How to defeat Trump's bad faith delaying tactics
The undisputed facts in the public domain already satisfy the beyond a reasonable doubt standard for a criminal conviction
300 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone: 202-465-8728
December 8, 2023
Jack Smith
Special Counsel
United States Department of Justice
Special Counsel Office
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Room B-206
Washington, D.C. 20530
Re: Urgency of timely Trump trials and verdicts in United States v. Trump, CR 23-257 (D.C.D.C.) and United States v. Trump, CR 23-80101 (S.D. Fla.)
Dear Special Counsel Smith:
We applaud your meticulous handiwork in the above-referenced cases.
We urge you to strongly oppose any further delay in these criminal prosecutions, even to the point of mandamus actions to overrule a district court’s trial date near or after the 2024 presidential election.
In United States v. Trump, CR 23-257, the District Court has set March 4, 2024, to start the trial. For the reasons elaborated below, we urge you to move for an earlier start date because the incriminating evidence against Trump is so overwhelming.
In United States v. Trump, CR-23-80101, the District Court has set May 2024 as the trial date but indicated a likelihood of further postponement over the Classified Information Procedures Act or otherwise. District Judge Aileen Cannon has exhibited extreme pro-Trump bias sufficient to warrant a mandamus petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit seeking an earlier and fixed trial date. That appellate court has already rapped Judge Cannon’s knuckles once over her appointment of a special master to supervise discovery and block the government from using information obtained in executing a search warrant. Trump v United States, No. 22-13005, December 1, 2022.
The future of our Republic and the rule of law are at stake. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963).
Defendant Trump’s trademark tactics have been delay-delay while shouting witch hunt, witch hunt. His defenses on the merits of the twin indictments are anemic or frivolous. All the world can see that Trump’s get-out-of-jail free hope is to win the White House in 2024 and order dismissal of the federal indictments if verdicts are not final before inauguration day of January 20, 2025. Delay has also been Trump’s soundtrack in companion criminal prosecutions in New York and Georgia. In the former prosecution, The People of the State of New York v. Trump, March 25, 2024, has been set as the trial date, with a probability of further delay to avoid interference with Trump’s federal prosecution in the District of Columbia. In the latter, State of Georgia v. Trump et al., Fulton Superior Court, Clerk No. 23SC188947, the prosecutor has suggested August 5, 2024, as a start date, only three months before the 2024 election.
We submit the public interest in speedy verdicts that honor due process is compelling. Mr. Trump has pledged to destroy the Constitution and rule of law if re-elected, including making political opposition or criticism a crime, and asserting limitless presidential power to do anything he wants. Think of Trump’s proclamation of July 23, 2019, “Then I have Article 2, where I have the right to do anything I want as president.” Or his demand of Vice President Mike Pence on the morning of January 6, 2021, “to choose between me and the Constitution” aiming to intimidate the Vice President from performing his constitutional duty to count state-certified electoral votes. Or his insistence that the Constitution should be “terminated” if electoral fraud is alleged.
We believe that evidence in the public domain of Trump’s corrupt intent on January 6 to thwart the counting of electoral votes by the Vice President in violation of the Twelfth Amendment and Electoral Count Act easily passes the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. Among other things, Mr. Trump idled for 187 minutes on January 6 watching his incited mob attack the Capitol with force and violence chanting “hang Mike Pence” and endangering the lives of Pence, his family, and lawmakers. Mr. Trump declined for over three hours to summon law enforcement or call off his MAGA followers. Mr. Pence was forced to step into the breach.
Virtually all words and actions of Mr. Trump following the balloting on November 3, 2020, were aimed at a single objective: preventing the counting of state-certified electoral votes that survived 61 Trump-orchestrated judicial challenges.
According to abductive reasoning, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.
Mr. Trump looks like a dictator, acts like a dictator, and demonizes like a dictator. He probably is a dictator.
Time is of the essence in prosecuting Trump without compromising due process to avoid risking a constitutional abyss. Trump at large is a clear and present danger to the Republic
Sincerely,
Ralph Nader, Esq.
Bruce Fein, Esq.