What To Make Of A Three Week Delay Before Even Holding A Hearing On SCO Smith's Requested Gag Order

Smith's Reply to Trump's Opposition Ignores The Central Point -- A Gag Order Violates the First Amendment Rights of a Candidate for Office.

The Crew & Co. stepped away for a couple of weeks to celebrate family birthdays that are close together in late September, causing a bit of a pause in publishing here.

But the swirl of events over the past 10 days have further contributed to my tardiness in getting this article finished. In the time since I started writing this article, I have started 4 others — finishing none — regarding events that jumped up and grabbed all the headlines. And none of those other four involve the ongoing saga over the selection of a new Speaker of the House or the Hamas slaughter of innocent men, women and children.

I think the only response to my self-created quagmire is to finish them all one at a time, but in somewhat truncated fashion.

First up is revisiting the current status of the motion for “gag order” in the D.C. criminal case against former Pres. Trump rose to the top of the list because there is a hearing set for next week on that motion. A hearing on that motion is set for Monday, October 16. Hopefully this article gives you a bit of background and context for the reporting that is likely to follow.

As the headline above indicates, my hook for this subject originally was all the protestations by Special Counsel Smith that this was a matter of urgency due to the sanctity of the Court process being under verbal assault from Trump’s public comments. But, notwithstanding the sense of urgency that has been attached to pretty much every other matter raised in the case in order to drive it to trial ahead of the 2024 election cycle, the hearing on this motion was set by the Judge to happen more than 30 days after the motion was filed.