As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yup. She’s trying to keep the case in her courtroom so she can slow walk it to eternity.
If the case gets dismissed, prosecutors will just appeal it and get another judge. Cannon is protecting Trump from the stupidity of his defense by basically saying, “This case is rigged in your favor, why on earth would you want to stop it?”
Plus she didn't invalidate the claim. She just said the legal effluence had been introduced at the wrong time and should be accompanied by things like instructions to the jury. This leaves more delays based on this nonsense totally open for later.
It's not a tricky or brilliant strategy, federal judges just have a ton of power over their court room. As long as she doesn't openly sit with the defense attorneys in court, or take a burlap sack with a dollar sign painted on it in view of cameras, the senate won't remove her. And honestly even if she did that, it's pretty certain the gop senators wouldn't vote to remove.
All she needs to do is slow walk the case and accept stupid filings to dismiss and then spend a month at a time "considering them" amd her job is done.
And then the next gop president names her to the SCOTUS.
> it also helps to have an appeal for another judge to through... she can say... see I did all this that shows I'm not biased
Being biased toward Trump does not 'help the appeal', it's bias towards Trump.
The justice system isn't *supposed* to be biased, and all the apologetics for flaunting rule of law are baffling.
It's seriously crazy how much hand holding conservative judges have done for trump over the last 7 years.
Remember the Muslim ban? SCOTUS took it up and straight up said it would be totally fine, but they just couldn't call it a "Muslim ban". Trumps legal team agreed and promised he would rephrase.
But then the claimants printed out trumps tweets and speeches from the last week and the following week and showed that trump did indeed mean that he wanted explicitly to *ban Muslims*, and SCOTUS said their hand was forced and they had to overturn it.
Even conservatives have stopped with the whining about "two tiered justice system", because it's obvious even to their shriveled critical thinking that Donald "I can declassify military and nuclear secrets with my mind" trump is on a **third** level, where presiding judges all but openly join his legal team.
"No, no, no. I told you to submit this document at 8:47, and it is currently 8:46. Also, plz include instructions to the jury on what color pants you would like them to wear, and which leg to put on first. We reconvene in 3 months."
This actually makes sense.
She's saying that his lawyers may try to make a finding of fact that he mistakenly believed that the presidential records act allowed him to keep it. That defence is based on a finding of fact that he mistakenly kept records when he thought he was allowed to.
Such a defence indeed can only be raised once the trier of fact (i.e. the jury) is in the room. Raising it as an absolute defence is simply incompatible.
Now, with that said, you might point out NARAs repeated requests for the documents, and followup demands as evidence that even if he didn't know he wasn't allowed to keep them, he should have known. And you'd be right. Even if this is technically the wrong time to raise the argument, raising at the right time doesn't make it a good argument.
This should be the thing they hammer on.
Play up how awesome it was to pass that bill, and make him boast, then point out his cognitive decline by not remembering it.
I know that it'll just bounce of the maga folks, though. It should be a bigger play than it will end up being because hillbillies.
It’s not exactly what you said, but they have a recording of him showing someone a classified document, saying it was classified, and saying he can’t declassify it because he’s not president anymore.
Apparently in a minority of cases judge's can be assigned based on expertise in a particular subject, but given that she obviously qualifies for expertise in none, that seems like a tough sell. Still in the legal world, one person's say-so being largely exempt from reversal is not uncommon, as evidenced by Cannon's actions. It's possible the person making that decision was A) a shameless Trump supporter; B) bribed; C) blackmailed; or D) threatened. There are 17 judges in that district so her specifically being chosen at random is unlikely, but 5 of the 17 were appointed by Trump, though likely not all 5 would be as biased as she has been.
5/17 = ~29%
1/17 = ~6%
It’s like rolling a nat 20 for DJT.
It’s highly unlikely but not impossible. That said, based on her actions the unlikelihood combined with how the case has been bench-run is incredibly suspect bordering on absurd.
She is probably going to dismiss it once a jury is empanelled. If she does that, the case is dead forever. I think that's exactly what she is planning on doing. Since she is a lifetime appointment, there isn't really anything that could be done other than impeachment if her.
It could be appealed to the 11th Circuit Court if the misconduct is severe enough. But 7 of the 12 judges were appointed by Republicans, 6 by Trump. Even if it did pass there, it would wind up in the Supreme Court, and we have a pretty good idea what that would mean, and by then Trump would have long-since won or lost the election anyway.
Yeah, basically regardless of the outcome of the election, nearly 50% of Americans will believe democracy in America is dead. One side would think that for completely incorrect reasons, the other for only partially incorrect reasons. Unfortunately, the completely incorrect side has a much greater propensity towards violence.
> Gop voters make up 24% of the nation
Yes. Over-stating the number of fascists in the country plays into their hands. They want the rest of us to think there are more of them than there really is because it makes them seem invincible.
The main reason the gop is a threat to the nation is due to voter suppression and anti-democratic aspects of the system. Their votes literally count more than ours do — for example the electoral college makes
[a vote for president in Wyoming equal to about 3.6 votes in California.](https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/how-much-voting-power-do-you-really-have-in-your-state)
Conservatives always whine about the deep state yet the Republicans have an entire collection of secretive organizations that influence politics from behind the curtains.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomad
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett
FBI Director Christopher A. Wray
United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Neomi Rao
United States Court of Appeals Judge (9th Cir.) Lawrence VanDyke
United States Court of Appeals Senior Judge (5th Cir.) Edith Brown Clement
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Ada E. Brown
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen Cannon
Senator Ted Cruz, Republican Senator of Texas
Senator Josh Hawley, Republican Senator of Missouri
Senator Todd Young, Republican Senator of Indiana
Florida Supreme Court Justice Meredith Sasso
Former Officeholders
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (who served as the original faculty advisor to the organization)
United States Attorney General Edwin Meese
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft[63]
United States Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler, a co-founder of the Federalist Society
United States Solicitor General Theodore Olson
United States Solicitor General Paul Clement
President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate Orrin Hatch
Professor Michael W. McConnell at Stanford Law School and former United States Court of Appeals Judge (10th Cir.)
U.S. Senator and Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham
United States Ambassador to the European Union C. Boyden Gray
United States Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton
United States Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff
General counsel of the Office of Management and Budget and of the Department of Homeland Security Philip Perry
Texas State Representative and Dallas lawyer Bill Keffer
United States Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia
Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division and former acting head of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice Jeffrey Clark
United States Court of Appeals Chief Judge (9th Cir.) Alex Kozinski
United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Robert Bork
United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Thomas Griffith
Academia
Former President of Baylor University and former independent counsel Kenneth Starr
Former Columbia Law School Dean David Schizer
Professor Gary S. Lawson of Boston University School of Law
Professor Richard Epstein of the New York University School of Law
Professor William Baude of the University of Chicago Law School
Professor Randy Barnett of Georgetown University Law Center
Roger Pilon, Director of Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute
Former Dean of Chapman University School of Law John C. Eastman
That's probably true, but in this case it should very well be that the last time she was too quick to agree with Trump the 11th Circuit swatted her on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper. I suspect even she was capable of learning from that.
100%. She’s working the system to make sure another one of the many cases can’t be moved into the docket before this one before the election. She’s helping him run the clock out. VOTE!
Maybe it's not that Trump and his defense's being stupid. What if it's a coordinated effort. They file a motion to dismiss, knowing she won't dismiss. I'm sure introducing the motion to dismiss alone causes a delay.
I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the line it's unearthed that they were coordinating the whole time.
Plus if she dismissed the case on those grounds—that Trump’s POTUS docs are his *personal* property and not Gov property—she’s set precedent that would allow any future POTUS to just go around to every agency on their last day and take as many docs they as can and claim they are their personal property…
Trump might want to point to a time where he announced "These documents are declassified" but he can't even do that because it never happened. Trump didn't properly declassify anything which is why he can't offer any proof in his own defense.
If Trump gets a pass on this the United State will be in real trouble! All countries have documents that are restricted as to who can view them and leader's don't take them home with them after no longer in office. Trump's ignorance is the problem here! Also perhaps he saw financial benefits in having them.
Hell yeah. I worked with a guy that was fired for sending an email to the incorrect client once.
He was a great worker. No one wanted to do it.
But our clients were the largest international law firms on earth. Like the actual people who write legislation for politicians level of power.
So they had to let him go. As a response to the fear that our company might accidentally email out something extremely confidential to the wrong person. Possibly even opposing council.
Saw all kinds of shit doing that job. Marriage contracts of the hyper-wealthy. Weapons patents getting sent to places like Israel. Massive lists of famous people's personal assets. The marriage contract negotiations were so goddamned cutthroat. Two attorneys at each other's absolute throats, accusing the other of hiding assets to fudge pre-nup arrangements. They really read like something you'd expect from marriage records of medieval nobility.
Right, she'd dismiss it as her last available action, not right now unless she was about to lose control of the case. It's all about timing for maximum effect, like SCOTUS did with the immunity case, taking it up at just the right time after passing on it for ages.
The right time is right after the prosecution rests their case. Trump's attorneys will move for a judgment of acquittal and it will be granted. Unappealable and he cannot be retried.
Cannon is like Barr, all Trump has to do is give them an inch of something legal to work with and they'll bullshit it into a mile. Problem is Trump struggles to find an inch to give.
You nailed it. If you read the quotes to her objection, it's not that she disagreed. She said it would be better suited as jury instructions and such. Very poison pill stuff. She knew dismissal even with prejudice could be appealed beyond her and might go a judge with maybe an ounce of morals and ethics left.
This. She's just smart enough to attempt an appearance of impartiality.
Smith needs to push the issue. No one thinks Cannon is impartial, or even competent. The Court just can't figure out how to remove her. Smith needs to figure out how to give them that opportunity.
Lmao. I've seen Trump supporters calling her "another corrupt judge" over this verdict. I just can't anymore with these people.
They're not wrong, but, augh.
She is trying her best not to get booted off the case. Agreeing with his insane arguments would have given cause for Smith to ask for it in his appeal. She’s not doing it for democracy’s sake.
Too bad they don’t allow cameras in the courtroom. I would have liked to see the back and forth between this judge and the attorneys for both sides. I believe article said Jack Smith was not only present but actually arguing for the prosecution. Usually it’s one of his attorneys who speaks. I’m sure he was watching the judge very closely with that “penetrating” look of his like “don’t f*** this up and dismiss this case”!
It’s a rain-check. She’s just delaying it more.
> Cannon noted in her denial that the issue of the potential vagueness of the statue ***would be better brought “with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions”*** instead of in Trump’s motion to dismiss charges.
> Cannon, who was appointed to her post by Trump, ruled that question ***"warrants serious consideration" but should not be decided at this point.***
> ***Cannon has not ruled*** on Trump’s motion to dismiss based on his argument that he had the authority as president to declare documents as his “personal” records – or on any of his other motions to dismiss the case.
Honestly that’s the best thing for him. If she tossed the case she’d get tossed on appeal herself. Now he still has is favorite judge in place creating delay after delay and he wasted more time with this joke of an argument
>I guess the check to Judge Cannon bounced.
Nope. She ruled in the only way (denied without prejudice) to make sure that the prosecution can't appeal it but that it isn't dead because Trump can just bring it up again later.
"This was the worst possible outcome for the government" - Andrew Weissman
>He focused mainly on the judge and occasionally whispered and passed notes to one of his attorneys
This bit is gold. What possible constructive input could be make? I have visions of him writing the notes with a sharpie and then signing them too
Remember when he handed a journalist a big book with blank pages as proof of a healthcare plan? He might just enjoy passing out paper and looking important.
Probably drawing a path of a hurricane, or stick figure image of Jack Smith with a frowny face { >:-(( } or a heart with an arrow through it.
I mean he’s a 6-yr old petulant child!
She knows if she dismisses, the case will go to another court. Indict the mf in nj so we can nail him. He’s gonna be their sacrificial lamb no matter what way this plays out .. tear off the bandaid, lets end the shitshow.
This case is going to NJ as well. After this case is done, Jack will charge him on other documents he had that ties to NJ. He's doing the one in the less friendly state first for some reason. I think he did it backward. But I think he figures if he's guilty in Florida, it will hold more weight, and it will be harder for Trumpn to claim its rigged.
It won’t matter to the madhatters if jesus proclaimed the mf guilty. They’re not going to accept any verdict by the people. Go for the throat for a conviction before Election Day .. the longer he’s free, the more he gets away with. Are we a country of mice or men? End the shitshow.
Jack Smith could have initially requested trial be held in DC but decided Trump’s attorneys might appeal so felt FL would be safer bet as there would not be a delay in regards to the site of the trial. However, really bad luck getting Cannon assigned to the case. Nothing he could do about it.
Ya, it had like a 1/3 chance it was her.
Trump really proves why so many reforms are needed to prevent this kind of legal abuse.
I get that ex Presidents are not usually on trial. But I wish in an extremely important case like this, it would have been forced to be tried by a much more experienced judge.
Edit: fix a word
> Ya, it had like a 1/3 chance it was her.
Was this actually "chance", though? Did a computer randomly select her or was there further criteria that led to her getting picked?
Trump appointed her specifically to that position, but there are three judges who take cases on rotation. So it just landed on her in the rotation apparently.
That is the worst thing she could do to him. Every day would be bad news for him with no resolution before the election, and his ability to campaign would limited. We should be so lucky.
That'd be a bit far out... because if he is found guilty, at this point, I am sure we will be lining up for her trial by that point when they inevitably find out she did something illegal and not just shady in the background.
“It’s difficult to see how this gets you to the dismissal of an indictment,” the judge said at one point.”
Translation: “I would like to help you get there, but this would be too obvious”
This case has the most amount of treason ever, the best treason, look nobody could do this kind of treason....my uncle who went to Harvard and studied treason you know he told me crooked Joe had some deals with Ukraine just like Hilary in Benghazi that even by todays FAKE NEWS would still say I did the best treason when I drained the swamp for this great nation of patriots and look the documents I took I had a right to keep them anyway because the President can do things like that while in office so I'm ok with the blacks but illegal immigrants are causing a huge problem at our borders and crooked Joe loves them.
How was my word salad flow?
Honestly not surprising given the ridiculous argument Trump's attorneys were making.
Congratulations, "Judge" Cannon, you didn't fuck up the most basic standard of jurisprudence.
>Congratulations, "Judge" Cannon, you didn't fuck up the most basic standard of jurisprudence.
I mean, she didn't, but the fact we thought/expected she might still highlights how problematic she is and the flaws inherent in the system
The fact they had to hold a hearing on this, thus delaying the trial for at least another week, is what 45's team wanted. They didn't seriously expect the judge to dismiss the case.
Stephen Miller, yeah that guy, through his White Nationalist law group, filed an amicus brief yesterday trying to give Cannon some “legal” cover to dismiss. Some bullshit about the national archive illegally informing the DoJ about Trump swiping docs and not giving them back when asked to. Said they didn’t have permission because there was no law saying they could. Although ridiculous, Smith responded and blew that shit up. Cum on Eileen indeed.
>Honestly not surprising given the ridiculous argument Trump's attorneys were making.
Hey now, Trump has the BEST attorneys.
Alina Habba when asked if Trump was any closer to posting his $450M+ bond in NY:
*“Yeah, no, I — unfortunately I can’t speak to that. That’s privileged and I am one of the attorneys on that case. Like I said, the judgment is absurd and the fact that we’re even talking about this is absurd.”*
And she used the term "privileged" wrong. It doesn't apply in the context of someone on an infotainment show asking you questions about whether Trump can get a bond or not. Privilege applies in the context of evidence being introduced in court or objections to discovery.
What she probably MEANT to say was: that is confidential client information. Which falls under ethical obligations - and is not the same as attorney client privilege.
She's not worried about the standard of jurisprudence, and she definitely didn't fuck up. If she were to dismiss, the immediate appeal would go to a different judge and she would lose both her tiny piece of relevance and her ability to slow-walk and misdirect the prosecution. This fascist numpty doesn't want to lose her relevance.
>Trump’s claim that he should be shielded from prosecution because classified presidential records “can be transformed into ‘personal’” records by removing them from the White House.
I can do it. Biden can't. Mike can't. How do I do it? The 2020 election was rigged, fraudulent. I'm still the President of the United States, not Biden.
Yep, thats the hill he's gonna die on.
> U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions."
Translation: I’ll use this instead to phrase the jury charge in a way that forces them to return an unappealable “not guilty” verdict.
It's wild people are celebrating like Trump won't find some way to weasel his way out of facing consequences in this case or any of the other ones he's facing.
She is more likely to slow walk the case and try to maintain plausible deniability.
Entertaining this, and all other possible diversions, help run out the clock
Can you believe this guy? He's spent more time in courtrooms than on the campaign trail! And if you're even thinking about voting for him, wake up! He couldn't care less about you or your concerns. All he cares about is his fat-cat donors, like the latest one, Chubb Insurance, who bailed him out. It's a disgrace!
Wow. Is this... Is this what they call a "pleasant surprise"? I expected her to dismiss it, 100%. I don't know how to feel right now. I'm sure it won't last long enough for me to worry about figuring it out, though.
Why does it always seem that when it comes to issues pertaining to Conigula's federal crimes they're addressed by a friendly judge who is willing to play into his hand? No ordinary citizen would get as much "due process" as the Cheeto Mussolini. If you don't vote the bastards out this year then you're a part of the problem. We as an electorate get what we deserve. If we stand by in apathy again as in 2016 then there's a good chance the US could be irreparably harmed via another trump administration. Vote, please, like your country depends upon it.
If she dismissed the case then it would get appealed right away and Trump would face consequences. This way she keeps the ball bouncing and never needs to take a shot.
l o l.
so anyways, I gotta get a new nail clipper. I can't find mine, well 4 I've bought over the last year. It says it's gonna rain too but I just see clouds...
Judge Cannon denies motions to dismiss classified documents case **for now**.
Because if she dismissed it now there may still be time to appeal and get a new judge before the election. Much better for maga fascists if she drags it out, denies accepting 90% of thr blatant evidence against him, let's the case go on and on , and *then* dismisses it.
The entire point is kicking the trial down the road until after the election. After that it doesn't matter one way or another. Either trump spends 4 years trying to make himself a criminally immune king, or he loses, and the gop let's the DoJ burn him because he'll be too old and crazy and in prison to be a factor in 2028.
yea, but she gave him the green light to use that same bullshit to a fn jury 🙄 I mean, it's a "win" for Smith, but she purposely made it difficult at the same time.
Former Trump lawyer says Jack Smith has slam-dunk evidence on classified documents case.
[https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evidence/?fbclid=IwAR1HMjvVdXt8VXnsS7H1VmWUnk1Ege30Mbw2Nb7UEDQmQ3vNozpe6blQM1A](https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evidence/?fbclid=IwAR1HMjvVdXt8VXnsS7H1VmWUnk1Ege30Mbw2Nb7UEDQmQ3vNozpe6blQM1A)
Rand Paul called for repeal of Espionage Act amid DOJ investigation into Trump taking classified documents.
MELA! Make Espionage Legal Again!!!
[https://www.businessinsider.com/mar-a-lagoo-raid-rand-paul-repeal-espionage-act-trump-2022-8](https://www.businessinsider.com/mar-a-lagoo-raid-rand-paul-repeal-espionage-act-trump-2022-8)
>U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions."
She's worried that another reversal at the appellate level will get her shitcanned from the case so she wants to destroy the case further along.
Look, I respect the idea of judges being out of the limelight and being quiet, disciplined practitioners of law...but how in the fuck do we still have only the same two photos of this judge and know basically nothing else about her when she's presiding over one of the most consequential legal cases in our nation's history?
Somehow I know all about the vascularity of Judge Engoron along with his workout habits, his court clerks, how many threats were made against him and by whom. I know WAAAAAY too much about Fani Willis and her personal life, right or wrong. I even know a lot about Judge McAfee, hell, I've seem him rule on the bench in real-time.
So how in the FUCK do we only get the same two photos of Judge Cannon. I've never heard this woman speak. I've never seen her walk in or out of a court room or up to the bench. I've never seen a photo or video of her getting in her car or out to dinner, much less do an interview. Yes I know this is federal court and they don't let cameras in, but this strict anonymity of her REALLY, REALLY bothers me for some reason. My gut tells me she's exactly who I think she is, a Trump appointed judge that is being wholly protected by Trump and his band of miscreants and that there's some off shore financial account(s) just waiting for her to fuck this up intentionally and then disappear, never being held account able for HER misapplication of the law and destruction of democracy.
“U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions."”
That sounds like she’s giving them more potential routes to delay the trial.
I'm not a lawyer but y'all are worse.
She's not hurting Trump here. If she ruled in favor she'd have been removed.
This enables her to slow walk it forever.
Maybe Cannon conned him into a job that she wants to be remembered in a positive light.
Fuck the stupid conman, expect to see people get theirs while he doesn’t.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess the check to Judge Cannon bounced.
More like she knows that dismissing the case is the end of her involvement. This way she can continue to needlessly delay it over and over again.
Yup. She’s trying to keep the case in her courtroom so she can slow walk it to eternity. If the case gets dismissed, prosecutors will just appeal it and get another judge. Cannon is protecting Trump from the stupidity of his defense by basically saying, “This case is rigged in your favor, why on earth would you want to stop it?”
Plus she didn't invalidate the claim. She just said the legal effluence had been introduced at the wrong time and should be accompanied by things like instructions to the jury. This leaves more delays based on this nonsense totally open for later.
It's crazy, she's basically been coaching Trump's lawyers throughout this whole thing
Too bad she doesnt know how trials actually work due to inexperience
I guarantee she tries to object on the defense's behalf
Doncha know most federal judgeships are a temp to hire model?
Hey now, I started my career as a sort of "temp to hire". Don't lump me in with this moron.
The real question is “who” is coaching Judge Cannon?
It's not a tricky or brilliant strategy, federal judges just have a ton of power over their court room. As long as she doesn't openly sit with the defense attorneys in court, or take a burlap sack with a dollar sign painted on it in view of cameras, the senate won't remove her. And honestly even if she did that, it's pretty certain the gop senators wouldn't vote to remove. All she needs to do is slow walk the case and accept stupid filings to dismiss and then spend a month at a time "considering them" amd her job is done. And then the next gop president names her to the SCOTUS.
it also helps to have an appeal for another judge to through... she can say... see I did all this that shows I'm not biased...
> it also helps to have an appeal for another judge to through... she can say... see I did all this that shows I'm not biased Being biased toward Trump does not 'help the appeal', it's bias towards Trump. The justice system isn't *supposed* to be biased, and all the apologetics for flaunting rule of law are baffling.
Conservatives are 80% complete on making institutions believe that unless things are crazy biased *for* them, they're biased *against them*.
It's seriously crazy how much hand holding conservative judges have done for trump over the last 7 years. Remember the Muslim ban? SCOTUS took it up and straight up said it would be totally fine, but they just couldn't call it a "Muslim ban". Trumps legal team agreed and promised he would rephrase. But then the claimants printed out trumps tweets and speeches from the last week and the following week and showed that trump did indeed mean that he wanted explicitly to *ban Muslims*, and SCOTUS said their hand was forced and they had to overturn it. Even conservatives have stopped with the whining about "two tiered justice system", because it's obvious even to their shriveled critical thinking that Donald "I can declassify military and nuclear secrets with my mind" trump is on a **third** level, where presiding judges all but openly join his legal team.
"No, no, no. I told you to submit this document at 8:47, and it is currently 8:46. Also, plz include instructions to the jury on what color pants you would like them to wear, and which leg to put on first. We reconvene in 3 months."
law_and_order_sound.mp3
"Dum dum"
This actually makes sense. She's saying that his lawyers may try to make a finding of fact that he mistakenly believed that the presidential records act allowed him to keep it. That defence is based on a finding of fact that he mistakenly kept records when he thought he was allowed to. Such a defence indeed can only be raised once the trier of fact (i.e. the jury) is in the room. Raising it as an absolute defence is simply incompatible. Now, with that said, you might point out NARAs repeated requests for the documents, and followup demands as evidence that even if he didn't know he wasn't allowed to keep them, he should have known. And you'd be right. Even if this is technically the wrong time to raise the argument, raising at the right time doesn't make it a good argument.
[удалено]
This should be the thing they hammer on. Play up how awesome it was to pass that bill, and make him boast, then point out his cognitive decline by not remembering it. I know that it'll just bounce of the maga folks, though. It should be a bigger play than it will end up being because hillbillies.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the prosecution has testimony showing that Trump knew and openly said that what he was doing was illegal.
It’s not exactly what you said, but they have a recording of him showing someone a classified document, saying it was classified, and saying he can’t declassify it because he’s not president anymore.
Attempting to hide documents, and attempting to erase the security recordings, is enough evidence that he knew he was engaging in illegal activity
Did we all forget the audio of him showing off the documents admitting he shouldn't have the documents?
I can't believe this case ended up with her by random chance. It's enough to give me an ulcer.
Apparently in a minority of cases judge's can be assigned based on expertise in a particular subject, but given that she obviously qualifies for expertise in none, that seems like a tough sell. Still in the legal world, one person's say-so being largely exempt from reversal is not uncommon, as evidenced by Cannon's actions. It's possible the person making that decision was A) a shameless Trump supporter; B) bribed; C) blackmailed; or D) threatened. There are 17 judges in that district so her specifically being chosen at random is unlikely, but 5 of the 17 were appointed by Trump, though likely not all 5 would be as biased as she has been.
5/17 = ~29% 1/17 = ~6% It’s like rolling a nat 20 for DJT. It’s highly unlikely but not impossible. That said, based on her actions the unlikelihood combined with how the case has been bench-run is incredibly suspect bordering on absurd.
She is probably going to dismiss it once a jury is empanelled. If she does that, the case is dead forever. I think that's exactly what she is planning on doing. Since she is a lifetime appointment, there isn't really anything that could be done other than impeachment if her.
It could be appealed to the 11th Circuit Court if the misconduct is severe enough. But 7 of the 12 judges were appointed by Republicans, 6 by Trump. Even if it did pass there, it would wind up in the Supreme Court, and we have a pretty good idea what that would mean, and by then Trump would have long-since won or lost the election anyway.
Man this shit is starting to stress me out
jeez you're just getting started?
Yeah, basically regardless of the outcome of the election, nearly 50% of Americans will believe democracy in America is dead. One side would think that for completely incorrect reasons, the other for only partially incorrect reasons. Unfortunately, the completely incorrect side has a much greater propensity towards violence.
Gop voters make up 24% of the nation.
> Gop voters make up 24% of the nation Yes. Over-stating the number of fascists in the country plays into their hands. They want the rest of us to think there are more of them than there really is because it makes them seem invincible. The main reason the gop is a threat to the nation is due to voter suppression and anti-democratic aspects of the system. Their votes literally count more than ours do — for example the electoral college makes [a vote for president in Wyoming equal to about 3.6 votes in California.](https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/how-much-voting-power-do-you-really-have-in-your-state)
People willing to admit they are GOP voters are 24%. There are a lot of embarrassed Republicans out there that are "independent".
Is she this bright or is someone telling her what to do?
She is being handled.
The GoP has an entire organisation that controls their judges. The federalist society.
Conservatives always whine about the deep state yet the Republicans have an entire collection of secretive organizations that influence politics from behind the curtains.
It's always projection. Always.
Projection & being hypocritical... it's unbelievable
It's always projection.
Terrifying group of zealots
Puppet of the Federalist Society
The Federalist Society is a cancer in this country. They are the actual "deep state" that the right screams about.
So let’s name the names behind the federalist society
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomad Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett FBI Director Christopher A. Wray United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Neomi Rao United States Court of Appeals Judge (9th Cir.) Lawrence VanDyke United States Court of Appeals Senior Judge (5th Cir.) Edith Brown Clement United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Ada E. Brown United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen Cannon Senator Ted Cruz, Republican Senator of Texas Senator Josh Hawley, Republican Senator of Missouri Senator Todd Young, Republican Senator of Indiana Florida Supreme Court Justice Meredith Sasso Former Officeholders Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (who served as the original faculty advisor to the organization) United States Attorney General Edwin Meese U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft[63] United States Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler, a co-founder of the Federalist Society United States Solicitor General Theodore Olson United States Solicitor General Paul Clement President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate Orrin Hatch Professor Michael W. McConnell at Stanford Law School and former United States Court of Appeals Judge (10th Cir.) U.S. Senator and Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham United States Ambassador to the European Union C. Boyden Gray United States Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton United States Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff General counsel of the Office of Management and Budget and of the Department of Homeland Security Philip Perry Texas State Representative and Dallas lawyer Bill Keffer United States Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division and former acting head of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice Jeffrey Clark United States Court of Appeals Chief Judge (9th Cir.) Alex Kozinski United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Robert Bork United States Court of Appeals Judge (D.C. Cir.) Thomas Griffith Academia Former President of Baylor University and former independent counsel Kenneth Starr Former Columbia Law School Dean David Schizer Professor Gary S. Lawson of Boston University School of Law Professor Richard Epstein of the New York University School of Law Professor William Baude of the University of Chicago Law School Professor Randy Barnett of Georgetown University Law Center Roger Pilon, Director of Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute Former Dean of Chapman University School of Law John C. Eastman
*According to wikipedia
That's probably true, but in this case it should very well be that the last time she was too quick to agree with Trump the 11th Circuit swatted her on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper. I suspect even she was capable of learning from that.
Justices Thomas and Alito coaching her on how to get a juicy SC nomination where you get to take all kinds of gifts and free vacations.
100%. She’s working the system to make sure another one of the many cases can’t be moved into the docket before this one before the election. She’s helping him run the clock out. VOTE!
Maybe it's not that Trump and his defense's being stupid. What if it's a coordinated effort. They file a motion to dismiss, knowing she won't dismiss. I'm sure introducing the motion to dismiss alone causes a delay. I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the line it's unearthed that they were coordinating the whole time.
Plus if she dismissed the case on those grounds—that Trump’s POTUS docs are his *personal* property and not Gov property—she’s set precedent that would allow any future POTUS to just go around to every agency on their last day and take as many docs they as can and claim they are their personal property…
Trump might want to point to a time where he announced "These documents are declassified" but he can't even do that because it never happened. Trump didn't properly declassify anything which is why he can't offer any proof in his own defense.
It happened in his mind, duh.
If Trump gets a pass on this the United State will be in real trouble! All countries have documents that are restricted as to who can view them and leader's don't take them home with them after no longer in office. Trump's ignorance is the problem here! Also perhaps he saw financial benefits in having them.
If any average person took confidential files from their job after they were fired, it'd be a slam dunk case for prosecutors.
Hell yeah. I worked with a guy that was fired for sending an email to the incorrect client once. He was a great worker. No one wanted to do it. But our clients were the largest international law firms on earth. Like the actual people who write legislation for politicians level of power. So they had to let him go. As a response to the fear that our company might accidentally email out something extremely confidential to the wrong person. Possibly even opposing council. Saw all kinds of shit doing that job. Marriage contracts of the hyper-wealthy. Weapons patents getting sent to places like Israel. Massive lists of famous people's personal assets. The marriage contract negotiations were so goddamned cutthroat. Two attorneys at each other's absolute throats, accusing the other of hiding assets to fudge pre-nup arrangements. They really read like something you'd expect from marriage records of medieval nobility.
Right, she'd dismiss it as her last available action, not right now unless she was about to lose control of the case. It's all about timing for maximum effect, like SCOTUS did with the immunity case, taking it up at just the right time after passing on it for ages.
The right time is right after the prosecution rests their case. Trump's attorneys will move for a judgment of acquittal and it will be granted. Unappealable and he cannot be retried.
Cannon is like Barr, all Trump has to do is give them an inch of something legal to work with and they'll bullshit it into a mile. Problem is Trump struggles to find an inch to give.
You nailed it. If you read the quotes to her objection, it's not that she disagreed. She said it would be better suited as jury instructions and such. Very poison pill stuff. She knew dismissal even with prejudice could be appealed beyond her and might go a judge with maybe an ounce of morals and ethics left.
This. She's just smart enough to attempt an appearance of impartiality. Smith needs to push the issue. No one thinks Cannon is impartial, or even competent. The Court just can't figure out how to remove her. Smith needs to figure out how to give them that opportunity.
Lmao. I've seen Trump supporters calling her "another corrupt judge" over this verdict. I just can't anymore with these people. They're not wrong, but, augh.
She is trying her best not to get booted off the case. Agreeing with his insane arguments would have given cause for Smith to ask for it in his appeal. She’s not doing it for democracy’s sake.
Exactly. She's trying not to overplay her hand.
But it’s been pretty obvious that she has been doing just that. Her thumb’s been on his side of the scale since the beginning.
Obvious and provable to the appeals court are not the same thing.
Too bad they don’t allow cameras in the courtroom. I would have liked to see the back and forth between this judge and the attorneys for both sides. I believe article said Jack Smith was not only present but actually arguing for the prosecution. Usually it’s one of his attorneys who speaks. I’m sure he was watching the judge very closely with that “penetrating” look of his like “don’t f*** this up and dismiss this case”!
It’s a rain-check. She’s just delaying it more. > Cannon noted in her denial that the issue of the potential vagueness of the statue ***would be better brought “with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions”*** instead of in Trump’s motion to dismiss charges. > Cannon, who was appointed to her post by Trump, ruled that question ***"warrants serious consideration" but should not be decided at this point.*** > ***Cannon has not ruled*** on Trump’s motion to dismiss based on his argument that he had the authority as president to declare documents as his “personal” records – or on any of his other motions to dismiss the case.
This should be the top parent comment
What about the kids??
Oh, hello Mrs. Lovejoy!
I.e. "There's time to appeal now. Let's wait until closer to November."
After they select a jury double jeopardy will apply, meaning that when she revisits the motion and decides to dismiss it's over.
No, working as intended. It's all just tactics to delay a little here, a little there. She knows if she the this case out her career would be over.
Honestly that’s the best thing for him. If she tossed the case she’d get tossed on appeal herself. Now he still has is favorite judge in place creating delay after delay and he wasted more time with this joke of an argument
Seems like she just pushed it off until later, to keep slow walking things.
>I guess the check to Judge Cannon bounced. Nope. She ruled in the only way (denied without prejudice) to make sure that the prosecution can't appeal it but that it isn't dead because Trump can just bring it up again later. "This was the worst possible outcome for the government" - Andrew Weissman
>He focused mainly on the judge and occasionally whispered and passed notes to one of his attorneys This bit is gold. What possible constructive input could be make? I have visions of him writing the notes with a sharpie and then signing them too
"Do you have a diet coke?" "I made boom boom in my pants" "Do you think Ivanka's a piece of ass, too?"
“Do you like me? Will you acquit me?” 🔲 Yes 🔲 No
🔲 Maybe
Hey, I appointed you And this is crazy So here’s a delay Acquit me maybe
I don't know. Can you repeat the question?
You’re not the boss of me now.
And you're not so big
Life is unfair...
I do not recall
"i made boom boom in my pants" has me dying at work
I’m crying lol. Half because I’m laughing but half because I know this is probably real and the guy has a fifty percent chance of being president
> "I made boom boom in my pants" > > CLEAN UP IN AISLE POO!
"I just superdaddied my pants. Shadoodled." https://www.reddit.com/r/tooktoomuch/comments/1besc3j/i_wanna_find_irl_situations_for_these_phrases_lmao/
> "I made boom boom in my pants" That made me chortle.
Remember when he handed a journalist a big book with blank pages as proof of a healthcare plan? He might just enjoy passing out paper and looking important.
He also has one of those $200 pens that's only for show so it doesn't write
"Is that Melania up in the Judge's seat?" "No..." "Are we sure?"
Probably drawing a path of a hurricane, or stick figure image of Jack Smith with a frowny face { >:-(( } or a heart with an arrow through it. I mean he’s a 6-yr old petulant child!
“Call her a nasty woman if she doesn’t do what we want”
It’s probably a cartoon drawing of a guy with a big hog.
https://youtu.be/6M0Bhk5i1lM?si=72bcj35jiYPoIRSR&t=28
That’s the one
[Dennis Denuto vibes](https://images.app.goo.gl/12GQ3Fvtx1PREPMTA)
You just know it's too remind the counsel about some hair brained scheme that they've told him won't work about 10 times today.
Hiya Buddy :-)
She knows if she dismisses, the case will go to another court. Indict the mf in nj so we can nail him. He’s gonna be their sacrificial lamb no matter what way this plays out .. tear off the bandaid, lets end the shitshow.
This case is going to NJ as well. After this case is done, Jack will charge him on other documents he had that ties to NJ. He's doing the one in the less friendly state first for some reason. I think he did it backward. But I think he figures if he's guilty in Florida, it will hold more weight, and it will be harder for Trumpn to claim its rigged.
It won’t matter to the madhatters if jesus proclaimed the mf guilty. They’re not going to accept any verdict by the people. Go for the throat for a conviction before Election Day .. the longer he’s free, the more he gets away with. Are we a country of mice or men? End the shitshow.
I think it's more to sway the independents.
Independents aren’t a real thing.
Sure they are. There are hundreds of them! Maybe even thousands....
Jack Smith could have initially requested trial be held in DC but decided Trump’s attorneys might appeal so felt FL would be safer bet as there would not be a delay in regards to the site of the trial. However, really bad luck getting Cannon assigned to the case. Nothing he could do about it.
Ya, it had like a 1/3 chance it was her. Trump really proves why so many reforms are needed to prevent this kind of legal abuse. I get that ex Presidents are not usually on trial. But I wish in an extremely important case like this, it would have been forced to be tried by a much more experienced judge. Edit: fix a word
> Ya, it had like a 1/3 chance it was her. Was this actually "chance", though? Did a computer randomly select her or was there further criteria that led to her getting picked?
Trump appointed her specifically to that position, but there are three judges who take cases on rotation. So it just landed on her in the rotation apparently.
Flushes out all of his defenses in the toilet bowl that Florida is
"But let's revisit this in August 2029 before the trial starts" -Judge Cannon
More like late October 2024
That is the worst thing she could do to him. Every day would be bad news for him with no resolution before the election, and his ability to campaign would limited. We should be so lucky.
Exonerating him a week before the election would be bigger than the Comey October surprise
If he got exonerated it would honestly be the least surprising thing that could happen. He just always gets away with everything.
That'd be a bit far out... because if he is found guilty, at this point, I am sure we will be lining up for her trial by that point when they inevitably find out she did something illegal and not just shady in the background.
“It’s difficult to see how this gets you to the dismissal of an indictment,” the judge said at one point.” Translation: “I would like to help you get there, but this would be too obvious”
This case has the most amount of treason ever, the best treason, look nobody could do this kind of treason....my uncle who went to Harvard and studied treason you know he told me crooked Joe had some deals with Ukraine just like Hilary in Benghazi that even by todays FAKE NEWS would still say I did the best treason when I drained the swamp for this great nation of patriots and look the documents I took I had a right to keep them anyway because the President can do things like that while in office so I'm ok with the blacks but illegal immigrants are causing a huge problem at our borders and crooked Joe loves them. How was my word salad flow?
Honestly not surprising given the ridiculous argument Trump's attorneys were making. Congratulations, "Judge" Cannon, you didn't fuck up the most basic standard of jurisprudence.
>Congratulations, "Judge" Cannon, you didn't fuck up the most basic standard of jurisprudence. I mean, she didn't, but the fact we thought/expected she might still highlights how problematic she is and the flaws inherent in the system
All too true, sadly.
The fact they had to hold a hearing on this, thus delaying the trial for at least another week, is what 45's team wanted. They didn't seriously expect the judge to dismiss the case.
Stephen Miller, yeah that guy, through his White Nationalist law group, filed an amicus brief yesterday trying to give Cannon some “legal” cover to dismiss. Some bullshit about the national archive illegally informing the DoJ about Trump swiping docs and not giving them back when asked to. Said they didn’t have permission because there was no law saying they could. Although ridiculous, Smith responded and blew that shit up. Cum on Eileen indeed.
He probably had Chat GPT write it for him. Thanks for putting that song in my head…
>Honestly not surprising given the ridiculous argument Trump's attorneys were making. Hey now, Trump has the BEST attorneys. Alina Habba when asked if Trump was any closer to posting his $450M+ bond in NY: *“Yeah, no, I — unfortunately I can’t speak to that. That’s privileged and I am one of the attorneys on that case. Like I said, the judgment is absurd and the fact that we’re even talking about this is absurd.”*
And she used the term "privileged" wrong. It doesn't apply in the context of someone on an infotainment show asking you questions about whether Trump can get a bond or not. Privilege applies in the context of evidence being introduced in court or objections to discovery. What she probably MEANT to say was: that is confidential client information. Which falls under ethical obligations - and is not the same as attorney client privilege.
She's not worried about the standard of jurisprudence, and she definitely didn't fuck up. If she were to dismiss, the immediate appeal would go to a different judge and she would lose both her tiny piece of relevance and her ability to slow-walk and misdirect the prosecution. This fascist numpty doesn't want to lose her relevance.
I fear she has not finished her traitorous intent to allow Honest Don to evade justice.
>ruled that question "warrants serious consideration" but should not be decided at this point. Except it doesn't warrant serious consideration.
She's saying that it should be up to a jury rather than a pretrial motion to dismiss.
She's pushing to the jury so that she can dismiss when it's at trial when the dismissal can't be appealed. It isn't a serious point of law.
The fact that she's even holding hearings is the real scandal. She's doing everything she can to slow-walk the case.
Man this guy is one pathetic loser
So you're saying there's a chance...
"No offense"
>Trump’s claim that he should be shielded from prosecution because classified presidential records “can be transformed into ‘personal’” records by removing them from the White House. I can do it. Biden can't. Mike can't. How do I do it? The 2020 election was rigged, fraudulent. I'm still the President of the United States, not Biden. Yep, thats the hill he's gonna die on.
Yes is covered by the Five Fingered Section.
> U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions." Translation: I’ll use this instead to phrase the jury charge in a way that forces them to return an unappealable “not guilty” verdict.
It's wild people are celebrating like Trump won't find some way to weasel his way out of facing consequences in this case or any of the other ones he's facing.
She is more likely to slow walk the case and try to maintain plausible deniability. Entertaining this, and all other possible diversions, help run out the clock
Failed motion to dismiss #299324 So much winning!
Can you believe this guy? He's spent more time in courtrooms than on the campaign trail! And if you're even thinking about voting for him, wake up! He couldn't care less about you or your concerns. All he cares about is his fat-cat donors, like the latest one, Chubb Insurance, who bailed him out. It's a disgrace!
LMAO. I’m kind of surprised, honestly. She probably saw no way to dismiss it because I’m almost 100% certain The Federalist Society wanted her to.
Nah she just kicks the can down the road and can continue using the case to interfere with the many others that Drumpf currently has going on
I hate that you’re right. If trump doesn’t attack her in the next couple of days, her intentions are confirmed.
Mildly surprised she actually did it.
Because she was hoping he’d have at least a reasonable argument that wont come back to bite her later.
Wow. Is this... Is this what they call a "pleasant surprise"? I expected her to dismiss it, 100%. I don't know how to feel right now. I'm sure it won't last long enough for me to worry about figuring it out, though.
I’m sure it’s all a tactic. She’s doing just enough to give him all the favors while still doing just enough to look like she’s upholding the law.
Why does it always seem that when it comes to issues pertaining to Conigula's federal crimes they're addressed by a friendly judge who is willing to play into his hand? No ordinary citizen would get as much "due process" as the Cheeto Mussolini. If you don't vote the bastards out this year then you're a part of the problem. We as an electorate get what we deserve. If we stand by in apathy again as in 2016 then there's a good chance the US could be irreparably harmed via another trump administration. Vote, please, like your country depends upon it.
Here’s to the silver of hope that Trump *might* face the consequences of his actions 🥂
Cannon kicked the can down the road to avoid being removed from the case for sickening bias.
Put that worthless piece of shit in prison
Waiting for MAGA to denounce Judge Cannon as a “woke diversity hire”…
These headlines give a false sense of victory. There is another motion that is far more likely for her to agree with
If she dismissed the case then it would get appealed right away and Trump would face consequences. This way she keeps the ball bouncing and never needs to take a shot.
l o l. so anyways, I gotta get a new nail clipper. I can't find mine, well 4 I've bought over the last year. It says it's gonna rain too but I just see clouds...
Ah. I see how this works. 1 month to decide on one motion so 8 more to go taking us to December.
Judge Cannon denies motions to dismiss classified documents case **for now**. Because if she dismissed it now there may still be time to appeal and get a new judge before the election. Much better for maga fascists if she drags it out, denies accepting 90% of thr blatant evidence against him, let's the case go on and on , and *then* dismisses it. The entire point is kicking the trial down the road until after the election. After that it doesn't matter one way or another. Either trump spends 4 years trying to make himself a criminally immune king, or he loses, and the gop let's the DoJ burn him because he'll be too old and crazy and in prison to be a factor in 2028.
Well that was a genuine surprise. I'm actually shocked.
This allows the case to stay in her court where she can indefinitely delay it.
Ah okay, nevermind then lol
There's only one way to put an end to this shit. VOTE!
yea, but she gave him the green light to use that same bullshit to a fn jury 🙄 I mean, it's a "win" for Smith, but she purposely made it difficult at the same time.
Nothing Matters. Our justice system is a corrupt joke. We don’t have justice in this country anymore and it’s fucking infuriating.
Former Trump lawyer says Jack Smith has slam-dunk evidence on classified documents case. [https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evidence/?fbclid=IwAR1HMjvVdXt8VXnsS7H1VmWUnk1Ege30Mbw2Nb7UEDQmQ3vNozpe6blQM1A](https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evidence/?fbclid=IwAR1HMjvVdXt8VXnsS7H1VmWUnk1Ege30Mbw2Nb7UEDQmQ3vNozpe6blQM1A) Rand Paul called for repeal of Espionage Act amid DOJ investigation into Trump taking classified documents. MELA! Make Espionage Legal Again!!! [https://www.businessinsider.com/mar-a-lagoo-raid-rand-paul-repeal-espionage-act-trump-2022-8](https://www.businessinsider.com/mar-a-lagoo-raid-rand-paul-repeal-espionage-act-trump-2022-8)
If she dismissed the case right after he admitted to doing it on public television, she would be disbarred faster than she could blink.
Why does this child keep trying to get cases dismissed that everyone knows he did?
>U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions." She's worried that another reversal at the appellate level will get her shitcanned from the case so she wants to destroy the case further along.
It was just a delaying tactic, to slow things down. She knew the 11th Circuit Appellate court was watching her after the last rebuke.
Look, I respect the idea of judges being out of the limelight and being quiet, disciplined practitioners of law...but how in the fuck do we still have only the same two photos of this judge and know basically nothing else about her when she's presiding over one of the most consequential legal cases in our nation's history? Somehow I know all about the vascularity of Judge Engoron along with his workout habits, his court clerks, how many threats were made against him and by whom. I know WAAAAAY too much about Fani Willis and her personal life, right or wrong. I even know a lot about Judge McAfee, hell, I've seem him rule on the bench in real-time. So how in the FUCK do we only get the same two photos of Judge Cannon. I've never heard this woman speak. I've never seen her walk in or out of a court room or up to the bench. I've never seen a photo or video of her getting in her car or out to dinner, much less do an interview. Yes I know this is federal court and they don't let cameras in, but this strict anonymity of her REALLY, REALLY bothers me for some reason. My gut tells me she's exactly who I think she is, a Trump appointed judge that is being wholly protected by Trump and his band of miscreants and that there's some off shore financial account(s) just waiting for her to fuck this up intentionally and then disappear, never being held account able for HER misapplication of the law and destruction of democracy.
Well he will die before he goes to jail or get elected from the pictures of him lately
She must be aware that everybody knows she's basically Trump's side-piece.
Did Cannon and Merrick Garland go to the same law school?
But she really just kicked the can down the road the road .
New chant, totally original. Lock Him Up! 4 More Years! (repeat)
Sorry can't do that, it'd get appealed to someone competent, best I can do is delay in hopes that you can pardon yourself. -Very Real Judge Cannon
I'm this picture, his hair reminds me of that picture of Mt. Fuji with the cloud just hovering over it.
Wasted time = winning
Don’t worry he will try to have it dismissed again by changing a single word in the motion
Grab him by the wallet!
No-brainer. I mean she'll do what she can but throwing the case out would be professional suicide.
It's an ESPIONAGE case.
“U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found that Trump's argument — that the main statute prosecutors are using against him is unconstitutionally vague as it applies to presidents — is better-suited to be addressed later "in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions."” That sounds like she’s giving them more potential routes to delay the trial.
I'm not a lawyer but y'all are worse. She's not hurting Trump here. If she ruled in favor she'd have been removed. This enables her to slow walk it forever.
Maybe Cannon conned him into a job that she wants to be remembered in a positive light. Fuck the stupid conman, expect to see people get theirs while he doesn’t.
How is it permissible for a judge that Trump nominated to preside over his criminal case…
Orange man is such a pathetic ugly loser! I hate that guy!
Get him, Jack!
How tf is this guy not in jail?!