There's already been drama between former and potentially future President Donald Trump and Special Counsel Jack Smith less than a week after the third indictment was announced last Tuesday. On Friday, Trump issued a TruthSocial post declaring "IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU!" That certainly did not sit well with the prosecutors, who then proposed a protective order limiting what Trump could discuss. Trump's lawyers asked for an extension, which was rejected, and were ordered to respond by Monday at 5pm. They're now asking for a narrowed limit on the protective order of what Trump can say about the case.
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 5, 2023
Shortly after the deadline, NBC News published a report detailing the lawyers' requests:
In a 29-page filing, Trump's lawyers argued that the government's proposal was "overbroad" and instead asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to adopt a revised order "to shield only genuinely sensitive materials from public view."
“The government requests the Court assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump’s political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive material and non sensitive potentially exculpatory documents," they wrote.
The filing includes proposed changes that would narrow the scope of the limitations sought by the government. One of the revisions would allow Trump to publicly disclose recordings and transcripts of witness testimony that prosecutors obtained in the course of their investigation and are expected to turn over to the defense.
First Amendment concerns have already existed with the case, with many criticizing how the indictment criminalized speech and political activities. There are also complexities in looking into Trump's mindset and whether or not he truly believed that he won the election.
One of those who has raised such concerns includes Alan Dershowitz, an attorney and law professor who is a Democrat and has voted against Trump, but has also defended him. Dershowitz spoke with Breitbart's Joel Pollack on Sunday, noting that Trump "has a First Amendment right--and we have a First Amendment right--to know what’s in the documents" showing their evidence against him.
Trump is also at a disadvantage with the case being assigned to Judge Tanya Chutkan, who has ruled against Trump before when it comes to him looking to exert executive privilege in keeping documents from the January 6 select committee, and who has been particularly harsh with sentences for January 6 defendants, even if prosecutors didn't ask for jail time.
As Mia has covered extensively for Townhall, Chutkan has had deep connections to Democratic politicians and causes, including former President Barack Obama who appointed her, as well as the Black Lives Matter movement.
Chutkan has found herself in the news at great length and has been trending over social media as well, including with whether or not Trump and his legal team will be looking for the judge to recuse herself.
Trump's continuous TruthSocial posts have called out Smith and Chutkan and suggested recusal. John Lauro, an attorney for Trump, has walked back the idea, though. While speaking to defense attorney David Markus on his podcast on Sunday, Lauro shared that "we haven't made a final decision on that issue at all, as POLITICO highlighted.
Law Professor Jonathan Turley, who has been among those legal analysts criticizing the indictment against Trump, has warned that the TruthSocial post above did not help Trump's case.
As discussed earlier, Trump's posting was a mistake and was made-to-order for Smith. https://t.co/leIknTcDr4 Now, Judge Chutkan has ordered Trump to respond on why she should not grant the protective order. This is the type of unforced error that Trump cannot afford in this case.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 5, 2023