beyond November 2024.
I don't think we should stress over that fact. Convicting Trump is not a substitute for beating him at the ballot box. Indeed, if we don't beat him at the ballot box, a conviction will be irrelevant, regardless of whether it occurs before or after the election in November.
Also, many have mentioned the absence of cameras in the courtroom to curtail Cannon's impulse to unfairness. That is true, but in the prior proceeding, Cannon issued all of her orders from in chambers. She was on the bench for a few minutes. Not so in the trial. She will be under the constant scrutiny of the press--and subject to criticism for her obvious inexperience, ignorance of the law, and bias. I don't think we should underestimate the pressure of intense scrutiny from the press or the capabilities of Jack Smith's team.
Finally, many people have expressed concern over the Miami jury pool. The DOJ has obtained multiple convictions with Trump supporters on the jury--Paul Manafort, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers. And Durham suffered two acquittals of defendants he charged even with the presence of Trump supporters on the jury.
And let's clear one thing up: Trump WILL NOT be acquitted. He may achieve a hung jury, but no jury will find him innocent of the charges. The DOJ can try him a second time if there is a hung jury.
In the end, we are not entitled to a conviction of Trump. The public is entitled to a fair trial of Trump on the charges in the indictment, nothing more. A fair trial should result in a conviction, but there is no guarantee of that outcome, so let's stop stressing over every bump in the road that might decrease the likelihood of a conviction. We have a long way to go and this process will be challenging for us all. For now, Smith has filed a stronger than expected indictment that shows Trump lied to his own attorneys and the FBI to conceal the documents and suggested that his lawyer destroy documents after receiving a subpoena from a grand jury. It doesn't get much worse than that!
Robert, if there should be a hung jury, can the venue be changed to D.C.? Should it be?
On the other hand, let's not go there. Let's hope the trial will end before the election and that DJT will be convicted and sent to prison for a long time.
Venue is going to say in Florida, unless Trump requests a change. But Smith can file other charges in DC and (possibly) NJ.
Now I'm puzzled. Isn't the venue in south Florida to forestall a Trump attempt to have the venue changed to D.C. and thereby save some precious time?
And, ah, yes, the "grave" situation in NJ.
He would be an idiot to file a motion to change venue. But then, he's an idiot.
But a consummately cagey one.
My heart sank when I read this post, Robert. Our legal system does not protect us by holding people accountable if they are running for or hold high office. Jack Smith promised a speedy trial, but you, as an attorney, are saying that this won't happen. Once again it is upon the electorate to defeat Trump at a time when his acolytes have put in place voter suppression, gerrymandering, officials pledged to subvert elections, and a propaganda system that supports an alternate reality for MAGAs and discourages many others from voting. I am so weary of this fight, and although I won't give up, I fear for our democracy more than ever.
The trial is not a substitute for beating Trump at the ballot box, so I don't think we should be concerned about delay. Our only option is to beat Trump at the ballot box.
Smith can promise a speedy trial, but the Speedy Trial Act sets minimum times to trial. Excluded from those minimum times are pretrial motions and interlocutory appeals. Smith can't do anything about exclusions.
I really appreciate your ability to walk those of us who have no legal training through the legalities in all of this. It can be overwhelming. Watching Jack Smith’s announcement yesterday was a relief.
I was just commenting to my wife yesterday that for all of the accusations of Jack Smith politicizing and weaponizing this, I'd never heard a word from him or heard his voice. A few minutes later I heard him on the radio and said, "I think that's him!" His brief statement was very reassuring and my confidence level is rising by the minute!
Robert B. Hubbell, YOUR VOICE in GOD’S EAR, I do agree, but Judge Cannon is clearly a mess. Tonight we are on our knees... hoping she grows up.
I’ve become increasingly concerned about the outcome of Smith’s case after reading the Atlantic article, “The Three Biggest Obstacles to Convicting Trump”. The judge is leeway in this case is an enormous issue with obstacles difficult to overcome.
I am new to the newsletter, and I just want to say thank you all and especially to Mr. Hubbell for your clear thinking and dispassionate, but deeply felt and thoughtful analyses. Thank you and all who who support this work.
