Many thought this day would never come. My gut told me that American democracy would not survive if it let Donald Trump off the hook. Then, on August 1, 2023, more than two and a half years after the January 6th attack on our nation’s Capitol, Trump was indicted for conspiring to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The former president is finally being held accountable for his treasonous conduct.
While there is no guarantee that justice will prevail, there is now a clear and convincing path to Trump’s being found guilty as charged. For those who still remain skeptical, consider these factors:
The Judge Assigned to the Case. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama and confirmed by a 95-0 bipartisan Senate vote, will oversee the case. She has stood out as one of the toughest punishers of rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, even handing down harsher sentences than Justice Department prosecutors recommended. At one sentencing hearing, Judge Chutkan explained, “It is not patriotism, it is not standing up for America to stand up for one man – who knows full well that he lost – instead of the Constitution he was trying to subvert.”1
In November 2021, Judge Chutkan ruled against Trump in a prior hearing when she refused his request to block the release of documents to the U.S. House’s Jan. 6 committee by asserting executive privilege.2
The Trial Venue. The January 6th conspiracy case will be tried in Washington, D.C., a pretty progressive city with a multicultural population. Unlike the Mar-a-Lago documents case in Florida, the jury pool will not be drawn from a Republican-friendly area more inclined to look favorably upon the former president.
Trump has already questioned whether an impartial jury can be seated in D.C. But Judge Chutkan previously ruled in the case of one January 6th defendant that the assumption the jury pool would be politically biased against them was “not an appropriate basis for changing venue.” She found that “Jurors’ political leanings are not, by themselves, evidence that those jurors cannot fairly and impartially consider the evidence presented and apply the law as instructed by the court.”3 Judge Chutkan will not permit the trial to be moved to another venue.
The Timing of the Trial. It is critical that the case be tried before the November 2024 presidential election. The American people must know the outcome of this trial before they go to the polls, assuming Trump is the GOP nominee, which now seems likely. But Trump and his attorneys will do everything they can to delay the trial until after the election. They will argue that they need more time for discovery and pre-trial motions in such an important case.
Additionally, Trump will contend that the government had over two years to prepare its case, and, in all fairness, he should have just as much time to get ready for the trial. In fact, Jack Smith, the special prosecutor handling the case, was not appointed until November 18, 2022, less than nine months ago. Prior to that, the Department of Justice was focusing on prosecuting people who participated in the January 6th attack on the Capitol. Preparing the case against Trump was not the DOJ’s focus until Smith came on board. Thus, Smith can argue that giving Trump, who has known for several months that an indictment was coming, another nine months to get ready for trial would be equivalent to what the prosecutor has had to put his case together.
The 1974-75 Watergate case involved high-level officials in the Nixon administration who were charged and convicted of conspiracy and obstruction of justice. It was a complex political trial comparable to the January 6th insurrection case. President Nixon was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case.4 The seven defendants were indicted on March 1, 1974, and tried and convicted in January 1975, less than a year later.5 Given the Watergate precedent, Trump’s trial could be completed by next summer.
Trump already has two other trials scheduled for next year. In one of them, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has signaled that he is ready to set aside former President Trump’s March 2024 trial date in New York to make way for a possible trial related to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6th insurrection trial.6 That would make a Spring 2024 trial date for the insurrection case feasible. It would also provide Trump’s attorneys with approximately nine months to prepare for trial.
The Prosecutor. Special Counsel Smith has a reputation for winning tough cases against war criminals, mobsters, and crooked cops.7 As a former prosecutor for the NM Public Education Department, I know that prosecutors do not bring charges against someone unless they are confident that they have the evidence to prove their case. I’m sure Smith has that confidence as well.
Smith called for a speedy trial in this case.8 One very significant indicator of Smith’s desire to bring this case to trial as soon as possible is that despite noting six other co-conspirators, none of them were indicted. Indicting others would have required more discovery and pre-trial motions which would have been more reason to extend the trial date. Smith is well aware of the importance of trying and winning this case before next year’s election.
The Key Witnesses. Almost all of the key witnesses in this case are credible Republicans, most of whom were appointed by or closely associated with Trump. Bill Barr, Trump’s former attorney general, confirmed that Trump “knew well he lost the election.”9
Former Vice President Pence stated that Trump pushed him to reject the Electoral vote count on January 6th in violation of his Constitutional role and send the election to the House of Representatives.10 There are many more GOP witnesses of high standing ready to testify how Trump plotted to overthrow the government. The picture they will paint is of a power-hungry tyrant itching to turn American democracy into an autocracy under his total control.11 The DOJ and the American people cannot allow this to happen.
The time has come. For Donald Trump, it’s the beginning of the end.
Bruce Berlin
A retired, public sector ethics attorney, Berlin is the author of Breaking Big Money’s Grip on America (See breakingbigmoneysgrip.com.), the founder of New Mexicans for Money Out of Politics, a former U.S. Institute of Peace fellow, and the founder and former executive director of The Trinity Forum for International Security and Conflict Resolution. He can be reached at breakingbigmoneysgrip@gmail.com.
Subscribe to this blog at https://breakingbigmoneysgrip.com/my-blog-3/. Join the movement to revive our democracy. Together we can save the soul of America.
Breaking Big Money's Grip on America 
Clearly written and realistically optimistic regarding the “struggle for the soul of America” — thank you! Elizabeth.
>
LikeLike