IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

Two unusual moments from Trump's arraignment for 2020 election indictment

I was a prosecutor for 21 years and a defense lawyer for 5 years — and I’ve never heard this during this type of proceeding.

By

Two things stood out to me as unusual during Donald Trump's arraignment on Thursday after he was indicted in special counsel Jack Smith's 2020 election interference investigation.

It is not usual for the magistrate judge to have talked to the assigned district judge — in this case, Judge Tanya Chutkan — to find out what the next date is. What is unusual is to be so focused on the trial date.

That to me, for people who are thinking that Chutkan is not focused on whether this case can go to trial before the general election in November 2024, is the issue. And it’s also clear that Trump attorney John Lauro knows that and that is the reason he started saying during the arraignment that he needed to know about the volume of discovery. Because it’s going to be a little eye-popping. There is going to be a huge amount of discovery material and Smith's team is going to have to deal with that issue. That is going to be the fight.

The second thing that stood out as unusual is that the standard condition that a judge usually emphasizes to a defendant is that they have to show up at each court appearance. That is the most important thing. That is what bail is for — so that you’ll show up in court. 

But I heard that the standard condition and most important thing today is “do not commit a crime’’ followed up by “do not tamper with a juror.” My first reaction was, I was a prosecutor for 21 years and I was a defense lawyer for five years, and I’ve never heard that.

This is an excerpt from MSNBC's special coverage of Donald Trump's arraignment on Thursday. It has been edited slightly for length and clarity.