Trump's Impending Criminal Trial: Countdown to Legal Showdown

Donald Trump is running out of time in his last effort to avoid being the first former president to face a criminal trial next week. Despite his attempts to delay the trial and change its location, he suffered another loss in court on Monday. This brings him and the nation closer to a potentially divisive spectacle that could impact the upcoming election.

This case is one of four criminal cases against the former president, stemming from payments made to an adult film actress before the 2016 election. Despite the charges, he has maintained his innocence in all cases.

As Trump's legal options become limited, his attacks on the judge in the New York case and others involved in his upcoming trials are becoming more extreme. He has made wild claims, suggesting that he is a victim of political persecution. In a recent post on Truth Social, Trump questioned how many "corrupt" judges he must face before someone intervenes. Additionally, in a fundraising email, he criticized the ongoing trial as a "sham" and warned of consequences unless he receives more financial support.

Judge Juan Merchan, who will oversee the case, recently issued a stricter gag order on Trump after he targeted and made derogatory remarks about the judge's daughter on social media. Trump has expressed his frustration on Truth Social, claiming that his First Amendment rights are being violated by Merchan's actions.

Trump’s attempts to discredit the upcoming New York trial have intensified. CNN recently obtained the jury questionnaire for the case, revealing the unique political context surrounding it. Potential jurors will be asked about their news sources, attendance at Trump rallies, and affiliation with extremist groups like the Proud Boys. Their opinions on the former president will also be probed, but not their political party or voting history.

This process is standard before trials to ensure that jurors can fairly assess the evidence without bias. The prosecutors are not aiming to prove the illegality of a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels in 2016. Instead, they will argue that Trump falsified business records to hide the payment, attempting to deceive voters before the 2016 election. Some critics question the case’s focus on election interference. Among the four criminal trials involving Trump, this is the one he would likely prefer to address first.

Delays in various legal cases involving Trump are often due to his exercise of his rights as a defendant to fully exhaust his appeals. However, there is a noticeable pattern of him using unnecessary legal challenges to stall the progress towards trials. As the New York trial looms only four weekdays away, the likelihood of further delays is diminishing rapidly. Despite being one of the most litigious individuals in recent history, Trump may still resort to additional unlikely legal maneuvers to avoid accountability.

If Trump fails to postpone the start of the trial on April 15, he will be spending a significant amount of time in the courtroom, leaving his rival, President Joe Biden, with an advantage on the campaign trail. On Monday, the former president attempted to address one of his major vulnerabilities by stating that the issue of abortion should be left to individual states, potentially a crucial topic in the upcoming general election. Biden swiftly dismissed Trump's statement, expressing doubts about his predecessor's commitment and warning that voters are increasingly holding him accountable.

Special counsel Jack Smith in Washington filed his latest brief to the Supreme Court on Monday. This was done in an effort to stop another delaying tactic by Trump, who claims presidential immunity. Trump's argument is that if former presidents can face criminal prosecution, the presidency's power would be weakened. However, Smith disagrees, stating that this would give presidents unlimited power.

Smith emphasized that the presidency should not grant immunity to a former president for alleged violations of federal criminal law. According to Smith, no one, not even the president, is above the law in our constitutional system.

In addition, Smith addressed Trump's attempt to prolong the legal process by suggesting that the Supreme Court could send the case back to lower courts for further arguments. This move could delay the trial significantly, potentially until after the election. If Trump is reelected, he could use his presidential powers to stall or even dismiss the federal case against him. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on April 25 and is expected to reach a decision by July.

Smith is facing obstacles in bringing the ex-president to trial in Florida, as Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump, is accused of delaying the proceedings regarding the ex-president's handling of classified documents.

In Georgia, Trump is trying to disrupt his election interference trial as part of his ongoing efforts to delay the other cases against him before the upcoming election. Trump's legal team is arguing that his actions to pressure local officials to overturn his election loss were simply an exercise of his free speech rights. According to Trump's attorney Steve Sadow, a robust freedom of expression is essential for democracy to thrive.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has already rejected the idea of dismissing the case based on the argument that Trump's actions were protected under free speech. This move by Trump is likely to be seen by his critics as a typical attempt to twist the facts, claiming that he was not trying to undermine democracy but rather to protect it.

How Trump is attempting to influence jury trials

The main decision in the New York case on Monday was about the former Republican president's attorneys claiming that their client wouldn't receive a fair trial in the city where he is well-known, which is mostly liberal. Associate Justice Lizbeth González denied the request to halt the trial while this issue is being discussed and stated that there would be no more arguments on the matter.

Trump has used a similar strategy before, arguing about the fairness of being tried in Washington, DC, which is also a liberal city. Normally, prosecutors file charges in the location where the alleged offense occurred. If Trump's arguments were taken to the extreme, it would mean that a political figure could only be tried in a place where the potential jury pool would likely support them. This would bring politics into the legal system and challenge the principle that everyone is equal under the law, especially former and potentially future presidents.

Trump successfully used his four indictments to rally support from the GOP base during his Republican primary campaign, portraying himself as a victim of unfair justice and sidelining his competitors.

A major question for this campaign is how the public will react to a president facing trial. Will it strengthen support for Trump, or will it lead to a backlash, especially if he is convicted?

Editor's P/S:

The upcoming trial of former President Donald Trump marks a significant moment in American history and raises critical questions about the rule of law and the accountability of powerful individuals. Despite facing multiple criminal cases, Trump has repeatedly attempted to delay and obstruct the legal process, casting doubt on his commitment to justice and casting himself as a victim of political persecution.

The jury questionnaire for the New York trial reveals the complexities of selecting an impartial jury in a highly polarized political climate. Questions about potential jurors' affiliation with extremist groups and their opinions on the former president highlight the challenges of ensuring fairness in a case that has become inextricably linked with partisan politics. Furthermore, the Supreme Court's upcoming decision on Trump's presidential immunity claim will have major implications for the future of accountability for high-ranking officials.