Judge overseeing Trump trial 'agitated' by Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling

Judge Tanya Chutkan is clearly not happy with the U.S. Supreme Court's recent presidential immunity ruling. 

This is according to at least one individual who personally witnessed what happened in Chutkan's courtroom this past week.

Chutkan is the District of Columbia judge who is overseeing the so-called election interference case that Special Counsel Jack Smith has brought against former President Donald Trump.

The latest development in the case was a court hearing that occurred on Thursday, Sept. 5, 2024.

Here is what is going on:

For many months, this case was delayed while Trump took his presidential immunity defense to the U.S. Supreme Court. There, the justices ruled that U.S. presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts.

The justices, however, did not define what is and what is not an official act. Instead, they left this up to the lower courts, including Chutkan.

Smith re-indicted Trump, in light of the Supreme Court's ruling. And, now, this case is underway. Chutkan held a hearing on Thursday to determine how the case will proceed.

The big development, as Fox News reports, is that, "in an order Thursday afternoon, Chutkan set deadlines for replies and paperwork from federal prosecutors and Trump's legal team for Nov. 7 — after Election Day."

In other words, it is now certain that the trial phase of the case will not take place until after the 2024 presidential election. This has to be a huge blow to Smith who has not kept hidden the fact that he wants a guilty conviction of Trump before election day.

Chutkan "agitated"

Chutkan's court does not allow cameras in the courtroom, so we can only know what happened in the courtroom from observers. One of these observers who was on hand for Thursday's hearing is Julie Kelly.

Kelly reported:

Not only is she clearly agitated by SCOTUS immunity ruling, it is unclear whether she even read it. On a number of occasions, she argued with John Lauro, Trump's defense attorney, about the elements of the opinion. "That's not how I read it," she said when misinterpreting what the opinion said.

Chutkan, according to Kelly, also said that the presidential election is "not relevant" to scheduling for the case.

Kelly went on to report:

Chutkan . . . was also in full performance mode. She made snide comments to generate laughter in the DOJ friendly crowd. She crossed her arms, held up her hand, pointed, and smirked during her back and forth with Lauro.

No wonder cameras are not allowed in the courtroom. If they were, then the entire country would be able to see this case for what it really is.