The Associate Editor of The Washington Post, a leftist newspaper, has expressed extreme frustration over the news that the politically motivated cases against President Donald Trump are unlikely to be brought to trial before the 2024 election.
From the very beginning, it has been evident, although some may choose to ignore it, that the primary objective behind the numerous criminal indictments against Trump is to ensure that he faces trial, is found guilty, and subsequently sentenced to prison before voters have the chance to cast their ballots in the November election.
Certain individuals who oppose Trump are now openly acknowledging this objective, including Ruth Marcus, the Associate Editor of The Washington Post. Democrats and their allies in the corporate media will argue that Trump must be prevented from being reelected as president in order to “save democracy.”
Marcus just argued in an op-ed that the “Slowpoke federal appeals court puts 2024 election in jeopardy.”
The potential electoral “risk” that concerned her was the chance that one or more of Trump’s criminal trials could be postponed until after voters have cast their ballots in the November election due to the “unacceptable” sluggishness of an appeals court panel. In her op-ed, Marcus was specifically referring to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that heard arguments regarding Trump’s claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution almost a month ago.
However, the court has not yet reached a decision. As a result, Trump’s federal election interference case in the D.C. district court remains indefinitely delayed until the appeal is resolved.
According to CBS News, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan recently removed the tentatively scheduled March 4 trial start date from the court’s calendar. This removal was expected after she halted all pre-trial proceedings in December pending the outcome of Trump’s appeal against her rejection of his immunity claim.
Even when the three-judge panel eventually issues their ruling on Trump’s claim, the matter will not be concluded, as the 45th president — or Special Counsel Jack Smith — can then appeal the issue further to both the full D.C. Circuit Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. This would undoubtedly result in additional delays of weeks or even months, regardless of the final decision.
“Without strict court supervision and swift action to prevent Trump from running out the clock, his trial could easily collide with the party conventions and the height of the general election campaign,” Marcus wrote in her op-ed.
“It is not at all far-fetched to imagine it being postponed until after the November election — Trump’s ultimate goal, so he can win, take office, and then order the case dropped.”
“Failing to try Trump before the election would be a terrible disservice to voters,” she continued.
“They are entitled to know before casting their ballots whether they are choosing a felon, especially one guilty of election interference.”
Marcus supported his position by referring to polls that indicate a potential Trump conviction or prison sentence before the 2024 election could influence a slim majority of voters in crucial swing states. These voters, who may have otherwise supported the 45th president, could end up voting against him.
Interestingly, this is not the only trial that could be postponed until after the 2024 election, much to the dismay of President Trump’s opponents at The Post and elsewhere. There is a genuine possibility that Trump’s other federal and state prosecutions could face similar delays or even be dismissed entirely.
One such case is Jack Smith’s attempt to imprison Trump in South Florida for his alleged unauthorized retention of classified documents. While the trial is tentatively scheduled for May, it is highly likely to be delayed due to the intricate and time-consuming procedures involved in handling classified materials in court. Additionally, the Georgia election interference case, which involves complex racketeering charges and multiple defendants, has not yet been assigned a trial date and is expected to experience delays.
Meanwhile, the trial for the New York business records falsification case is set to take place in late March. However, this particular case is considered the weakest among the four Trump faces, and even if there is a conviction, the resulting punishment would be minimal.
In her op-ed, Marcus strongly criticized Trump for his tactics of delaying the trials. She even went as far as comparing the former president, who has merely utilized the standard appeals process and procedures, to a “murderer who kills his parents and then pleads for mercy because he is an orphan.”
“But both the appeals court and the Supreme Court have mechanisms to frustrate this kind of gamesmanship,” she concluded.
“They can set tighter deadlines and allow pretrial preparation to go forward while they weigh any appeal.
“Justice has been delayed enough already.”
