DOJ and the media have lied about the infamous photo of alleged classified documents seized during FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago.
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 6, 2024
New court filings prove the FBI used cover sheets depicted in the photo during the raid.
That's not how the records were found:https://t.co/f0m2Zcvj0D
I had a wide-ranging discussion with Don Jr at his home in Florida on Monday evening. We covered the ongoing lawfare against his father, breaking news out of classified docs case, and much more.
So as it turns out, Jack Smith and his team tampered with evidence
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 7, 2024
Or to put it another way: Mishandled classified materials
Whatever the left accuses everyone else of doing is exactly what they’re doing themselves!!!
Reporter Julie Kelly @julie_kelly2 explains pic.twitter.com/z9Gm8CkrE1
NEW: Judge Cannon officially vacates May 20 trial date, says setting a new date with so many outstanding matters would be “imprudent.”
NEW: Judge Cannon officially vacates May 20 trial date, says setting a new date with so many outstanding matters would be “imprudent.” pic.twitter.com/A8QwNmuQ6o
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 7, 2024
The Court also determines that finalization of a trial date at this juncture—before resolution of the myriad and interconnected pre-trial and CIPA issues remaining and forthcoming—would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court, critical CIPA issues, and additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury.6 The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice.
In reaching this decision, the Court has fully evaluated the parties’ positions as expressed during the March 1, 2024, conference and in related and subsequent filings [ECF Nos. 356-357, 369, 433, 452-453, 458, 507, 527]. The Court also reviewed the procedural posture of this case in light of the currently pending motions, which now consist of eight substantive pretrial motions (two of which have not been publicly docketed because of requests for sealing and redactions [ECF Nos. 324, 326, 348, 352, 384, 485, 508, 516]); extensive defense motions to compel discovery on a host of issues spanning hundreds of pages of classified and unclassified briefing.
