LAW AND ORDER: MIAMI — One consequence of former President Donald Trump’s indictment by the Justice Department is that many Americans will learn a thing or two about how federal prosecutors actually work. Today’s lesson from Miami? The first hearing in a criminal case is not that interesting. Everyone involved — the government, the defendants, their lawyers, and the court — is looking much further ahead.

Today, Trump arrived at court, did not speak during his 48-minute hearing — his lawyer Todd Blanche entered a plea of not guilty — and was released without having to post bond. He left the courthouse and went to Versailles restaurant, a well-known Cuban cafe.

Trump was represented by Blanche and Chris Kise, following the departure last week of two attorneys who had been handling Trump’s defense while the case was still in its investigation stage. Blanche is a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan who was already working on Trump’s defense in the criminal prosecution brought by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office earlier this year. His task now in Florida is to prepare and conduct an effective criminal defense in the most high-profile criminal case in recent memory.

Here’s some of what he and his colleagues are almost certainly working on as we speak:

Motions to Dismiss

There are a variety of pretrial motions that a criminal defendant can bring. One of them is a motion to dismiss some or all of the counts in an indictment because they are legally deficient on their face, even assuming all of the factual allegations in the indictment are true. This is a very high bar for criminal defendants to clear, but motions to dismiss do get granted from time to time.

In this case, Trump’s lawyers may be evaluating whether they can get the case tossed on the theory that Trump had the inherent authority to declassify and remove material upon leaving office. Most informed legal observers have strongly disputed this claim, and in any case, it has no obvious bearing on the charges related to Trump’s obstruction of the Justice Department’s investigation.

Trump’s lawyers might also file a motion to dismiss based on alleged selective prosecution, on the theory that Trump has been singled out by prosecutors while other Democratic politicians, like 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, were given a pass for their alleged mishandling of classified information. The argument has formed the centerpiece of the public defense of Trump by his political allies in recent days, but it is far from compelling as a legal matter: The allegations against Trump are distinguishable on multiple grounds, including, most notably, the extensive and elaborate alleged effort on his part to obstruct the government’s investigation.

Discovery

Now that Trump has been indicted, the government is required to disclose a considerable amount of information to the defense, including the evidence that prosecutors intend to introduce at trial, any exculpatory evidence, and statements made to the government by witnesses that they intend to call at trial that were provided either in voluntary interviews or before a grand jury. The scope of the government’s discovery is often contested by defendants, so do not be surprised if Trump’s lawyers file motions for additional discovery beyond what is unilaterally provided by the government.

Trump’s lawyers will want to obtain as much of this information as quickly as possible, and they will want to go over it as closely as they can in order to identify any information that they believe might be helpful to them — including exculpatory evidence as well as misstatements or inconsistent statements on the part of witnesses that the government may call at trial. In theory, Trump’s lawyers’ review of the government’s discovery might also generate investigative leads that they may want to follow to buttress their defense.

Motions to Suppress or Exclude Evidence

This is another major area of pretrial litigation in criminal cases. Defendants can move to suppress evidence that they believe was unlawfully obtained — for instance, if the defendant’s constitutional rights were violated by an unlawful search. As the trial approaches, they can also move to exclude evidence from the government’s case on a number of grounds.

Not surprisingly, Trump’s lawyers are reportedly looking into the possibility of moving to suppress the evidence obtained by the government from Trump’s lawyer Evan Corcoran, who produced what appears to be key evidence concerning his dealings with Trump as they were responding to the Justice Department’s grand jury subpoena last year. The government had to litigate in federal court in Washington, D.C., to obtain that evidence, but Trump’s lawyers may try to relitigate that issue now that they are in Florida and now that they will have more information to mount an objection.

Evidence of Prosecutorial Misconduct

Trump’s lawyers are also going to be on the lookout for any potential prosecutorial misconduct that they might be able to use to narrow or derail the case. Thus far, the arguments along those lines that have been advanced in recent days have not been particularly compelling as a legal matter, but in theory at least, that could always change depending on how things unfold.

An Alternative Narrative

Trump’s lawyers are also no doubt looking for something in the way of a coherent alternative narrative to advance in court and at trial.

After the search of Mar-a-Lago last year, Trump and his since-departed lawyers offered an array of factual claims and arguments in the court of public opinion, but they never came together to form a cogent and persuasive account of what transpired that might actually help Trump. Of course, Trump is under no obligation to prove his innocence in court — like all criminal defendants, the burden is on the government to establish Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is no requirement for Trump to testify or even call any witnesses — but the best defenses have some alternative theory of the case that jurors can potentially latch onto. (“Hillary did it too,” in addition to being wrong on the facts, is not likely to get very far.)

The Trial Date

Trump’s lawyers also face a major strategic question about whether and how to drag out the schedule past the 2024 election if Trump is the Republican nominee for president.

