Judge agrees to unseal additional filings from Jan. 6 case as Trump signals challenge

[Bernardo de La Paz]

Source: The Hill

by Rebecca Beitsch - 10/10/24 5:37 PM ET

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Thursday agreed to unseal additional filings from special counsel Jack Smith laying out his election interference case against former President Trump, something Trump’s attorneys signaled they plan to challenge.

Chutkan agreed to a request from Smith to unseal exhibits that accompany his 180-page brief asserting that prosecutors can still bring much of their Jan. 6 case against Trump in the wake of a Supreme Court decision granting former presidents broad criminal immunity.

[...]

“The court determines that the Government’s proposed redactions to the Appendix are appropriate, and that Defendant’s blanket objections to further unsealing are without merit. As the court has stated previously, ‘Defendant’s concern with the political consequences of these proceedings’ is not a cognizable legal prejudice,’” she wrote.

[...]

But Chutkan also agreed to stay her ruling for seven days after an earlier motion from Trump’s legal team asked for additional time “so that President Trump can evaluate litigation options relating to the decision.”
[...]

Read more: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4927545-trump-election-interference-case/

---

Some discussion indicates the appendix might contain information mostly already known from various sources.

[slightlv]

1. It will be full of the evidence, tho...

and I'd really like to know what type of evidence they have. trumps stalling with more litigation options isn't surprising. what will surprise me is if this case goes to trial before the New Year!

[Comfortably_Numb]

2. Eat your jello ya dotard and STFU. His crimes are front and center and he's soiling himself. In other words, Tuesday.

[dickthegrouch]

3. How can evidence interfere with an election????

IMHO it can only “interfere” with the lies that have been spewed almost without consequence for the last 3 years and 11 months.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Excellent point, well stated. . . . . . nt

[riversedge]

5. Even if known--many probably have not seen nor heard it. IMHO