states, if i m not mistaken, i think it s the sixth amendment rights is that you have you re entitled to a trial of your peers in the venue where the crime was committed. totally. people forget that part, it s very important. and all you need, of course, it 12 poorest persons good into true. it is a matter of 98 voted against him. i don t think you can argue for a venue change because people voted he will argue. that he will. but so let s say, you guys seem to be in agreement, this is the one that is built to go first. okay. let s stipulate that. what s a reasonable, catherine, do you think a reasonable time for it? this is interesting. we re saying this one should go first. i wonder if judge cannon will agree to that, because she has this date in may. but i would say if judge cannon agrees, it s in may. it s enough. time use the may trial great. regulates down march, and if cannon were to defer
that is actionable, and we ll see what a jury says, but perhaps we ll actually and in criminal conviction. let s talk about criminal intent, one of the most important aspects of this, and it clear that i think there s three prongs to the defense. criminalizing speech in front of conduct, he was relying on his lawyer s advice. and then this third one having to do with intent. i ll read here today from his lawyer saying i would like them to try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that donald trump believed that these allegations were false. basically, rick, the notion that he is so, that he is essentially clinically deluded about the reality of the matter, despite the repeated evidence presented to him time and time again, said in the indictment. that clinical delusion means he is incapable of forming
a criminal, case that had to show that was not entitled to first amendment protection. we re not talking about speech. there really are all kinds of conduct that might be reprehensible, that, morally wrong. even insidious. it s particularly true with regards to speech. because speech is protected by the first amendment. and importantly. so this is not one of those cases. in fact, as she pointed, out none other than jack smith himself makes that point on page two of the indictment. quote, the defendant had a right like every american, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome determinative fraud during the election and that he won. and one of the things, really indictment today, that it does so well is, smith and the lawyers that wrote this, really seek to clearly delineate when things move from protected speech, political advocacy, hardball politics, to a criminal conspiracy as laid out in the fact contained in the indictment. noth
determines when the case goes to trial. clearly if the judges off of her rocker, which this one isn t, things happen. she has a reputation for moving cases along. clearly, this is the biggest case ever in the united states history. i don t think that she is going to be moved because of that. obviously they are in titled to make motions. they have to have enough time to try the case. i don t think that this judge will allow for unnecessary limitless delay. and what she said very quickly, if it goes to the court of appeals, and i don t think that they have much spaces for doing it. this is a court of appeals in contrast to the other circuit that knows the high jinx very quickly. all right, catherine, christian, thank you very much. we learn something there. still ahead, about that judge we were just mentioning. she is about to
happens all the time. usually with violent defendants. they have the will try one, get convicted and pleads for the. others or plead for all of them. clearly that is not going to happen in this case. so right, if someone goes up and down the east coast assaulting people, or killing them, or something like that. or through new york in different counties in new york. and different counties. sure. generally the way that plays out is, one of those goes first, and there s a trial. usually the most serious. one the most serious one. or the federal one. yes. and if that is secured, then they all fold. or if it s acquitted, it s also the other way. and when this, once let me try that. one but if there s a conviction on one, particularly the federal, and the more serious state one, they all fall.