Judge Chutkan has the law on her side to slap down Trump's 'political argument': expert
Donald Trump's drive to round up as many GOP delegates as part of a legal strategy in his battle with U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Tanya Chutkan is unlikely to persuade her to go easy on him.
That is the opinion of a former prosecutor when asked if Trump is a guaranteed lock for the 2024 presidential nomination would that bolster his argument that his prosecution is politically motivated.
According to a report from the Messenger's Marc Caputo, the former president is frantically trying to add to his committed delegate total before his Washington, D.C. trial over alleged 2020 election interference begins as part of a wide-ranging defense strategy.
While special counsel Jack Smith is endeavoring to keep the former president and his legal team from pushing election interference conspiracies before the jury, Trump reportedly believes it will help him in the court of public opinion.
Caputo is reporting one Trump insider explaining, “The closer to the election this gets, the more pressure there is and the more people will see the politics. Judge Chutkan said she doesn’t care about Trump’s status as a candidate. This hasn’t worked. But if that trial date moves, will she be so steadfast in pursuit of a verdict and ignore the reality of an impending election? What does Jack Smith do?”
RELATED: Supreme Court gets stern warning to butt out of Trump ballot challenges
According to former prosecutor Mitch Epner, Judge Chutkan has no obligation to consider the political repercussions for Trump's third presidential bid.
"Even if Donald Trump is the officially nominated candidate after the convention, there is no special constitutional status for a nominee seeking an elected office," he explained before adding the caveat, "But it doesn’t matter to Trump. Trump is not constrained by the truth. And he’s certainly not constrained by legal niceties.”
ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene has Jan. 6 anniversary plans
Epner added that jurists, “...are loathe to intrude on the political process, not as a matter of law but as a matter of effective argument. The more that Trump can make the argument the more likely it is that judges could cite it in their opinions or be motivated to rule in his favor that is legally cognizable."
You can read more here.