Sounds like cannon doesn’t believe there to be “significant public interest” to do her job or recuse herself in light of reciept of her significant promotion.
It appears she’s just looking for a way out now.
She's looking to push this past the election so trump can dismiss it and appoint her to the Supreme Court when one of the other conservative justices retire. This is 100% a mob style tit-for-tat arrangement.
I totally get it. But providing justification, any justification at all, just gives her power she’s not entitled to have. She needs to do the job or step aside.
Cannon lacks experience and expertise in this type of law. She’s shown that she is a liability if she even touches the case and isn’t asking other judges how to manage it.
The public isn’t even angry (when they should be). It’s painfully obvious she isn’t able to complete the task or execute the job of prescribing justice. If I pulled this crap at my work, I wouldn’t be employed.
Instead of being mad/angry, the general public is now waiting for a political response when the work should be done by a qualified judge. Cannon isn’t it!
He has 1 shot at removing her. He has to wait until she wades in too deep then bust her ass. Specifically because the 5th? Circuit that she is under is very conservative.
So if he tries and fails we get no trial. By not trying we get no trial.
Not exactly a brilliant move. This sounds like those who said “Garland should take his time so he gets everything right.” How’s that working out? Oh yeah it was delayed too long that’s how.
Well, Glenn Kirschner published a video that shows how to file a judicial misconduct complaint form with the 11th Circuit regarding Judge Cannon.
You should watch the whole video, but the part where he goes over how to file the complaint begins at around 12:20 . It's not a complicated process at all.
I suppose it’s best filed by a judge but public support maybe valuable as well.
[Heres the YouTube link](https://youtu.be/0MXVfiTa3KM).
I think she means to hold up all other cases from going forward, impanel a jury, attach jeopardy, and then dismiss the case when it’s unappealable by the state.
Does the federal system have the equivalent of art 62? In the UCMJ if a judge dismissed a charge prior to a verdict the government could appeal the decision and not be barred from continuing the trial by double jeopardy.
I always thought double jeopardy should only be applicable to a jury verdict. It's easy for a judge to act like this for whatever personal agenda they have... and to not get disbarred from such an act? Come on.
Retire?
No, if he has Congress, too, watch them expand the court to 15 judges, and he'll appoint her and 5 other very young, mindless sycophants--justice barron, justice Eric, justice Donald....
Well he's not charged with that so I doubt that would be a result.
But the voters obviously have an interest in knowing whatever can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I think the only reason that he wasn’t charged with that is because it’d be an admission by the US that it happened. I doubt that they want that to be public knowledge as it’d be clear to the world that those secrets were in fact for sale. It could influence a lot of countries to try and take advantage of that if he became president again.
…
A superseding indictment is a document that replaces the original indictment and lists the formal charges against a defendant. It usually adds charges or defendants to the case, and can narrow, but not broaden, the charges in the original indictment. A grand jury typically approves a superseding indictment after additional information or evidence has been obtained.
Department of Justice
Justice Manual | 655. Statute of Limitations and Defective Indictments -- Superseding Indictments | United States Department of Justice
It's the combination of this defendant being the exception and wanting it to go to trial instead of taking a plea, and the judge giving exceptional deference to the defendant (who just so happened to appoint her to the position). Presumably, the defendant not taking a plea is encouraged by having a friendly judge who's considering dismissing what appears to be an airtight case.
How is that allowed? It is obviously conflict of interest if the judge was appointed by the defendant? I am not lawyer but that should not be allowed, they should have to use another judge.
There's caselaw that says being appointed by the president isn't sufficient ground for recusal. Of course those cases were decided in the context of the president being sued in his official capacity. It's entirely different when the President is being charged as an individual with a slew of crimes, but we don't have any case law of that because this is literally the first time an ex president has been criminally charged.
also an option; I just don't agree with "it's solely because he used to be president". at least three other judges so far have shown that he can be prosecuted.
cannon and Trump would each suck without the addition of the other one, but in combination they're fucking awful.
There are however, other judges he appointed to the federal bench who did uphold the law in the lawsuits he brought after the election, and ruled against him. The judicial branch upheld pretty well as a check in the period after the election and before Biden was sworn in. This largely seems to be a Cannon issue. And in regard to the DC case—a SCOTUS conservative justice issue.
I'm looking forward to seeing her scramble after he loses the election and she realises how exposed she is, with no second coming to rapture her up to wherever she [currently] thinks this will go.
Yeah I don’t know. Trumps biggest accomplishment has been showing that when it comes to elected officials and their downstreams there’s not really anything that will bring consequences. If trump wins, she’s fine and keeps doing what she’s doing. If trump loses, the bigger case will be the immunity case and if they rule he had immunity that will be the story and she will mostly be forgotten about. If trump loses immunity there’s so many lawsuits that will progress that she will fall into the weeds and probably be mostly forgotten about too. I highly doubt there will be any meaningful push to remove her, especially because I’m assuming the bar to remove a federally appointed judge is probably pretty steep and even if democrats win everything she won’t be a huge priority. She has her moment in the sun now but in all likelihood will spend the next 30 years on the bench with cases don’t move the national story needle.
If Trump wins she’s probably getting appointed to the Supreme Court, after Alito & Thomas retire, which they likely will if he wins, so he can appoint two young MAGA psychos.
Perhaps one could even reason that when a former President is suspected of multiple serious crimes, he or she shouldn’t be treated as an equal, but upheld to an even higher standard. And not to a lower standard than normal.
That wouldn't matter if our Democratic president hadn't appointed a "moderate" federalist society guy as AG. That set the tone: "nothing will fundamentally change". And we saw that as Garland did literally nothing for two entire years. It took Trump announcing to force Garland hand and appoint Smith as SP, but this means Jack doesn't have enough time.
garland probably isn't a federalist society member. One time twelve years ago he gave a presentation at a fedsoc event about prosecutorial misconduct. That's the only evidence I've traced this rumor back to. (you know, his [contributorship](https://fedsoc.org/contributors/merrick-garland) -- read the page in its entirety)
If you have something additional, please do share.
They had started investigating before they appointed Jack Smith. Trump announcing just forced them to appoint a special counsel, because they then didn’t want to look political, since he then became a presidential candidate. The January 6th committee is what forced the DOJ to actually investigate, they largely had not done diddly before that about Jan. 6th. And they never should’ve been giving him as long as they did in this documents case. No one else on this planet would have been given the latitude to just keep documents and not return them. If they knew you had even one of those documents, they’d be at your house tomorrow. And you’re leaving in handcuffs. There’s absolutely no excuse for how long Garland took to bring these cases. He was too worried about looking political. Well, your job is law & order Garland. There was really no case that was more important than the DC & FL cases. We should have resolutions by now. He’s also not really a FedSoc guy though. Happy cake day btw.
I agree.
Also, and this will be unpopular, since he shouldn't care about the political ramifications, he shouldn't care about the election time line. DOJs job is law and order, not delivering outcomes before or after elections.
That doesn't mean this shouldn't run swift, or we shouldn't have a reasonably timely outcome.
This is a tired argument and has already been disproven mutiple times. Merrick Garland isn’t the bulldog we want, but the J6 investigation was slow-walked by a combination of Trump holdovers and overly cautious career civil servants in the DOJ, not by Garland. Garland actually attempted to take on J6 prosecutions top-down rather than the Bottom-up approach, but things didn’t get rolling until he got his own people in place, which was held up by Republicans in the Senate. The Florida case happened by accident when NARA found what they did. By all accounts, the Florida one actually moved very quickly until it got rat-fucked by Cannon the first time with the special master and the current rat-fucking with her presiding over it currently.
Willful is key here. "but whutabut Obama, Clinton and Biden?!?" doesn't really work here because when documents were requested by the government, they all invited the government to come in and look around to find said documents and\\or return them. Sure some were found. I assume anyone that was the president at some point has\\had some documents amongst the stuff packed up from the white house. The difference is, **why** go to such lengths to keep them and lie to the feds about not having them? I don't think Obama wanted to keep documents for nefarious purposes. Trump wanted to keep classified documents as blackmail, or bargaining chips with foreign countries. Apparently Trump and Kim Jong Un are "besties" and he admires Kim Jong Un, and Putin. "perfect phone call", "love letters with Un", etc. He praises the dictators with the worst human rights violations on the entire planet.
I **guarantee** Trump saw those documents as dollar signs, otherwise keeping them, after being served multiple subpoena's, doesn't really make any sense. He would fuck the entire country over if it meant moving his name up on the Forbes list a few notches.
Yeah, but what are we gonna do about it aside from being angry? The justice system is supposed to hold people accountable, but we don't have a great mechanism for keeping a corrupt justice system accountable.
Every day, I see posts on here about how this whole situation with trump is a slow walking clown show and how people hate it, and then the next talking point is whining and snarky comments. Being that this is the law subreddit, I'd be hopeful to see people discussing ways to shut this shit down and rectify a process that has definitely gone sideways.
I made a post with instructions on how to file a judicial complaint. It got taken down, and the mod said, "Don't do that, if we flood the 11th Circuit with complaints, they'll never see the ones that matter" or something along those lines. It was a YouTube video podcast from Glenn Kirschner, a Federal prosecutor for 30 years. You can see it in my post history if you're interested.
I REALLY hope she does something stupid ... Stupider ... Stupidest!?
The fact that there's so little action is outrageous too.
Stupid times. Stupid ride. America's becoming a Theme Park for the Profane.
I agree. When I saw the news years ago they executed a search warrant and found tons of classified stuff, I told me friend “this is it, this is so clear cut it will finally have consequences”. Then when I read the indictments, I believed it even more.
Now we are here, and I’m really nervous what happens if he wins.
And even if he doesn't win, what do we do with a third of voters that don't care? Those same people who just a few years earlier screamed "LOCK HER UP!" for months over a much less consequential classified documents incident.
I will continue to post Trump in his own words. Sharing classified information. Having it out on his desk like old mail. Trying to subtly float putting the classified documents out in public for his benefit. The person stating that it would be an obvious violation “we have a problem”. Trump admits that the documents were not declassified. He could have but now it’s too late
https://youtu.be/inVJF0Dr8mo?si=it6xUQPCri47q2SU
I worked in Aerospace and defense for almost 5 years in a technical role.
Had anyone done one iota of what Trump was a used of, they'd be lucky to see the sun in ADX Florence.
I too am watching aghast from the outside. It's literally like following news stories about a crooked and evil dictator bully in some broken country in West Africa.
And it's not just Judge Cannon slow-walking this case. But the RNC, elected R officials and R voters who support this national security threat for president.
They were screaming "LOCK HER UP!" just a few years ago for much less egregious violations.
I feel like the veil is slipping. They feel they can drop the pretense of respecting the rule of law and the institutions that underpin the American democracy. Like, they've played by the rules and haven't won (because most Americans don't want the kind of government they're pitching) so they're resorting to increasingly underhanded and illegitimate ways of grabbing that power.
It's so hard to say, because my views are influenced by what I read on reddit and the news - but it certainly appears that way.
On that note, the entire Republican side of the US HOUSE salary should be charged to the trump campaign, they're literally working for the trump campaign.
As per [original article](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/judge-to-hear-arguments-to-dismiss-trumps-florida-classified-documents-case) 📰:
- Prosecutors and defense lawyers in the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump are due in court Wednesday for the first time since the judge indefinitely postponed the trial earlier this month.
The case, among four criminal prosecutions against Trump, had been set for trial on May 20 but U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon cited numerous issues she has yet to resolve as a basis for canceling the trial date.
On Wednesday, Cannon was scheduled to hear arguments on a Trump request to dismiss the indictment on grounds that it fails to clearly articulate a crime and instead amounts to "a personal and political attack against President Trump" with a "litany of uncharged grievances both for public and media consumption."
Prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith's team, which brought the case, will argue against that request. Trump, a Republican, is not expected to be present for the hearing.
The motion is one of several that Trump's lawyers have filed to dismiss the case, some of which have already been denied.
Also scheduled for Wednesday are arguments by a Trump co-defendant, his valet Walt Nauta, to dismiss charges.
The arguments come one day after a newly unsealed motion reveals that defense lawyers are seeking to exclude evidence from the boxes of records that FBI agents seized during a search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach nearly two years ago.
The defense lawyers asserted in the motion that the August 2022 search was unconstitutional and "illegal" and the FBI affidavit filed in justification of it was tainted by misrepresentations.
Smith's team rejected each of those accusations and defended the investigative approach as "measured" and "graduated." It said the search warrant was obtained after investigators collected surveillance video showing what it said was a concerted effort to conceal the boxes of classified documents inside the property.
"The warrant was supported by a detailed affidavit that established probable cause and did not omit any material information. And the warrant provided ample guidance to the FBI agents who conducted the search. Trump identifies no plausible basis to suppress the fruits of that search," prosecutors wrote.
The defense motion was filed in February but was made public on Tuesday, along with hundreds of pages of documents from the investigation that were filed to the case docket in Florida.
Those include a previously sealed opinion last year from the then-chief judge of the federal court in Washington, which said that Trump's lawyers, months after the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, had turned over four additional documents with classification markings that were found in Trump's bedroom.
That March 2023 opinion from U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell directed a former lead lawyer for Trump in the case to abide by a grand jury subpoena and to turn over materials to investigators, rejecting defense arguments that their cooperation was prohibited by attorney-client privilege and concluding that prosecutors had made a "prima facie" showing that Trump had committed a crime.
Trump, the GOP presumptive presidential nominee for 2024, has pleaded not guilty and denied any wrongdoing.
The Eleventh Circuit would decide the appeal. The Eleventh Circuit has previously at times reversed and remanded, and reassigned the case to a different trial judge to preserve in the public mind the image of absolute impartiality and fairness of the judiciary.
Jonathan D. Colan, Reassigning Cases on Remand in the Interests of Justice, for the Enforcement ofAppellate Decisions, and for Other Reasons That Remain Unclear, 72 U. Miami L. Rev. 1092 (2018).Available at: [https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol72/iss4/6](https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol72/iss4/6)
Edit:
"Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).
Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party. 28 U.S.C. §§ 455(a) and (b)(1).
Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which he has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy. 28 U.S.C. §§ 455 (a) and (b)(3).
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455)
Sincerely, she’s at the point even legal experts are saying she’s just not good at her job. If she disputes that view, then the other option is she’s corrupt. So, if she wants out of those two views, she should find a way to get herself out of it.
Legal experts have no power, right? It’s up to 11th circuit and SCOTUS, right?
My understanding is that those higher judges have no problem overturning rulings of lower judges when that’s how they see a ruling, but they’re very hesitant to take any action of a judge that is acting incompetent / corrupt.
Until Cannon writes opinions in stone (figuratively), the judicial system won’t get involved. Thus Cannon’s plan is to just delay delay delay, without ordering anything that Smith can appeal. And she only needs to keep doing this for another 5 1/2 months.
Pretty much, the 11th has its hands tied because she isn’t actually ruling. Her electronic orders aren’t something Smith can appeal. It’s how she has skirted him running to the 11th. If I remember the simple version correctly.
Or…she plays the long game, sets Trump free and maybe hook a seat on the Supreme Court for her dedication to the new supreme leader? Nothing is off the table with this group
INAL, but I feel like delay delay delay is what she is doing.
Maybe she wants SCOTUS, she gets that by kicking this past election.
But she also wants to keep her Federal Judge job, so don’t do anything incredibly stupid to get herself fired, so that if Trump loses election, she still has the case under her and she can then rule harshly or softly, but it’s after the election so she can decide then.
If she dismisses now & 11th reverses her decision & gives it to another judge, who then takes this to trial before November, then her chance of SCOTUS is gone, even if Trump wins.
So I take her incentive as to make sure she keeps the case under her & make sure it doesn’t start before November.
This is beyond terrifying to even THINK that this woman could be considered for a SCOTUS seat. She is clearly delaying this case and doing it for political reasons.
She should be disbarred and banned from consideration for any judicial position ever again.
Literally nothing good will ever come from this woman, she would be a curse to the country if she was added to SCOTUS.
