Six months ago, as criminal charges mounted against Donald Trump, it seemed likely that the courts would block his bid for re-election as president.

But a series of blows to prosecutors and Joe Biden’s Justice Department over the past few weeks suggest the campaign to try Trump before Election Day is losing ground.

The complexity of the indictment against him, delaying tactics by lawyers, questions about the ethics of a state prosecutor and questionable rulings by Trump-appointed judges have left the twice-impeached former president with 5 p.m. A trial is increasingly unlikely. November.

Crucially, polls show that a certain number of moderate Republicans and swing voters would abandon Trump if he were convicted before the election. If they don’t, the scales may tip in his favor.

This week, a New York judge told prosecutors in the hush-money case that the trial must be postponed for at least a month to give defense attorneys time to digest new evidence. It was originally scheduled to start on March 25.

Not only that, the notorious enter hollywood Video of Trump bragging about “grabbing pussy” will not be shown to jurors.

Judge Juan Merchant said that while the tape was “relevant to key issues”, playing it would likely be unduly prejudicial. Whatever you want.

The hush-money case centers on accusations that Trump falsified company records to conceal the nature of payments to then-lawyer Michael Cohen, who helped Trump bury negative publicity during his 2016 presidential campaign.

Cohen paid porn actor Stormy Daniels $130,000 and arranged for a publisher to publish the book. national enquirer Paid $150,000 to former Playboy model Karen McDougal to suppress claims they had an extramarital affair with Trump years ago. Prosecutors said Trump’s company reimbursed Cohen and recorded payments to him as legal fees.

But for those who want him to face justice before a possible re-election, this is the least and most legally contentious complication Trump faces, after which he can invoke presidential powers and pardon himself.

In February, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court decided that it would hear Trump’s appeal of a lower court’s rejection of his claim that the presidency entitles him to the challenges he faced related to the Jan. 6 U.S. Immunity from charges related to the Capitol insurrection.

Many observers had hoped that a panel of Republican and Democratic judges on the District of Columbia Court of Appeals would reject the immunity defense, preventing the Supreme Court from hearing the case.but The Supreme Court will consider – No timetable was given for the ruling.

Even if the Supreme Court ultimately decides not to dismiss the most serious of the 91 criminal indictments Trump faces for apparent attempts to subvert the results of the 2020 election, it will severely delay the case. Trump is charged with four counts in this case, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, witness tampering, and conspiracy to violate civil rights as he seeks to tear apart democracy and turn the United States into a banana republic.

Neal Katyal, former Acting Deputy Attorney General of the United States tell MSNBC This week: “I don’t think there’s any chance that the U.S. Supreme Court will side with Trump on the issue of absolute immunity. But the fact that the court gave Donald Trump what he wanted with such a delayed timeline is a very There is a realistic possibility that you could postpone the case until after the election.”

Things get worse. Trump does appear to be right in the criminal case in Florida over the mishandling of classified documents, and warning signs are flashing that the former president can count on judges to lend a hand.Junior judges appointed by Trump have Condemned by U.S. Court of Appeals Jury Wrong ruling in Trump’s favor at preliminary hearing.

Last week, amid jeers from many legal experts, Judge Erin Cannon cast doubt on Trump’s claim that the Espionage Act was too vague to be used to prosecute him, but stopped short of dismissing the dubious claim. ruse, but instead advised his attorney to appeal to the jurors when the case began.

Former FBI general counsel Andrew Weisman said Cannon’s ruling was the “worst possible outcome” for prosecutors because “if the judge had simply said, I agree with Donald Trump, I find it vague and I would have dismissed it, and the government could have appealed to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, as they have done twice before and won twice.”

He added that she had tried “at all costs” to avoid scrutiny of her conduct in the case by senior judges.

Bradley Moss, an attorney who specializes in national security issues, agreed with Weisman and mocked Cannon for refusing to clear up doubts about the Espionage Act’s applicability. Special counsel Jack Smith is using the act to prosecute Trump for scattering top-secret documents around his Mar-a-Lago resort. Prosecutors claim some of the documents were discussed with guests and staff. Trump is also accused of urging his lawyers to hide the records and lying to the FBI, saying he no longer had them. He is also accused of recruiting staff to delete video evidence of alleged crimes.

