Randall Eliason, former chief of the fraud and public corruption section of the U.S. Attorney's office for Washington, D.C., writes in this morning's New York Times that the Federal judiciary needs to move more aggressively in its schedules for the Malignant Loser's trials on multiple felonies. It's already a given that the Malignant Loser will use every tactic to delay the trials for the January 6 insurrection and the purloined classified documents to beyond the election so that he can shut the Federal cases down. From his essay:
"If Donald Trump is the Republican nominee for president in 2024, it’s now clear he will likely still have criminal indictments hanging over his head on Election Day. It’s possible that his criminal liability for the events leading up to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol will remain unresolved.
If that happens, voters will go to the polls without knowing whether one of the candidates in the current election is criminally responsible for trying to overturn the last one and subvert the will of the voters.
Having an election under such circumstances is unthinkable. As Richard Nixon might have put it, voters have a right to know whether their candidate is a crook. It can be avoided, but it’s going to require the judiciary to take some extraordinary steps. And whether it happens will be decided by a relative handful of federal jurists — including a number appointed by Mr. Trump himself."
It's not helpful, to say the least, that he has a virtual co-conspirator in the form of Judge Aileen Cannon overseeing the classified documents case, putting roadblocks in the way of the prosecution where possible. It also wasn't helpful that Attorney General Merrick Garland dragged his feet especially on the January 6 insurrection case, waiting until Congress had provided him cover to appoint a Special Counsel despite the Malignant Loser's crimes being committed out in the open and on videotape. Eliason concludes his essay:
"A functioning democracy requires an informed electorate. It’s hard to imagine a more important piece of information for voters to have next November than whether a candidate is criminally culpable for trying to overturn the last presidential election.
Our legal system can resolve this case expeditiously while still protecting the defendant’s rights, but the judiciary will have to step up and do its part to protect democracy."
With numerous Trump appointees on the Federal bench, it's doubtful whether they can be counted on to assure speedy trials, effectively giving the Malignant Loser a pass on his crimes.