If they pursue this path, they may not need much help in this regard, since Trump appears to have gotten very lucky with the appointment of district judge Aileen Cannon as the presiding judge. Cannon is a Trump appointee and the same judge who got reversed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals last year after she appointed a special master to oversee the government’s review of the material recovered from Mar-a-Lago. She is now, once again, the most closely watched judge in the country.

Tracking the Trump criminal cases: Check out POLITICO’s definitive guide to the key players and legal risks in the four criminal probes of Donald Trump.

Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at [email protected]. Or contact tonight’s author at [email protected].

— In the Senate, Biden’s spy pitch falls on deaf ears: The Biden administration’s latest bid to convince lawmakers to renew a soon-to-expire foreign surveillance power without significant new privacy safeguards is off to a rough start. During a hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee today, lawmakers were concerned about the privacy abuses that have occurred under the law — the vast majority of which concern the FBI’s ability to warrantlessly sift through data collected under the program for information on Americans.

— Freedom Caucus adds new members in the wake of House floor rebellion: After hardline House conservatives aggravated GOP leaders by halting the chamber floor in protest, the Freedom Caucus — which most of the agitators call home — is growing in numbers. The Trump-aligned bloc admitted two new members this week: Reps. Diana Harshbarger (R-Tenn.) and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.). Their admittance, confirmed by two Republicans who spoke on condition of anonymity, shows that while some in the Freedom Caucus may be sparking blowback with their rebellion against GOP leaders, the group is also expanding its reach.

— Biden rushes replacement armored vehicles to Ukraine after battlefield losses: The Biden administration is rushing more armored vehicles to Ukraine as the country’s forces suffer some early losses in the early thrusts of its counteroffensive against Russia. A $325 million drawdown of U.S. military stocks announced today will also pump artillery shells and air defense missiles into the fight, in addition to sending 15 Bradley fighting vehicles to Ukraine after a similar number was lost recently in heavy fighting.

THIRD-PARTY NEWS — The centrist political organization No Labels has defended its third-party presidential bid by insisting there’s a broad voter appetite for a candidate running in the political middle. But the group said it would likely exit the race entirely if Donald Trump doesn’t win the GOP nomination — even as more conservative candidates such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis run to Trump’s right.

Jacobson said the organization isn’t focused on who its nominee will be or what the nomination process will look like, reports POLITICO’s Shia Kapos. No Labels is wrapped up in laying the groundwork to gain access to the ballot in key states and writing up what it calls its “Common Sense” policy agenda.

No Labels is also planning an April convention in Dallas — an important decision point for the group’s possible third-party push. Who the GOP nominee will be could be clear as early as Super Tuesday in March. No Labels plans to keep that convention date even if it exits the race altogether.

THE WAR ON DOJ — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has been working for months on plans to tear down and rebuild both the Department of Justice and the FBI, consulting with experts and members of Congress to develop a “Day One” strategy to end what conservatives see as the weaponization of the justice system, reports RealClearPolitics.

The governor has privately told advisors that he will hire and fire plenty of federal personnel, reorganize entire agencies, and execute a “disciplined” and “relentless” strategy to restore the Justice Department to a mission more in line with what the “Founding Fathers envisioned.”

But his ambitions go beyond bureaucratic restructuring. He wants to physically remove large swathes of the DOJ from the District of Columbia, including FBI headquarters.

UPHILL BATTLE — Ukraine is facing fierce Russian resistance in the south and east, as it plugs away with a counteroffensive to retake Russia-occupied territory, Veronika Melkozerova reports.

The Ukrainian forces have been gaining ground, but fighting is taking place for every meter, Ukraine’s Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar said in a statement.

“The enemy is doing everything to keep the captured positions. Russians actively use assault and army aviation, and conduct intense artillery fire,” Maliar said. “During the offensive, our troops encounter continuous minefields, which are combined with anti-tank ditches. All this is combined with constant counterattacks by enemy units on armored vehicles and the massive use of ATGMs and kamikaze drones.”

Over the past day, Ukrainian troops have advanced 250 meters in the direction of Bakhmut in the area of the Berkhiv Reservoir, and another 200 meters in the direction of Toretsk in the Donetsk region, Maliar said. In the Zaporizhzia region, Ukraine’s army took back up to one kilometer in the Berdiansk direction, making it a three square kilometer total advance in the region so far.

According to Maliar, battles are currently ongoing in several districts across south and east Ukraine.

Ukrainians and Russians have been reporting their gains in meters for months now. For example, in the nine-month battle for Bakhmut alone, Russia reportedly lost one soldier killed or wounded for every 48 centimeters of territory gained, the British defense ministry reported in recent days.

TURBULENT TIMES — Have you been on a flight recently and noticed more turbulence than normal? It’s not only you. Climate change is contributing to bumpier flights in a surprising way. Turbulence that forms in the air without clouds — called clear-air turbulence — has gotten worse as the planet warms, and is projected to continue on its concerning trend-line. This kind of turbulence is particularly confounding because it doesn’t show up on a plane’s radar, meaning that it’s more difficult to prepare for or avoid entirely. Justine Calma reports for The Verge.