Former judge Andrew Napolitano lambasted the judge presiding over Trump’s DC trial case during an interview on Newsmax. Napolitano commented that he was unsurprised that the DC judge, Tanya Chutkan, picked the day before Super Tuesday to begin the trial and called her “blind to the political realities of this” trial date. Politics aside, Napolitano also found fault with the judge’s legal reasoning.
“There are more than 1 million pages of documents…that the federal government will soon be giving to Donald Trump’s lawyers. That is an enormous amount of paperwork for them to read and analyze and examine and second guess between now and March 4th. They [Trump’s lawyers] begged for more time and the court [judge Chutkan] said no. This will force Trump’s lawyers to hire more lawyers so that human beings can read all this stuff…you have read every single page of every document that the government gives you of what is called discovery before you can even begin to prepare your defense,” said Napolitano.
Napolitano further criticized the court’s decision by stating, “Trials should be decided on the merits…trials should not be decided on the court’s convenience or the court’s calendar or some artificial statement like he will be treated like anybody else.” He also acknowledged that the Department of Justice was behaving politically in its indictment of the Republican frontrunner, Donald Trump.
There are more reasons to doubt the integrity of Chutkan’s decision. As Robert Barnes, a constitutional lawyer, pointed out, “The same Judge that said it would take more than a year to bring a simple misdemeanor J6 case to trial also now set #Trump case with 12 million+ documents to an early trial date almost twice as quickly.”
The same Judge that said it would take more than a year to bring a simple misdemeanor J6 case to trial also now set #Trump case with 12 million+ documents to an early trial date almost twice as quickly.
— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) August 28, 2023
This act is an appealable issue alongside her contradictory statements about how she will treat Mr. Trump versus her actual treatment of Trump. Mike Davis wrote, “Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan: I won’t treat Trump differently than any other criminal defendant. Also Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan: Trump’s rich. So I’ll treat him differently. (Keep talking, Judge Chutkan. You’re effectively writing the appellate briefs for Trump. Keep talking.)”
Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan:
I won't treat Trump differently than any other criminal defendant.
Also Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan:
Trump's rich. So I'll treat him differently.
(Keep talking, Judge Chutkan. You're effectively writing the appellate briefs for Trump. Keep talking.) pic.twitter.com/BSIlDvNYsG
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) August 28, 2023
The judge also make a ridiculous statement about how Trump could have prepared a defense before he was indicted. Julie Kelly, a reporter, observed, “Absolutely preposterous. Chutkan, desperate to fast track Trump’s trial, continues to challenge Trump’s lawyer on his need to do his job. Chutkan argues that he should have started preparing Trump’s defense A YEAR AGO. “Just like any other American,” right, judge?”
Absolutely preposterous. Chutkan, desperate to fast track Trump's trial, continues to challenge Trump's lawyer on his need to do his job.
Chutkan argues that he should have started preparing Trump's defense A YEAR AGO.
"Just like any other American," right, judge? pic.twitter.com/uB1Y9QeWXR
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) August 29, 2023
As former judge Napolitano pointed out it is only after post-indictment discovery material is made available that the defense can begin to prepare legal defenses.
The hostile purpose of the judge could be construed as trying to rig the trial against Trump in order to get a conviction regardless of the appealable issues this treatment raises. In other words, the trial has a political purpose to convict Trump in the belief that this would damage him politically irrespective of the actual soundness of the verdict.