NMC has three good posts out there on the DeLaughter defense.
DeLaughter’s reply argues that there are two issues they identified that make this case distinct and demonstrate a need for a pretrial hearing, and that the Government ignores them in its response. They’re right. The Government’s response (which you can read about here) focuses solely on how admission of co-conspirator statements work in an ordinary case.
In addition to the pleadings just noted, last night Judge DeLaughter filed a reply on his motions to dismiss the mail fraud and the bribery counts of the indictment. I don’t have time to comment on that one right now (it’s more complex than the other two) and will try to get to it later. Here it is for those who don’t want to wait.