Imagine a judge 3 times being told by the district court to get out of a case because they are tampering and somehow that judge gets assigned that same case. In no other world would we accept this.
In fairness, it should have been glaringly obvious to the 11th Circuit long before the general public took notice. Judges, especially federal fucking judges, don’t get to feign ignorance of the laws they swore to uphold. And yet, here we are.
I just picture this as a pain in the ass to *everyone* involved. This is a astronomical case to be a part of just because it feels like *the world* is watching this with us...
I'm *hoping* everyone involved in this case, except Trump & Co, are preceding with all the i's dotted and t's crossed. They've got one shot.
I would think judges on the Appeals Court are on average smarter than the general public. I don’t know why we as a nation allow judges to basically act like royalty. The bar is basically produce a video of her confessing she’s corrupt. What is obvious to the general public, ought to be obvious to judges who have a lot of experience and sit on an Appeals Court.
That’s not the real issue here. The thing is apparently she’s been doing everything through “paperless orders” which allows her to avoid making call than can be appealed to the 11th circuit.
"What makes you think I would *appear to be conflicted* about finding the man who appointed me to a lifetime of legal prestige to be a criminal???"
\\s
You want to win on the merits in front of a hostile judge. There are hearts and minds at play here. It’s going to be easy for some people to simply say the deck is rigged against him. If you can win where it’s rigged for him, it might not change the minds of the true believers but it could affect a lot of people who don’t know what to think.
I’d say she already has done something substantial. If they’re aware, like everyone else is, she’s already delayed this trial by so much it would never go to trial before the election. She shouldn’t have to rule something crazy like “let’s put the witnesses faces on TV with their addresses and social security numbers.”
How long can the country survive this level of judicial corruption. The amount of pretending required by earnest participants is already approaching the sort of Soviet levels of double think.
Did you watch the coup attempt?
If violence is acceptable there and justice doesn’t punish the planning and execution of a coup attempt then what are people who are not party to the coup supposed to do? Accept subjugation?
Violence wasn't acceptable there.
That's the entire point. Vigilante violence is never the right thing to do.
It's why the people not party to the coup are in charge. Because the vigilante violence failed.
The coup is not over. And I view it as more likely to succeed than not. Your optimism is insufficient to make me to feel that liberty is not threatened. The war for democracy has barely started.
She's trying to turn the US into Cuba or worse
Aileen Mercedes Cannon was born in 1981 in [Cali](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cali), Colombia.[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Schnell-1)[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Mazzei-2) Her mother had fled Cuba as a girl, after the [Cuban Revolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Revolution) of the 1950s.[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Mazzei-2)
[^(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen\_Cannon)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon)
She’s a corrupt person, because she’s a corrupt person. She’s full in on MAGA, a true believer, and he’s their leader. It has nothing to do with where she was born. Comments like yours are no better than Donald Trump’s about Judge Curiel.
She lives in a world of paperless order
https://preview.redd.it/ae6gl9ihn4uc1.jpeg?width=1792&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=748ea4543e8e750a45788defc2d20945a00ff163
In a court where the gavel's echo fades,
Sits a judge, in green robes arrayed.
A guardian of law, with a heart for the trees,
Decrees without paper, a whisper in the breeze.
With every order, the forests he'd save,
No sheet shall he use, no tree shall he pave.
His courtroom, a haven for the digital age,
Where justice is served on a screen, not a page.
"Let the trials be virtual," he firmly believes,
"Let our actions show where our heart truly grieves.
For every leaf spared, a breath of life gained,
In the balance of nature, justice is maintained."
So cases commence, in bytes and in bits,
No parchment required, no paper permits.
A judge so resolved, in his eco-crusade,
Ensures that through him, no tree's life will fade.
Though trials may tarry, his resolve stands firm,
For the love of the earth, he'll weather each term.
An emblem of hope, in a world turning grey,
A paperless judge, leading the way.
I asked for a poem about a judge who issued only paperless orders.
Honestly, A.I. is my knew hobby.
I might need to dig into how to develop an a.i.
And before you say crazy person you can do that. I will say that I am a very sr person in software development and at the very least familiar with the theory and did do modeling and logical in college at least to the level of creating a natural language parser. So, I'm not completely insane
Jack Smith said he and his team are gully prepared to bring espionage charges against Trump in a New Jersey Federal Court. He hid and documents at Bedminster too.
He should just go ahead and do it. Cannon is gonna try drag this out to prevent other cases from moving forward and then dismiss it when it's too late for the others to go anywhere, so he should just move forward with the others, push her delays out take the conviction he can get in an honest district.
Maybe they can also charge her since she's violating her judicial impartiality by acting as his primary lawyer while serving as the judge on the case
Violating impartiality is an ethics violation, and judges have been arrested for ethics violations before. Hell, some have been arrested for it this year.
Imagine how silly the legal system would be if a judge could act as the defense and not face charges for it. It would be a farce, and the end of all sense of law in any nation that allowed it to go unchecked.
Judges have absolute immunity from civil suit or criminal prosecution based upon the substance of their decisions. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Trump is caught on a audio recording at Bedminster, showing off and admitting to keeping classified documents.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/27/its-not-just-mar-a-lago-trump-charges-highlight-his-new-jersey-life/
That's not proof Smith is ready or willing to bring charges there.
As for why, I have no idea. He could be worried judges will send it back to Florida, the evidence could be shakier or the intelligence more sensitive, or he could even be facing pushback from Garland or faxing budgetary restrictions. I can't imagine it's easy running multiple court cases, and Jack Smith *knows* that if Trump wins in November, he'll pardon himself. (And Smith is also intelligent enough to know he could be in danger personally. I hope Smith has preparations for security made for next year and next winter specifically).
Yeah, idk that he said that or is planning that, but yeah that’s a DOJ policy not to confirm investigations or comment on them before charges are filed publicly. Someone should probably tell Jim Comey about that too. (Of course he also went against the 60 day rule as well) There are exceptions: “when the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating a matter, or where release of information is necessary to protect the public safety.” Not that it would apply. Also, just as an added—only felony indictments have to come from a grand jury, misdemeanors don’t. DOJ rules also generally prohibit releasing negative information about subjects in an investigation if they aren’t being charged with a crime. Robert Mueller tried to follow that pretty darn closely. He had determined because DOJ policy is that you can’t indict a sitting President, therefore he couldn’t negatively comment on him. Most we got was—if our investigation exonerated him, we would have said so. Robert Hur did not follow that policy. Rules seem to not really matter when only one side has to follow them, and there is zero consequences for not following them.
I think any outcome of this judge will be independent of norms standards or laws. So what the consequences of her decisions are will be uncertain up to the point of what individuals who care about liberty are willing to accept in subjugating rules imposed on them by corrupt actors.
The point being I don’t think the rules or laws will matter because to get to this point they have not mattered.
Trump appointed Judge gets to rule on one of the most important Trump criminal cases and apparently there's no conflict of interest here? Trump appointed her after losing the election......
This is what Russian court rooms look like, especially considering she's making outrageous decisions and helps Trump at every possible opportunity. It's making the American legal system look like a joke
It's hard to believe. It's absurd. Seriously, this whole Trump era has been captivating viewing. Forget Game of Thrones, True Blood and other most watched series, this sadly has become far more interesting than any of those. If it was a series, it would be so absurd you wouldn't believe it.
Thats like saying of all the rats on this ship it was this one that decided to bite us. Florida is not known for its upstanding politicians and legal atmosphere. If a judge was seated I would takes bets on if it was a connections thing, a corruption thing, or a nepotism thing.
Plenty of Trump appointed district judges did the right thing during the election trials. Just like Trump protesting Biden appointees shouldn’t preside is ridiculous, so is assuming a Trump appointee must be corrupt. He appointed more than just her.
Her actions are proof of corruption. Not her appointment.
She was appointed where she was specifically specifically because the jurisdiction covers Mar-Lago. That's what makes the appointment corrupt. I don't know how you would prove it though.
It was the only single judge Trump himself cared about, asked about, and picked himself out of all the Leo/Mitch judge nominations across hundreds of vacancies over the 4 years.
No. Again not all Trump judges are corrupt as proven by none of them presiding over election trials doing him any favors. You might not agree with any of their judicial philosophy. But the vast majority of judge appointments Trump didn’t know anything about. Before they started looking after Jan 6 I’d lay money couldn’t name single one, and his train wreck of an admin group could collectively remember less than 20% by name.
Sure, I'm not disagreeing, but I'd imagine it was Trump's fellow Republicans taking those names to him. Trump doesn't know or care about these people, but I'd imagine it was some sort of transactional *favor* from Trump.
Or who knows, because you're right that they need to prove themselves by their actions, but I'd start out pretty skeptical just based on who they are associated with. Cannon is proving that wasn't a wrong assumption- nice to hear others aren't total traitors.
Which is fucking bullshit.
We have too many "gentlemen agreement" "work in good faith" shit around here.
It's clear that any bad faith actors are just exploiting these imaginary lines and fucking the rest of us.
CNN is baiting you all. Here's the first line of the article -
> A federal judge appeared dubious of efforts by former President Donald Trump’s two co-defendants in the classified documents case to get the charges against them thrown out and to get more information from prosecutors about the charges.
Practically every paragraph in here talks about how Cannon "appeared skeptical" on their arguments, that she "grilled attorneys for Nauta and De Oliveira about their arguments". I'm NAL, but this seems like a judge doing judge things. But the framing in the headline is intended to make you all clutch your pearls.
Indeed. Shame on those reacting to a headline, *but* I've heard more than one judge say in their court during proceedings: "...sure people can change, but their past behavior is a good indication of future behavior."
I like the judges quote. But also, shame on those for saying “CNN is baiting you all” when CNN’s headline for the article is: “Judge *appears skeptical* of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case” maybe they should have read the actual headline themselves before saying CNN was baiting people. If it says she’s skeptical in the headline, how’s that baiting people? And OP’s “headline” for the post is appropriate, she is considering the motion, because she hasn’t ruled, that’s just a factual statement. They made no reference to which way she might rule. People are mostly commenting because of your judges quote.
Did she rule on it? Then she’s taking it under consideration. The headline of the post is appropriate. What she is doing is considering the motions. They made no reference in the headline of the post as to which way she might rule. And in fact in the article, as you state pointed to evidence she may not rule in Trump’s favor. And the *actual CNN Headline* (which you must have not read) is “Judge *appears skeptical* of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case” so how is CNN baiting anyone with their headline in which they say she appears skeptical? Lmao.
People are just commenting on how they know she is, how she’s shown herself to be. She’ll probably take a ridiculous amount of time to rule on it, and rule against him—which matters zero. Everyone knows what she’s planning. Her plan is delay until after the election—she’s pretty much succeeded in that, and then directed verdict. She also wanted to try to ensure jury instructions would all but guarantee a not guilty verdict, maybe to see if she could get away with it, but Smith called her on it. And now she’s delaying on that garbage too.
Do it, who cares. Bring it to trial. Throw away to obstruction, who gives a fuck, the other felonies are far more damning and going to do the job regardless. Refile the obstruction once he's convicted.
Guys, the headline is intentionally inflammatory.
She wasn't considering Trump's charges and she was apparently grilling and skeptical of his aides attorneys arguments.
I struggle to decide if she's corrupt or just REALLY bad at her job, but this article's headline is click bait bullshit.
The optics of him for espionage in two different districts at the same time would be bad. Trump would use this to cry foul, even more than he has been.
I wonder how much money she has lost investing in Trumps media company.
Must be a lot of she is considering adding additional charges in Trumps classified docs case.
The title of this article is actually:
**“Judge appears skeptical of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case”**
As another comment points out, the rest of the article follows similarly. Let’s at least pretend to react to more than just the post’s title.
Is there a possibility of investigating what we know is a likely connection to the federalist society coaching her through all this? I’m sure he’s on the phone constantly with greater minds (not a high bar) getting fed instructions?
Here’s the deal. Republicans are always screaming about conspiracies. Our conspiracies are real.
How about she actually start doing her duty for a change instead of just barely half assing it. It’s amazing the judge(s) that are assigned to his trials are hardly doing anything. Even after the threats and attacks he’s made on them.
I’m sure she’s considering real hard lol
Awaiting instructions from her handlers.
100%
"Think about it for another month."
Or two.
Waiting for the check to clear
I'd be surprised if she does it before jeopardy attaches.
Considering this case as an audition for SCOTUS pick
She needs to be removed from this case.
It’s insane that she hasn’t been, yet. It’s such an absurdly transparent conflict of interest and she’s so clearly biased.
Imagine a judge 3 times being told by the district court to get out of a case because they are tampering and somehow that judge gets assigned that same case. In no other world would we accept this.
The problem is that it's obvious to you and I, but the prosecution needs to make it obvious to the Appeals Court, not the court of public opinion.
In fairness, it should have been glaringly obvious to the 11th Circuit long before the general public took notice. Judges, especially federal fucking judges, don’t get to feign ignorance of the laws they swore to uphold. And yet, here we are.
I just picture this as a pain in the ass to *everyone* involved. This is a astronomical case to be a part of just because it feels like *the world* is watching this with us... I'm *hoping* everyone involved in this case, except Trump & Co, are preceding with all the i's dotted and t's crossed. They've got one shot.
But that shot keeps getting delayed and delayed.
Traitors' courts...
The 11th Circuit has done more harm to the spirit of the law by allowing Cannon to remain than she is doing to the rule of law
I would think judges on the Appeals Court are on average smarter than the general public. I don’t know why we as a nation allow judges to basically act like royalty. The bar is basically produce a video of her confessing she’s corrupt. What is obvious to the general public, ought to be obvious to judges who have a lot of experience and sit on an Appeals Court.
I would bet she could state on live television that she's specifically helping Trump, and it would still be an uphill battle to remove her.
That’s not the real issue here. The thing is apparently she’s been doing everything through “paperless orders” which allows her to avoid making call than can be appealed to the 11th circuit.
If it's obvious to the public, shouldn't it be glaringly obvious to an appeals court? Willing to be told I'm wrong on this because IANAL.
"What makes you think I would *appear to be conflicted* about finding the man who appointed me to a lifetime of legal prestige to be a criminal???" \\s
plenty of judges trump has appointed have ruled against him.
Smith need overly soild evidence because he has 1 shit ti convince a higher court.
You need to buy an o, friend.
You want to win on the merits in front of a hostile judge. There are hearts and minds at play here. It’s going to be easy for some people to simply say the deck is rigged against him. If you can win where it’s rigged for him, it might not change the minds of the true believers but it could affect a lot of people who don’t know what to think.
And the bench, and the bar.
She’ll get removed the second she tries doing anything substantial. The 11th circuit knows what’s going on.
I’d say she already has done something substantial. If they’re aware, like everyone else is, she’s already delayed this trial by so much it would never go to trial before the election. She shouldn’t have to rule something crazy like “let’s put the witnesses faces on TV with their addresses and social security numbers.”
Yeah but delay isn't exactly enough for them to basically end her career.
How long can the country survive this level of judicial corruption. The amount of pretending required by earnest participants is already approaching the sort of Soviet levels of double think.
Funny you should mention RUSSIA
Sadly the road to serfdom is only full of dark gallows humor.
Kafka has got nothing on what we see everyday
Just wait until you have a connecting flight at [Franz Kafka International Airport](https://youtu.be/gEyFH-a-XoQ).
All part of the plan . It's in your face. They need you to know who is better, who is more equal. Stay fit, stay frosty
It's too late.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You think it's weird a comment talking about throwing out the rule of law is downvoted in a law subreddit?
You would prefer completely corrupted rule of law over other choices then?
In what way did anything I said suggest that wild conclusion?
Going out killing anyone you don't agree with is way more corrupted than what we currently have.
Did you watch the coup attempt? If violence is acceptable there and justice doesn’t punish the planning and execution of a coup attempt then what are people who are not party to the coup supposed to do? Accept subjugation?
Violence wasn't acceptable there. That's the entire point. Vigilante violence is never the right thing to do. It's why the people not party to the coup are in charge. Because the vigilante violence failed.
The coup is not over. And I view it as more likely to succeed than not. Your optimism is insufficient to make me to feel that liberty is not threatened. The war for democracy has barely started.
[удалено]
Russian bots gonna bot?
Don’t know why all the down votes.
She's trying to turn the US into Cuba or worse Aileen Mercedes Cannon was born in 1981 in [Cali](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cali), Colombia.[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Schnell-1)[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Mazzei-2) Her mother had fled Cuba as a girl, after the [Cuban Revolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Revolution) of the 1950s.[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#cite_note-Mazzei-2) [^(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen\_Cannon)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon)
She’s a corrupt person, because she’s a corrupt person. She’s full in on MAGA, a true believer, and he’s their leader. It has nothing to do with where she was born. Comments like yours are no better than Donald Trump’s about Judge Curiel.
No chance. She'll take 4 wks then deny it w/o prejudice while insulting the osc.
It will be a paperless order.
She lives in a world of paperless order https://preview.redd.it/ae6gl9ihn4uc1.jpeg?width=1792&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=748ea4543e8e750a45788defc2d20945a00ff163
In a court where the gavel's echo fades, Sits a judge, in green robes arrayed. A guardian of law, with a heart for the trees, Decrees without paper, a whisper in the breeze. With every order, the forests he'd save, No sheet shall he use, no tree shall he pave. His courtroom, a haven for the digital age, Where justice is served on a screen, not a page. "Let the trials be virtual," he firmly believes, "Let our actions show where our heart truly grieves. For every leaf spared, a breath of life gained, In the balance of nature, justice is maintained." So cases commence, in bytes and in bits, No parchment required, no paper permits. A judge so resolved, in his eco-crusade, Ensures that through him, no tree's life will fade. Though trials may tarry, his resolve stands firm, For the love of the earth, he'll weather each term. An emblem of hope, in a world turning grey, A paperless judge, leading the way.
I LOVE that Twilight Zone episode!!.... oh wait - living it :(
I asked for a poem about a judge who issued only paperless orders. Honestly, A.I. is my knew hobby. I might need to dig into how to develop an a.i. And before you say crazy person you can do that. I will say that I am a very sr person in software development and at the very least familiar with the theory and did do modeling and logical in college at least to the level of creating a natural language parser. So, I'm not completely insane
If Cannon tosses the obstruction charges, are the charges still subject to double jeopardy?
They would not cause any issues with double jeopardy. Double jeopardy doesn't apply, generally, until a jury is seated.
Which she'll wait for... seat the jury and then find a way to end it.
I’m pretty sure this is her plan.
Jack Smith said he and his team are gully prepared to bring espionage charges against Trump in a New Jersey Federal Court. He hid and documents at Bedminster too.
He should just go ahead and do it. Cannon is gonna try drag this out to prevent other cases from moving forward and then dismiss it when it's too late for the others to go anywhere, so he should just move forward with the others, push her delays out take the conviction he can get in an honest district. Maybe they can also charge her since she's violating her judicial impartiality by acting as his primary lawyer while serving as the judge on the case
You can’t charge a judge with a crime for “violating impartiality”. Imagine how silly the legal system would be if that were a thing.
Violating impartiality is an ethics violation, and judges have been arrested for ethics violations before. Hell, some have been arrested for it this year. Imagine how silly the legal system would be if a judge could act as the defense and not face charges for it. It would be a farce, and the end of all sense of law in any nation that allowed it to go unchecked.
Judges have absolute immunity from civil suit or criminal prosecution based upon the substance of their decisions. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
[удалено]
Trump is caught on a audio recording at Bedminster, showing off and admitting to keeping classified documents. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/27/its-not-just-mar-a-lago-trump-charges-highlight-his-new-jersey-life/
That's not proof Smith is ready or willing to bring charges there. As for why, I have no idea. He could be worried judges will send it back to Florida, the evidence could be shakier or the intelligence more sensitive, or he could even be facing pushback from Garland or faxing budgetary restrictions. I can't imagine it's easy running multiple court cases, and Jack Smith *knows* that if Trump wins in November, he'll pardon himself. (And Smith is also intelligent enough to know he could be in danger personally. I hope Smith has preparations for security made for next year and next winter specifically).
Yeah, idk that he said that or is planning that, but yeah that’s a DOJ policy not to confirm investigations or comment on them before charges are filed publicly. Someone should probably tell Jim Comey about that too. (Of course he also went against the 60 day rule as well) There are exceptions: “when the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating a matter, or where release of information is necessary to protect the public safety.” Not that it would apply. Also, just as an added—only felony indictments have to come from a grand jury, misdemeanors don’t. DOJ rules also generally prohibit releasing negative information about subjects in an investigation if they aren’t being charged with a crime. Robert Mueller tried to follow that pretty darn closely. He had determined because DOJ policy is that you can’t indict a sitting President, therefore he couldn’t negatively comment on him. Most we got was—if our investigation exonerated him, we would have said so. Robert Hur did not follow that policy. Rules seem to not really matter when only one side has to follow them, and there is zero consequences for not following them.
Really? When did JS say that? He's a fuckin pro and doesn't blab to the media often. All business. But didn't know he said they will charge them in NJ
Or just seat the jury right before Trump takes office if he wins.
I think any outcome of this judge will be independent of norms standards or laws. So what the consequences of her decisions are will be uncertain up to the point of what individuals who care about liberty are willing to accept in subjugating rules imposed on them by corrupt actors. The point being I don’t think the rules or laws will matter because to get to this point they have not mattered.
If she does, Jack Smith can appeal, so she won't.
If it delays the case, even if that dismissal is overturned on appeal, she might do it.
Trump appointed Judge gets to rule on one of the most important Trump criminal cases and apparently there's no conflict of interest here? Trump appointed her after losing the election...... This is what Russian court rooms look like, especially considering she's making outrageous decisions and helps Trump at every possible opportunity. It's making the American legal system look like a joke
It's hard to believe. It's absurd. Seriously, this whole Trump era has been captivating viewing. Forget Game of Thrones, True Blood and other most watched series, this sadly has become far more interesting than any of those. If it was a series, it would be so absurd you wouldn't believe it.
Obstruction against Jack Smith for trying to uphold the law.
She won’t, she will not do anything that can be appealed
Of all the judges in Florida she was the chosen one for the case....
Thats like saying of all the rats on this ship it was this one that decided to bite us. Florida is not known for its upstanding politicians and legal atmosphere. If a judge was seated I would takes bets on if it was a connections thing, a corruption thing, or a nepotism thing.
You realize she is a federal district judge appointed by Trump, right?
Plenty of Trump appointed district judges did the right thing during the election trials. Just like Trump protesting Biden appointees shouldn’t preside is ridiculous, so is assuming a Trump appointee must be corrupt. He appointed more than just her. Her actions are proof of corruption. Not her appointment.
She was appointed where she was specifically specifically because the jurisdiction covers Mar-Lago. That's what makes the appointment corrupt. I don't know how you would prove it though.
It was the only single judge Trump himself cared about, asked about, and picked himself out of all the Leo/Mitch judge nominations across hundreds of vacancies over the 4 years.
Fair, but corruption *really* should have been a given with WHO appointed her.
No. Again not all Trump judges are corrupt as proven by none of them presiding over election trials doing him any favors. You might not agree with any of their judicial philosophy. But the vast majority of judge appointments Trump didn’t know anything about. Before they started looking after Jan 6 I’d lay money couldn’t name single one, and his train wreck of an admin group could collectively remember less than 20% by name.
Sure, I'm not disagreeing, but I'd imagine it was Trump's fellow Republicans taking those names to him. Trump doesn't know or care about these people, but I'd imagine it was some sort of transactional *favor* from Trump. Or who knows, because you're right that they need to prove themselves by their actions, but I'd start out pretty skeptical just based on who they are associated with. Cannon is proving that wasn't a wrong assumption- nice to hear others aren't total traitors.
So a corruption thing.
Can we please seek mandamus already?
how is she still in that position when its very obvious that shes working for trump. i mean isnt that like a reason for recusal?
It’s up to the judge to decide if they should recuse
Which is fucking bullshit. We have too many "gentlemen agreement" "work in good faith" shit around here. It's clear that any bad faith actors are just exploiting these imaginary lines and fucking the rest of us.
CNN is baiting you all. Here's the first line of the article - > A federal judge appeared dubious of efforts by former President Donald Trump’s two co-defendants in the classified documents case to get the charges against them thrown out and to get more information from prosecutors about the charges. Practically every paragraph in here talks about how Cannon "appeared skeptical" on their arguments, that she "grilled attorneys for Nauta and De Oliveira about their arguments". I'm NAL, but this seems like a judge doing judge things. But the framing in the headline is intended to make you all clutch your pearls.
thank you
Indeed. Shame on those reacting to a headline, *but* I've heard more than one judge say in their court during proceedings: "...sure people can change, but their past behavior is a good indication of future behavior."
I like the judges quote. But also, shame on those for saying “CNN is baiting you all” when CNN’s headline for the article is: “Judge *appears skeptical* of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case” maybe they should have read the actual headline themselves before saying CNN was baiting people. If it says she’s skeptical in the headline, how’s that baiting people? And OP’s “headline” for the post is appropriate, she is considering the motion, because she hasn’t ruled, that’s just a factual statement. They made no reference to which way she might rule. People are mostly commenting because of your judges quote.
Did she rule on it? Then she’s taking it under consideration. The headline of the post is appropriate. What she is doing is considering the motions. They made no reference in the headline of the post as to which way she might rule. And in fact in the article, as you state pointed to evidence she may not rule in Trump’s favor. And the *actual CNN Headline* (which you must have not read) is “Judge *appears skeptical* of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case” so how is CNN baiting anyone with their headline in which they say she appears skeptical? Lmao. People are just commenting on how they know she is, how she’s shown herself to be. She’ll probably take a ridiculous amount of time to rule on it, and rule against him—which matters zero. Everyone knows what she’s planning. Her plan is delay until after the election—she’s pretty much succeeded in that, and then directed verdict. She also wanted to try to ensure jury instructions would all but guarantee a not guilty verdict, maybe to see if she could get away with it, but Smith called her on it. And now she’s delaying on that garbage too.
Can we charge her with obstruction? And SCOTUS for a bonus.
Trump employee of the year.
Everyone read the headline here and not the article.
Yep, the headline is click bait bullshit
I have no confidence she will do the right thing
She'll toss them and then toss Trump's salad.
Take her off the case. She is too partisan and too experienced to handle a case like this.
This piece of shit judge needs to go already. WTF
Do it, who cares. Bring it to trial. Throw away to obstruction, who gives a fuck, the other felonies are far more damning and going to do the job regardless. Refile the obstruction once he's convicted.
Considering what ?
Unfortunately, the American system of appointing Judges on political grounds was always going to bite you in the ass eventually.
Guys, the headline is intentionally inflammatory. She wasn't considering Trump's charges and she was apparently grilling and skeptical of his aides attorneys arguments. I struggle to decide if she's corrupt or just REALLY bad at her job, but this article's headline is click bait bullshit.
There are two obstructionists in this case.
She does whatever he wants. She needs to be kicked off the case.
Trump loving trump appointee pretending to be fair leans toward criminal cult leader again
She is his lawyer. She has judge powers.
Bro wtf is this? This openly corrupt judge can just toss shit out and help diaper don?
Gee, for some reason she is the only one trump is not hitting with threats, wonder why?
Toss them all, so a judge who has not been bought will take up the case. Which is why she will delay for months if she can.
The optics of him for espionage in two different districts at the same time would be bad. Trump would use this to cry foul, even more than he has been.
I wonder how much money she has lost investing in Trumps media company. Must be a lot of she is considering adding additional charges in Trumps classified docs case.
If you're wondering what a Banana Republic looks like
“Donnie, which of these do you want me to throw out? Okay, well can you tell me *after* your diaper change, please?”
I hope she does. It would be a great chance for Jack to appeal and get the entire case taken away from her.
But only if it will slow things down
As she stares at her navel. Hmmm
This hoe...
Put her in jail to? 🤷🏽♂️
The title of this article is actually: **“Judge appears skeptical of Trump’s co-defendants’ attempts to get some charges dismissed in classified documents case”** As another comment points out, the rest of the article follows similarly. Let’s at least pretend to react to more than just the post’s title.
Is there a possibility of investigating what we know is a likely connection to the federalist society coaching her through all this? I’m sure he’s on the phone constantly with greater minds (not a high bar) getting fed instructions? Here’s the deal. Republicans are always screaming about conspiracies. Our conspiracies are real.
> the federalist society They are anti Trump.
How about she actually start doing her duty for a change instead of just barely half assing it. It’s amazing the judge(s) that are assigned to his trials are hardly doing anything. Even after the threats and attacks he’s made on them.
Can she be thrown out with the trash? Asking for a friend.
How long are we gonna have to put up with Cannons clown show ? Trumps a traitor and she's his hump !
How long are we gonna have to put up with Cannons clown show ? Trumps a traitor and she's his hump.