On Monday, federal Judge Tanya Chutkan scheduled former President Donald Trump’s trial on criminal charges of election interference for March 2024, opting with a date years ahead of the scheduling that Trump’s team wanted — in 2026, five years after the tumult in and around Congress over the certification of the presidential election results from 2020.
Before doing so, Chutkan criticized some of the claims made by Trump’s team in trying to make their case for the lengthy delay, observing, for instance, that their claimed average for the length of the process represented a span from commencement to sentencing — which can come months after a trial concludes! The former president’s team also cited supposedly supporting cases in which the list of defendants was much more extensive. Here, it’s just Trump. Allies of the former president were not thrilled, promptly turning to antagonistic commentary online in which they posited various methods of response.
“The Democrats are doing exactly what what they are accusing President Trump of doing. ELECTION INTERFERENCE!” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) claimed.
Though the claim of election interference has been made before, some are raising new complaints because Chutkan scheduled Trump’s trial right around Super Tuesday, the point in the primaries when many delegates will be at stake on the same day. There is no substantial evidence that the early March scheduling is actually the work of “Democrats,” though. Prosecutors had wanted a trial in January, and Chutkan, though perhaps Democratic in her personal beliefs, was acting by all appearances independently under the standards of law. There’s no indication Trump’s cases have been handled procedurally in a manner distinct from relevant norms.
“Judge Chutkan is a political operative in a robe. We should set her censure for a vote ASAP to expose this sham and restore our republic,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) added. He proposed that censure of the judge, making flatly false claims about her. The proposal alleges, for instance, that the judge expressed support for violence, ignoring how so many of the 2020 demonstrations for racial justice (which were at issue) were, in frank reality, peaceful! You can’t just wipe from existence that basic factual record.