With more information emerging daily about Judge Tanya Chutkan’s open hostility to Donald Trump as she presides over the legally suspect case that Jack Smith filed against him, a 2021 article describing Chutkan’s conduct and statements about the January 6 defendants has suddenly gone viral. The woman is unprincipled and partisan to the point of delusion. She has no business presiding over Donald Trump’s case or even sitting on the federal bench.
Yesterday, news emerged about Chutkan’s openly stated belief that Donald Trump ought to be behind bars, something that, with nothing more, means she should be taken off of Trump’s case because she is incapable of the kind of integrity and impartiality required of federal judges. She’s a hanging judge and not bothering to hide it.
The inestimable Techno Fog has also revealed how Chutkan has treated Trump differently—and way more harshly—than other defendants in her courtroom. Her blatantly unfair conduct arose in the context of the prosecution’s request for a protective order that would effectively silence Trump during the primary season. The prosecution filed the motion on August 4, a Friday, at almost 10 p.m. Techno Fog picks up the story:
Image by Andrea Widburg
Typically, Judge Chutkan would allow for at least one week for Trump’s team to file a response. (the Court’s local rules allow 14 days to respond to motions). How do we know that? Because we went through Judge Chutkan’s other cases where a protective order was disputed - more on that below.
Curiously, however, Judge Chutkan decided to demand an expedited briefing and hearing schedule - against the reasonable requests of Trump’s attorneys, who requested just a little bit extra time. Here’s the timeline:
August 4, 2023: Special Counsel Smith files his motion for protective order.
August 5, 2023: Trump is ordered to file his response to the motion for protective order by 5:00 on Monday, August 7, 2023.
August 5, 2023: Trump’s lawyers file a motion to revise the briefing schedule on the government’s motion for protective order, seeking only three extra days – a deadline of August 10. This is under the timeframe discussed in the Court’s local rules, which allow for 14 days to respond to motions.)
August 5, 2023: Judge Chutkan denies Trump’s requested extension.
August 7, 2023: Trump’s lawyers file their response to the government’s proposed protective order. Judge Chutkan demands dates and times for a hearing on the protective order, which she orders to take place by August 11, 2023.
August 8, 2023: Trump and the Special Counsel file their joint notice. Special Counsel says it is available “at any time on August 9, 10, or 11.” Trump requests a setting on Monday or Tuesday (August 14 or 15) where both of Trump’s lawyers can be present. A very reasonable request.
August 8, 2023: Judge Chutkan denies Trump’s request and sets the protective order hearing for August 11, 2023 - exactly one week after the protective order was filed by Special Counsel Smith.
In other words, Chutkan went out of her way to deny Trump’s counsel time in which to write a response directed to the millions of terabytes and documents at issue under the proposed order. She also specifically set the hearing on a date she knew Trump’s counsel would be unavailable.
With this real-time information about Chutkan’s open hostility to Trump, along with her malevolent scheduling requirements, an AP article from October 2021 has suddenly reemerged to become one of the “most shared” articles amongst conservatives on X (formerly known as Twitter). You’ll quickly see why:
A Texas man who joined the mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6. was sentenced Monday to 45 days behind bars even though prosecutors weren’t seeking jail time, after the judge blasted comparisons between the riot that day and the Black Lives Matter protests over racial injustice.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan called it a false equivalence “to compare the actions of people protesting, mostly peacefully, for civil rights” to the mob that “was trying to overthrow the government.” She said doing so “ignores the very real danger that the Jan. 6 riots pose to the foundation of our democracy.”
The judge’s remarks in the case against Matthew Mazzocco of San Antonio came days after another judge in Washington’s federal court suggested that the Justice Department was being too hard on the Jan. 6 defendants when compared to the people arrested during the protests after George Floyd’s murder.
Because I’m not a lawyer in Chutkan’s jurisdiction or, thank God!, in her courtroom, I can say this straight out: The woman is ideologically corrupt to the point of delusion. In case you’ve forgotten, this was what the BLM riots looked like:
It’s not just BLM. This is the left attacking the Supreme Court:
I could go on but won’t. You know what the left has been doing since the 1960s.
Chutkan is completely corrupt—and I’m not accusing her of financial corruption, a la Joe Biden. Instead, I’m accusing her of something infinitely worse, which is ideological corruption. She’s a dirty judge and should be driven from the courthouse.
If Trump is convicted in her courtroom—which you know will happen when a corrupt judge presides over a case tried before a D.C. jury—the moral, decent half of the country will, and should, discount the verdict entirely. And that’s very, very bad for a country’s health and even its ultimate survival.