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.

  • originalucifer
    link
    fedilink
    220
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    must be nice getting to appoint the judge directly involving your criminal case

    what a cunt.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    1626 months ago

    Why is she being allowed to get away with this? Didn’t she already get reprimanded?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      100
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      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.

    • AlwaysNowNeverNotMe
      link
      fedilink
      716 months ago

      Judges really don’t like to discipline other judges in any way. Because they know how presidents are set.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1036 months ago

    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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    956 months ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      56 months ago

      Makes me wish I devoted my life to being a scumbag. Would have guaranteed a high level position in trumps government. Darn shame I feel emotions, really.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    816 months ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      76 months ago

      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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        116 months ago

        True, but what does that matter to him? He’s their god king. It’s all for the sound bite they can parrot.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          16 months ago

          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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        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.

  • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ
    link
    fedilink
    English
    37
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It sounds absolutely batshit insane that judges can take sides and not be impartial when it comes to politics in the US.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    316 months ago

    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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    236 months ago

    Someone wants to be on the Supreme Court…too bad Trump doesn’t really reward loyalty.

    • FuglyDuck
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Quiet is relative. She’s not frothing at the mouth yet, so she’s not quite as loud as most Trump-Slurpers.

    • Zagorath
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      She’s doing it in a way that leaves her with plausible deniability.

  • zeps
    link
    fedilink
    106 months ago

    You’d be surprised how many lawyers & judges are republicans

  • SVcrossDO
    link
    fedilink
    English
    36 months ago

    I misread and thought that a Camera company was going against Trump.

  • gregorum
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -41
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    “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.

    • toadyody
      link
      fedilink
      506 months ago

      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.

      • gregorum
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -20
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        i don’t doubt i agree that that was some obvious bullshit.

        *edited for clarity

        • YeetPics
          link
          fedilink
          236 months ago

          So obvious (and repeated) bullshit surely is evidence of malfeasance, right?

          You’ll admit that now? Right?

          • gregorum
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -27
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            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.

            • YeetPics
              link
              fedilink
              25
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              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.

            • enkers
              link
              fedilink
              11
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              If it walks like a duck, quacks likes a duck, and looks like a duck, maybe it’s pretty safe to make an assumption.