- cross-posted to:
- news_world@lemmy.link
- cross-posted to:
- news_world@lemmy.link
Judge Aileen Cannon said she would issue a ruling later after appearing skeptical of arguments from both sides
You must log in or register to comment.
Aileen “loose” Cannon knows where her bread is buttered.
She need to be impeached for not recusing herself due to the OBVIOUS conflict of interest alone given that she was appointed by the man she is judging. Seriously what the living fuck?
She has a lifetime appointment, so from that perspective, she doesn’t owe them anything. Unless she’s got eyes on SCOTUS, which historically wouldn’t take people as wildly partisan as her, but times have obviously changed in SCOTUSland.
Judge Cannon has absolutely no business being on this case and it’s a joke to our entire justice system that she can be anywhere near a court room involving the president that appointed her to the bench. She needs to be recused.
TL;DR Summary:
Federal Judge Aileen Cannon, overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case, hinted that the trial might be delayed until 2024, deeming the matter potentially complex. This comes after prosecutors and Trump’s attorneys presented their arguments. While prosecutors had urged the judge not to defer the trial beyond the 2024 election, Trump’s side recommended a postponement. The case involves Trump being charged with retaining crucial national defense information. Given the nature of the charges, the case is governed by the Classified Information Procedures Act (Cipa), which has specific rules for cases involving classified documents, making it more time-consuming than standard criminal cases. Both Trump and his valet, Walt Nauta, have pleaded not guilty. If the trial is delayed post-2024 and Trump wins the election, he could possibly pardon himself or instruct the justice department to dismiss the case.
Oh ffs please don’t. Thanks.
Judge Cannon was a Trump appointee and Trumps lawyers specifically selected her because of her bias towards Trump. She has already done stuff like this before.
But this is not the only jurisdiction in which Trump is being prosecuted. So eventually, when this does go to trial, the DoJ will appeal whatever ruling she makes that ends up being super lenient to trump, and they’ll get to do it all again in Big Boy court, except he’ll get real punishment this time. But then also maybe it will get to the SC, and if they give him a pass… well, the Supreme Court can be packed by people who aren’t Republicans, too.
She wasn’t specificly selected. She did have something like a 50% chance of being drawn with the way the districts work. But otherwise fully agree. She’s a hack.
Yeah - they went judge shopping. It’s ultimately a bit of a roll of the dice as you said, but there are absolutely ways to game the system so that you have better odds of getting the judge you want. Which Trump’s lawyers absolutely did.
How exactly would the defense be able to decide in which federal district the DOJ would prosecute the case?
Trump knows what court district his resort is in, and one of the many shitty judges he appointed when he was president was to the district court where Mar-a-lago is.
From there: Cases are generally prosecuted in the district in which they were committed. For the classified documents case, the crime was committed at or around his residence:
- Moving the boxes while he was president, though deeply sketchy, was technically not illegal.
- Possession of the boxes after Biden was sworn in - and moreover, clear, unambiguous, and repeated attempts to stymie and misdirect investigations around where the documents went - is definitely illegal.
This ignores that he is also under investigation in other districts, at the state level, and the reports of other classified document incidents that happened in other locations but haven’t been charged (yet).
Your first bullet point is also moot, as Trump was not charged with taking documents, but rather keeping them without legal authority or permission.
What a circus.
Didn’t another judge recuse himself though? I thought that was why she was selected or was that another case?
Oh really? I don’t recall hearing that… do you remember who it was? I couldn’t find an article on that with a quick search.
I looked for it too and couldn’t find it, I was hoping someone remembered it. I’ll try again, check back in 10 and I’ll update either way.
Edit: I found it, it was the Disney case for DeSantis, I was wrong: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/disney-desantis-case-judge-stock-conflict-1234746158/
Jack Smith needs to pound home the Speedy Trial Doctrine. It shouldn’t just apply to defendants, although that’s usually who it benefits.
I’m shocked. Utterly.
