West Palm Beach, Florida – Judge Aileen Cannon is planning additional hearings regarding former President Donald Trump’s attempts to contest key evidence in a case involving classified documents. She is allowing Trump’s legal team to question witnesses about the investigation and search of his Mar-a-Lago estate. The judge expressed interest in obtaining more information about the language used in the FBI warrant that led to the seizure of classified records from Mar-a-Lago in 2022, as well as grand jury testimony from Trump’s former attorney, Evan Corcoran.

During hearings on these issues, the judge did not make any rulings but indicated a desire for further evidence. Critics have accused Cannon of prolonging the case with multiple hearings, with a prosecutor suggesting that Trump’s team is attempting to manipulate the proceedings to spread conspiracy theories about federal investigators’ work.

In an 11-page order issued on Thursday, Cannon defended her approach, emphasizing the distinction between a thorough evidentiary hearing and a time-consuming “mini-trial.” She remarked that the hearings were geared towards adjudicating contested factual and legal issues related to pre-trial motions to suppress evidence.

The judge also mentioned revisiting the language used in the search warrant for the seizure of property from Mar-a-Lago two years prior, as well as the Justice Department’s reliance on Corcoran’s testimony to support the obstruction aspect of the case. The special counsel’s office has opposed the need for additional hearings and Trump’s efforts to truncate parts of the case.

Cannon has yet to schedule dates for the additional hearings. Before proceeding, the parties involved will engage in discussions on the scope and timing of the hearings, submit exhibit and witness lists, and ensure the efficiency and control of evidence presented.

Trump’s legal team has raised concerns about the specificity of the language in the search warrant authorizing the seizure of “national defense information” and “Presidential Records,” to which Cannon acknowledged ambiguities. The judge denied Trump’s request for another hearing on the warrant’s validity in searching rooms at Mar-a-Lago.

Furthermore, the legal battle involves the sharing of conversations between Corcoran and Trump during a grand jury investigation. Cannon indicated a review of Corcoran’s notes and testimony about his former client, stressing the need for fresh factual findings regarding potential crime-fraud issues.

In a separate ruling, Cannon mentioned allowing one final submission from each party regarding a proposed gag order from the special counsel’s office. During a hearing on this matter, the judge emphasized the necessity of establishing a factual link between Trump’s statements and any alleged threats posed by prosecutors.

As the case unfolds, with ongoing disputes over evidence, witnesses, and legal procedures, the legal battle between Trump and federal authorities continues to generate scrutiny and debate. The complexity of the case underscores the challenges of navigating legal processes in high-profile investigations involving former presidents and allegations of misconduct.