Let no one be mistaken, the road ahead will be challenging. TFG is on a tear using the same modis operandi - with great drama. "The Final Battle to take down the corrupt. Talk about gaslighting. Those who are coming after him are the ultimate enemy - his enemy and the enemy of all his supporters." Perhaps someone can post this article without a paywall. Ugh! Maybe best to move on through the weekend and recognize this is what we are in for, find ways to move beyond the moment and believe that justice will prevail. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/us/politics/trump-georgia-north-carolina.html?smid=url-share
Here is a free link to the NYTimes article: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/us/politics/trump-georgia-north-carolina.html?unlocked_article_code=McimsJTm533geTMPl_fRGHgiBH7Xga4LW6pHQbpW8tp84eO8SHdb5CmWzW9o8_FkI8DSaxdAIuE-bSyupdeMLZiZmN9KHTcOVFIGVGxEMEYiSwQjDX9uHB_s-1CnqzR7ZK1EhY6i0-ut4wL6Z-VBZtvrEWFkrkSstBtuCH8mQva_ly2N1NsjXoAloM6oPBff0XSbR7Txe0uB5EnzWIwNMGg6bGqf2QqihjyV0Z4IqowCGc_V33gmYTW0deAVkNJT4yhwUB-qOmYGLbMoD99Iw6B0uSf7mKVilJI9UjrM9pvIQQxZ3DPjPvFaxkG4IAyabRheMygbuS-UK0Z6VhjpBPYFbDKkBAfIAnM&smid=url-share
Robert, you need to enjoy the rest of your weekend. So, do so. Yet, reading Trumps comments and how the Georgia Republican convention responded was like listening to his, “be there, it will be wild,” that summoned a mob to the The Capitol. I hope people higher up than me heard it. Such rhetoric always reminds me of Justice Michael Luttig’s final comments at the January 6 hearings. “They are going to do it again in 2024. How do I know? They are telling us.” The man is a loose cannon. I’ll look forward to you continuing to walk us through these times. We’ve already said they will be at times rough and we’ll have to stay focused and take care of ourselves. Surely that and get out the vote are our focus. Thanks for your steady hand.
Robert, I would like you to comment on WHY Trump stole the documents? It could only be a money motive. Imagine the value of military secrets: Billions!!! And Trump had plenty of time to
sell any of it to the highest bidder. If it can be proven that he sold our secrets to any of our adversaries, I think that would be the final straw to put him away for good!
I have no proof, but I believe his motivation was monetary. We don't know if all of the documents have been returned. some may have been sold. At least he planned to do so. whether he succeeded, we may never know.
I agree, and while he may not have sold the documents themselves, he probably sold the information in them (or peeks at them), or exchanged it for something of personal benefit (like $2B investments in his son-in-law's business). It's probably one of the things that was strongly suggested by evidence, but not as provable as what was charged.
As for Judge Cannon and not worrying about recusal because the verdict will be rendered by a jury: Trump can waive trial by jury and leave the verdict to Cannon. Oh My!!
The government must consent to Trump's waiver of a jury.
Fed. R. Crim. Proc. 23
(a) Jury Trial. If the defendant is entitled to a jury trial, the trial must be by jury unless:
(1) the defendant waives a jury trial in writing;
(2) the government consents; and
(3) the court approves.
Best concise presentation of reassurance about Judge Canon I’ve read.
I printed the indictment last night; it's now a coffee table book. And a 'gin table' book.
Thanks for addressing Judge Cannon. She has been concerning to me; less so now.
Thank you for this reassurance. You help us get through news that initially alarms us and give us perspective as well as hope.
For those focused on what Trump's motive may have been for keeping the documents, I suggest 2 things to allay your concerns...1. It is not necessary to render a conviction on the charges spelled out in the indictment. 2. Just ask him. While it may take him a minute or two to extract other of his feet stuck in his mouth, he will gladly share his preposterous reasoning with anyone willing to listen.
That was exactly my reaction. He didn’t gas on and he explained things clearly, including how dangerous to all of us Trump’s behavior continues to be. The silence of the Republicans is deafening.
It’s been suggested that each of us take the time to read the indictment. Reading it doesn’t take long, perhaps an hour. While Roberts writing is excellent, informative, and very good to read, please do not limit your reading to Robert’s and/ or others Substack writing (HCR’s LFAA, etc.) Please read the indictment! You’ll be glad you did!
For ease in finding it here it is:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.3.0_2.pdf
Wondering if Trump could waive his right to a jury and hope judge favors him?
Trump can waive his right to a jury, but the government and the judge must both agree.
Thank you Robert, your piece is very reassuring. Have a good weekend.