steps taken by the state thus far. how much credence do you think the judge is going to give to co-defendants who are calling this all politics? i should say, how likely is it the d. a. willis is going to get anything within the ballpark of march 2024 as far as a trial? two things. first of all, d. a. willis has said, both the night she returned the indictment and throughout the course of her career, that she makes her decisions based on the facts, the evidence she can present at trial, and the law. she does not make decisions based on partisan politics. so i find it interesting that those that may view this case through a political lens, are transferring this lens to her, when she has made it clear that it s not her framing. with respect to the timing, we also heard her say that she was ready to try this case in six months. that may seem ambitious to some, but if you think about it, if she had said anything less than a ready to go sort of stance,
things i need to be reviewed before then, that there is a significant volume of documents here. both of that makes sense. the judge has to decide what really is due process here, what amount of time is reasonable by balancing both the defendant s need to have reasonable preparation but also the governmen s right to protect the public interest in the speedy trial. yeah. when we talk about the trial, whenever it scheduled market, the reality is that journalists, americans, other candidates are going to be witnessing the strangest split screen probably in american political history. which is, do we have the calendar? we have the iowa caucus is on the 15th of january, you have trump civil defamation case the same day, trump civil fraud case two weeks later, the month of march is peppered with caucuses and trials. i mean, this is election season 2024 is going to be, and it truly is unlike anything we have ever seen in this country. the fact that the presumed front runner is going to be bo
reasonably prompt disposition so a person can either be held accountable or exonerated. there is also an interest in making sure that witness memories do not fade, and that the evidence is still available when the case goes to trial. this argument about the terabytes of documents here is true and not only this case but in other cases as well. no, doubt it will take some time to work through all of this. but no, longer is at the world where you sit down which each page and page through it, the way discovery is reviewed today is it is assorted, searchable, the way you would go about a modern computer search and not the way you would read warn piece of time was written. you know, hat tip for the reference, martha. what is so abundantly clear in the sea of all days, the day trump is trying to kick this trial to 2026 is the same that he s out there making exactly the kind of statements that could be perceived as witness intimidation, stuff that will automatically trigger the judge to move
it s really a audacious request. it s not only the defendant who has a right to a speedy trial, it s also the public that has the right to a speedy trial. the public has an interest and reasonably prompt disposition so a person can either be held accountable or exonerated. there is also an interest in making sure that witness memories do not fade, and that the evidence is still available when the case goes to trial. this argument about the terabytes of documents here is true and not only this case but in other cases as well. no, doubt it will take some time to work through all of this. but no, longer is at the world where you sit down which each page and page through it, the way discovery is refute today s and assorted, searchable, the way you would go about a modern computer search and not the way you would read warn piece of time was written. you know, had tip for the reference, martha. what is so abundantly clear in the sea of all days, the day trump is trying to kick this
just one person doing all that reading. it s why people retain entire legal teams to help them in cases like this. nonetheless, trump and his lawyers argue that they will not be ready to go to trial until april of the year 2026. this is a decidedly different date than the one proposed by jack smith s team, which would like a trial date set for january 2nd of the year 2024 which is well before the presidential election. ultimately, both these dates are just suggestions. the trial date in this case is the judge s decision. at a hearing last friday, the judge presiding over this case made it very clear that a key deciding factor here as far as the date was going to be how trump conducted himself outside of the courtroom. this is what she said. quote, even arguably ambiguous statements from parties or their counsel, if they could reasonably interpreted to intimidate witnesses or prejudice potential jurors can threaten the process. the more a party makes