Election Interference? Next Trump Court Date Is Right Before 2024 Votes Begin

Have we just seen our first sign of election interference in the 2024 presidential election? Yesterday, the judge at the arraignment of former President Donald Trump set the next hearing date for December – some eight months from now – right before the first major election primary. That’s more than enough reason to raise a suspicious eyebrow.

As reported:

The judge overseeing former President Trump’s criminal case in New York City has set the next in-person hearing for Dec. 4, roughly two months before the official start of the 2024 Republican presidential primary calendar.

Trump was arraigned in Manhattan in front of Judge Juan Merchan on Tuesday, where he was charged with 34 felony counts. . . . Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges.

At the December in-person court appearance, Merchan will decide on expected motions to dismiss the case.

The Iowa Republican caucuses will be held on Feb. 5, 2024, marking the start of the GOP primary season. That underscores how Trump’s legal troubles could shadow him into the period when voters are picking a candidate to nominate for president.

Now that the charges have been read and the hearing set, motions will begin to be filed. And the judge will have until the court date to rule on them. It’s very likely, if this goes to trial, that it will not start until January. And guess what happens in February? That’s right. The election process kicks into high gear, starting with the Iowa Caucus. 

Ask yourself, why would they schedule the next court date so far out? And specifically, why schedule it so close to a crucial campaign date, knowing that Trump is running for President again? Are we to believe it’s all a coincidence?

What it feels like is more political gameplay, as my dad, ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, echoed in his own analysis:

Someone is going to have to file what’s called a motion for particulars, because they don’t even allege what the so-called other crime is that would raise this from a low-level misdemeanor, which is like a traffic ticket, to a low-level felony, which is what this is – it’s the lowest level of felony. . . . The idea that a district attorney in Manhattan can then take a case and say that case is now a felony because we believe that the arrangement for this payment violates federal election law – FEDERAL ELECTION LAW – when the federal government already said it does not. That includes the Federal Election Commission and the United States Department of Justice.

So you’ve got to be concerned at the outset of what this is. You know, we said this was politics. We knew it was politics. It’s raw politics. It is exactly and precisely what I said in an opening argument to the Supreme Court of the United States 38 months ago. And I said you’re weaponizing 2,300 district attorneys, accountable to their local constituencies, to target political opposition, and especially Presidents and presidential candidates. And when you see this indictment unfold, that’s exactly what it was.

Even Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg couldn’t answer a simple question about what specific crimes Trump allegedly committed. He simply said he didn’t have to state them. Sounds like the response of a man with a flimsy case.

Today’s full Sekulow broadcast includes more analysis of the judge’s decision to schedule the next Trump court date so close to the beginning of the primary season and whether or not it was legitimate or simply strategic to kneecap the former President’s campaign hopes. We’re also joined by Jenny Beth Martin, honorary chair of the Tea Party Patriots, one of the conservative organizations we defended when the Deep State IRS targeted them.

Watch the full broadcast below: