Former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants are making legal maneuvers that are “sure losers,” according to legal analyst Glenn Kirschner.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to 91 felony charges spread across four criminal indictments this year. The former president has two co-defendants in his federal classified documents case and 18 co-defendants in his Fulton County, Georgia, election interference case, all similarly pleading not guilty to felony charges.

A series of legal motions recently filed by lawyers for Trump and his co-defendants are attempting to significantly alter, delay or dismiss the criminal proceedings before trials begin. Kirschner, a staunch critic of Trump and former federal prosecutor, said during the latest episode of his Justice Matters podcast that all of the motions “range from weak to frivolous.”

Kirschner on Tuesday shared the podcast in a post to X, formerly Twitter, where he wrote that “Trump and his criminal associates are flooding the courts with motions seeking to avoid prosecution” and argued that “these motions are sure losers.”

Donald Trump Motions Weak Frivolous Sure Losers
Former President Donald Trump is pictured on Friday during an event in Rapid City, South Dakota. Trump’s lawyers recently filed a motion in federal court that legal analyst Glenn Kirschner called a “sure loser.”
Scott Olson

“All of a sudden, we are seeing an explosion of legal motions being filed by Donald Trump and some of his criminal associates who are desperate to try to find ways to wiggle out from under their criminal prosecutions,” Kirschner said during the podcast. “It won’t work … These motions range from weak to frivolous.”

Kirschner cited a motion from lawyer and Georgia co-defendant Kenneth Chesebro, who’s accused of acting as the architect of a scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election outcome with fake pro-Trump “electors.”

Attorneys for Chesebro on Tuesday asked for the dismissal of charges while claiming that their client was “justified” in his actions and was “fulfilling his duty to his client as an attorney.”

Kirschner countered the claim by stating that Chesebro, to whom he referred as “Cheese,” did not “have a justification defense” because he was advocating for “a fake electors scheme that was designed to criminally, corruptly [and] unconstitutionally overturn the results of an election.”

The legal analyst concluded that the motion from Chesebro was “going to go nowhere.” He then brought up what he said was “another motion that is going to go nowhere”—from former Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

Meadows’ lawyers filed an unsuccessful motion to move his felony case in Fulton County to a federal court, claiming that Meadows was performing official duties at the time of his actions for which he’s been charged. Meadows is appealing the decision. Kirschner predicted the decision would be upheld “very promptly.”

Kirschner went on to say that his “favorite motion that was recently filed” was the attempt by Trump’s legal team to convince U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to recuse herself from the former president’s federal election interference case.

In a filing that was panned by several legal experts, Trump’s lawyers on Monday urged Chutkan to recuse herself, alleging she made “prior negative statements regarding [former] President Trump” that would “unavoidably taint” his trial.

“When you file a motion like that, you probably ought to have some precedent, something supporting your argument,” Kirschner said. “If there was any precedent anywhere in the country, the defense probably would have, should have cited it, but … you’re not going to find a single case.”

“Nothing that Judge Chutkan said or did is disqualifying [or] requires her to be removed from presiding over the prosecution of Donald Trump in federal court in Washington, D.C.,” he added. “So, she will remain the judge.”

In response to a request for comment, Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung on Tuesday night sent Newsweek the following previously shared statement via email:

“Glenn is a notorious trafficker of wild conspiracy theories and dubious legal analysis. I would expect nothing more from a clout-chasing MSNBC contributor who has been shunned by the legal community at large.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *