On Friday, District Judge Aileen Cannon issued a new order in the Donald Trump classified documents case adding to the mountain of evidence that she is firmly in the former president’s pocket. Trump appointed Cannon in 2020 and the Senate confirmed her appointment in the days after he lost the 2020 election. It’s deeply offensive to the rule of law for judges to bend the law to benefit those who put them on the bench. Sadly, Cannon does just that.
Cannon’s new ruling rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s entirely standard request that she order Trump to state whether he intends to rely on an “advice of counsel” defense ahead of the trial, currently scheduled for May 20. Advance notice of the defense helps expedite a trial because defendants asserting it need to provide additional discovery to prosecutors—raising the defense means that defendants must disclose all communications with their attorneys, as the defense waives the attorney–client privilege.
Judge Cannon’s brief order asserted that Smith’s motion was “not amenable to proper consideration at this juncture, prior to at least partial resolution of pretrial motions” and further discovery.
Sound innocuous? It’s anything but. Instead, it’s part of a pattern we’ve already seen of Cannon laying the groundwork for delaying Trump’s trial—until it’s too late for a jury to be empaneled and the case tried to verdict before the election.
must be nice getting to appoint the judge directly involving your criminal case
what a cunt.
Why is she being allowed to get away with this? Didn’t she already get reprimanded?
She was also separately the judge in an earlier lawsuit that Trump filed trying to stop the government from examining what it obtained with the search warrant, for reasons that made no sense and they couldn’t really articulate. The Trump filings were essentially legal nonsense, so this judge took it upon herself to try to weave together something else for them, that still didn’t make any sense. She was faffing about with appointing a time consuming special master (not at all appropriate for that situation) and trying to find ways to prevent the government from examining the evidence. Jack Smith played along with her but at the same time appealed the legality of any of this to the eleventh circuit (actually pretty conservative circuit too). When they finally got the case they said this is all legal nonsense, you never should have even taken up this complaint, accused them of just doing all this only because he was a former president. It was a pretty crazy opinion to read, they were not happy with her. Case was dismissed and the government was finally able to examine all the evidence they had seized with the search warrant. Whole charade delayed the investigation by at least 6 months.
And then when the government finally file charges after the investigation is complete, she gets pulled, again, to be the judge in this case (randomly apparently but from a very small potential pool). Ugh. So that’s why we have her again. It’s been reported Jack Smith has contemplated filing for her removal from the case. It’s a tall order though and would also delay things. Potentially could be trying to gather even more evidence for bias before trying to make such a play, or could be trying to see if there’s any way he could still get it through in a timely manner while she plays interference for Trump. Either way it’s infuriating, as she’s tying up probably the most solid criminal case against him, probably trying to delay it past the election.
Judges really don’t like to discipline other judges in any way. Because they know how presidents are set.
Typo, or clever wordplay?
Every judge is a corrupt piece of shit who only cares about their own power.
Don’t you already know the answer to this though? 😢
Search your feelings.
My physical demeanor will change dramatically towards the powerful, wealthy, and forceful if Trump wins another term. I was very ragged through that entire term. And I will be much worse in dealing with it again.
But I refuse to abandon the US to Trump and his toadies and run off to another country.
There will be plenty to take care of here.
Removed by mod
10-4 Rambo, you’re the real hero.
Ah yes, the idea that your pea shooter can deal with tanks and drones flown from under a mountain in Colorado. Nah, you’ll get blown up, they won’t find enough parts to identify you, and the world will turn onward.
Why are you waging a conventional war? Resistance doesn’t fight in the open.
Advocating shooting lessons in the wake of a 2nd Trump term is a call to violence under rule 6. Removed. 24 hour ban.
Fortunately the rules allow for celebrating violence and advocating for nonviolent deaths. If you’re going to be pedantic about the exact meaning of your rules to stifle opposition, write better rules.
Rule 6 is NOT ambiguous:
“No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning”
Telling people to practice shooting if Trump is re-elected, or, hell, if ANYONE is elected, is advocating violence.
I advocate shooting lessons because you don’t want to hit the wrong object. Isn’t that a safe thing to advocate for? 😜
Do we need to talk in code like unalive someone in Minecraft/Roblox?
I absolutely encourage good firearms safety IN GENERAL. You’re never too young to learn good trigger discipline. ;)
Advocating it in response to an election or other political event carries unfortunate connotations which isn’t allowed.
I’m actually quite pleased at the number of gun groups that have popped up on Lemmy. Liberal Gun Owners for example, I think there’s one for LGBTQ shooters as well. Can’t recall the name of it.
Since someone is going to be elected pretty much no matter what, “practice shooting if a tone is elected” is logically equivalent to “practice shooting”.
Banning proponents of 2A is a bit weird for a politics sub but I like it. Gun nuts are crazy.
Oh, I have no problem with proponents of the 2nd Amendment, it’s when you start talking about the 2nd Amendment in connection with other people that there’s going to be a problem.
“Trump just became the nominee? Better brush up on the 2nd Amendment…” Surely you see the tone there. It’s really no different than what Trump was saying on 1/6, only actually invoking weapons.
I don’t own firearms. And I don’t appreciate shitheels implying that I do.
Not everyone with an agenda fills it with killing people to make the sex hot at home.
Because that is the pig game: they figured out how hot the sex is after beating someone or a kill.
And that is what they can’t give up. Their ultimate VIAGRA : Kill and fuck.
Addicted to killing and fucking is what a badge is all about.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/police-trainer-best-sex-killing/
You’re right.
If the fascists take over, it’s better to quietly sit on the sidelines and hope you’re not one of the targeted undesirables.
First they came for the trans people, and I did not act—
Because I was not trans.Then they came for the gay people , and I did not act—
Because I was not gay.Then they came for the immigrants, and I did not act—
Because I was not an immigrant.Then they came for the women, and I did not act—
Because I was not a woman.Then they came for the ”woke”, and I did not act—
Because I was not ”woke”.Then they came for me—and there was no one left to act for me.
Had the original on my bedroom wall throughout childhood. I think ny son is about to grow up with that plus yours. Everyone should know this one
Thanks for the copy pasta everyone has seen 20 times a month since 2016
Gee wonder why it’s popping up so often?
Lack of creativity and algo-chasing.
Ding ding ding
LOL people actually downvoted you for saying that you don’t have or like guns.
I was actually about to upvote for that first paragraph, but downvoted because of the rest.
And hey, I mean, ACAB, I’m not defending cops. Cops are selected for stupidity and aggression, trained to murder, and held above the law. Even the best of them are still part of a system that is oppressive by design.
But what that trainer was saying was true, and an important thing to acknowledge for anybody who is likely to be in life-and-death situations - firefighters, paramedics, even social workers. Go to the Snopes link he included and read the whole thing.
Sex is a normal reaction to danger. It doesn’t mean that cops are going out and killing people just to have better sex, that’s stupid. They’re killing people, yes, for lots of reasons, but that’s not one of them. It’s almost as dumb as the QAnon quacks talking about adrenochrome.
Americans are blood thirsty, genocidal monsters. What did you expect? Lmaoooooooooo
why wait for then to break out the molotovs.
Removed by mod
It’s so sickening that a teabagger like this, being the Fifth Column which is against our Constitution, against freedom, and against America, can have a job within our government even now.
Removed by mod
Just trying to string it out till the election, then he can pardon himself if he wins or start a civil war if he loses.
He’s going to do both.
Remind me: doesn’t a pardon include or rather imply an admission of guilt?
Because no guilt, no grounds for pardon, right?
Can pardons be effectively handed out for all kinds of crimes? Or are there crimes, which just can’t be pardoned - strictly from a legal point of view of course.True, but what does that matter to him? He’s their god king. It’s all for the sound bite they can parrot.
You can be pardoned for crimes you haven’t committed yet, legally speaking.
Not crimes you haven’t yet committed - you can’t pardon an assassin for murder then send them on their way
It can be crimes you haven’t been convicted of, which is what I think you meant to say
That’s more DoJ policy, which is legally like an employee handbook: precedent that it is to be followed when deciding to prosecute cases. It would still need to go to court and be weighed by a judge.
Edit: On the topic of civil or state charges, it can be argued as admission of guilt, but again, up to the court to decide.
The President ultimately gets to decide who to pardon. Everything else relates to the Office of the Pardon Attorney/DoJ is there to “help” the President make the president make his decisions. And Trump has already ignored the norm and pardoned whoever he wanted.
It sounds absolutely batshit insane that judges can take sides and not be impartial when it comes to politics in the US.
Well they aren’t supposed to, the US government is pretty corrupt
Seems like it’s more of “Jack Smith wants to get this trial going” vs. “Cannon maybe wants to back door delay it a little while.”
In any case, I don’t think Smith is going to win his fight for a speedy trial. There are just too many was to dilly dally.
Someone wants to be on the Supreme Court…too bad Trump doesn’t really reward loyalty.
Quietly?
Quiet is relative. She’s not frothing at the mouth yet, so she’s not quite as loud as most Trump-Slurpers.
Ehh, I got that reference.
She’s doing it in a way that leaves her with plausible deniability.
You’d be surprised how many lawyers & judges are republicans
I really don’t think I’d be very surprised at this point
I misread and thought that a Camera company was going against Trump.
Apparently just a coincidence that’s she hasn’t received any death threats. /s
“not amenable to proper consideration at this juncture, prior to at least partial resolution of pretrial motions” and further discovery.
Sound innocuous? It’s anything but.
maybe, maybe not. we don’t know why she’s considering her pretrial motions in such an order, but it’s not necessarily evidence of malfeasance, nor of anything else. she didn’t decline to consider the motion nor deny the motion outright-- nor at all; she just said, basically, “not right now, we need to do a few other things first.” this isn’t exactly unusual.
Nah, Jack Smith had been trying to get procedural hearings about handling classified documents from the jump and Canon had dismissed them like four times.
i don’t doubti agree that that was some obvious bullshit.*edited for clarity
So obvious (and repeated) bullshit surely is evidence of malfeasance, right?
You’ll admit that now? Right?
I don’t think that this is the same thing. Just because all German shepherds are dogs doesn’t mean that all dogs are German shepherds.
Yea totally, I get it. Just because the neighbor is a serial rapist and pedophile doesn’t mean they’ll assault MY kids when I ask them to babysit.
Makes perfect sense.
Also not all German shepherds are dogs BTW. There are shepherds that live in Germany that are quite human.
If it walks like a duck, quacks likes a duck, and looks like a duck, maybe it’s pretty safe to make an assumption.