“To my knowledge, every criminal defendant charged under the Espionage Act has filed the same motion,” Moss said. “They all argued it was unconstitutional. Too vague. It couldn’t be applied that way. But they all failed. Judges across the country and multiple local courts have repeatedly rejected that argument.

“What worries me is … Judge Cannon’s failure to adapt to this moment. She’s trying to push some of these issues into jury questions and have 12 average Americans try to evaluate things that lawyers smarter than me are arguing about every day.”

The comments prompted concern from prominent liberal commentator and MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell “The entire country is watching this bizarre behavior by a Trump-appointed judge who is doing everything in her power to favor the person who appointed her to the bench, which is the most obvious, most obvious thing you could ask for in a court of law. Toxic Conflict of Interest.” federal court, as it now also encompasses the dynamics of her judicial future. “

Weisman responded: “I agree… the fact that she was reversed twice, not just for making small mistakes, but for making really big mistakes, and everything she does consistently is One-sided, it brings up all the things you thought it would,” said. “

Experts point out that the classified documents case will be tried in South Florida, Trump’s home state, and that only a single MARC sympathizer on the jury could unseat Trump.

Hence the opportunity for prosecutors to bring the most serious charges against Trump in Washington and the most watertight ones against him in Florida –– has a problem.

If he is convicted in Georgia of conspiring to overturn the swing state’s 2020 election results, those state-level convictions cannot be overturned through a presidential pardon. But the signs are dire here, too, thanks to a puzzling lapse in judgment by Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis.

Three years ago, on January 2, 2021, after Trump lost the election, he called Republican Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to urge him to “find” enough votes to overturn the state presidential election results. The recording of this apparent attempt to steal victory in a battleground state forms the core of Willis’ accusation that Trump organized a vast hoax aimed at overturning the state’s election results.

Willis’ Georgia election conspiracy case looks like an open and closed case that can be solved trump card forever.

But Willis has alleged ethics violations and has leveled sophisticated racketeering charges against Trump and his associates, threatening to give the disgraced former president another get-out-of-jail-free card.

Trump’s legal team says Allegations of inappropriate relationship There was a serious conflict of interest between Willis and her special prosecutor, Nathan Wade.

Legal experts noted that Willis hired Wade even though he seemed ill-suited for the position. He earns a huge amount of money from this work. Reports about the pair’s romantic relationship added fuel to the fire.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled last week that Willis could remain in charge of the case after calling for her firing trump card The premise is that Wade quits.

But, and this is a very big “but”, McAfee criticizes Willis Because of her “huge lapse in judgment” and “unprofessional manner” in her combative testimony on the issue. He noted that her account of events reeked of “lies” and said there was “reasonable doubt” as to whether she had lied under oath.

Her actions don’t tell us anything about the truth of Trump’s accusations. But what impact will this gut-wrenching verdict have on her credibility and chances of defeating Trump? This doesn’t help.

“In the minds of independents and swing voters, the McAfee ruling is likely to create enough skepticism that it could fuel Trump’s narrative that the Georgia cases were simply a result of Fannie Willis’ actions and character Another example of a baseless ‘witch hunt’,” said Todd Landman, an expert on American politics at the University of Nottingham.

“It seems unlikely that these cases will be resolved before the election,” added Patricia Krause, a political scientist at the University of New Haven. “It’s definitely in Trump’s favor, except for the Georgia case, whether he As president, the cases will continue. Unless any of these are clearly resolved before November 5, they may have little impact on independent voters.”

She added: “The issue facing both candidates is [Biden and Trump] The large number of undecided voters now comes not just from independents but from both Democrats and Republicans, suggesting voters are generally frustrated with both candidates. “

Amid the legal setback, Landman found a glimmer of good news for Democrats.

“Despite these cases, their evolution and outcomes, the Trump campaign has struggled to keep up with Biden’s fundraising and adopted an election strategy more based on core support and loyalty, thereby reaching those who have not yet made the Decided voters are stuck with the indifferent choice of not voting at all or voting for Biden. “

In other words, if the American judicial system (as seems likely) is not up to the task, swing voters will almost certainly decide.