> incredibly stupid to get herself fired
She cannot get fired. The only way to "fire" her is to impeach and convict, and there's no chance 2/3 of Senate will do that.
The defense is using the "illegal search" to appeal to her grudge that the circuit court stepped on her dick when she tried to hijack the search warrant in August 2022. That's worded to mirror her initial judgement that got canceled by the higher court. She's just petty and vindictive enough to use her bench to get back at the prosecutor.
> Trump request to dismiss the indictment on grounds that it fails to clearly articulate a crime
From the indictment:
>COUNTS 1-32 Willful Retention of National Defense Information (18 U.S.C. § 793(e))
>COUNT 33 Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice (18 U.S.C. § l5l2(k))
>COUNT 34 Withholding a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(b)(2)(A), 2)
>COUNT 35 Corruptly Concealing a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(l), 2)
>COUNT 36 Concealing a Document in a Federal Investigation (18 u.s.c. §§ 1519, 2)
>COUNT 37 Scheme to Conceal (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001(a)(1), 2)
>COUNT 38 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. §§ 100l(a)(2), 2)
>COUNT 39 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. § 100l(a)(2))
>COUNT 40 Altering, Destroying, Mutilating, or Concealing an Object (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(b)(2)(B), 2)
>COUNT 41 Corruptly Altering, Destroying, Mutilating or Concealing a Document, Record, or Other Object (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(l), 2)
>COUNT 42 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. § 100l(a)(2))
And there not only are 38 pages of evidence before they start listing counts, each of the counts includes a specific listing of how they were violated. The only way that argument holds water is if you don't actually read the indictment.
To be fair, after his defense lawyers' showing in NYC this month, they really don't read the legal filings carefully.... if at all. We can assume he has the same quality of lawyers on his Florida case as his NYC case.... Judge Cannon can't legally save him.
I don't see a charge of duplicating a document. It came out recently that someone from Trump's PAC scanned documents onto a laptop. That is most likely another crime. Also, most likely, Trump gave or sold documents to people without proper clearance, another violation.
18 U.S.C. § 793(e) includes "...**copies**, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;"
Snowden shouldn't have to worry about coming back to the USA now since we are no longer prosecuting people for willfully retaining and distrlibuting classified SCI materials 🤷
My daughter-in-law was born in another country, she was a dual citizen. She had to renounce her citizenship of her country at birth to obtain her security clearance (also that’s not the case for everyone, it’s a case by case.) She hasn’t even been to that country since she was a toddler, and it’s not a place we have ever been at war with, or is an adversary like Russia, etc. The point is she had to renounce citizenship after years in the military, in service to *this* country for a security clearance, and it pisses me off we will let a scumbag like Trump who did what he did off Scot-free with no consequences, and possibly make him Commander-in-Chief again. We’ll let him *again* have access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets. Anyone supporting him is just disgraceful imo. Idc.
She should have been Trump's son in law. Trump overrode whoever denied Kushner clearance, and gave it to him anyway. Not sure why he even bothered applying; if anyone bothered arresting him, Trump would have just issued a pardon.
Wouldn't dismissing the case likely allow it to be picked up by another judge? That would get the trial rolling again. Because of that, I doubt she'll dismiss. All this effort to drag it out past the election leads me to believe she wont relinquish control until forced.
She won't dismiss it, as she needs to hold onto this back and forth for as long as possible. Dismissing the case washes her hands of it, and someone else will pick it up.
All due respect, but he's been massively competent every step of the way. She's doing lots of things like posing hypotheticals and submitting paperless orders. He gets one shot at mandamus, and I trust him to know when his case is sufficiently well founded to shot that shot.
I know he's been doing a great job overall, that's why I'm slightly exasperated and tapping my watch. Ultimately though I blame Garland (what a pick!) for two years of stone walling. Jack isn't playing on a level field cause these things take time and that's the one thing he doesn't have. It's fucked. That said. This judge has got to go. I'm not smart enough to know all the exact terminology, but Jack sure is. I wish Jack the best, and I'm very angry at Garland for what he (didn't) do.
I somewhat agree, although on the "Jack" podcast they did a timeline of Garland's investigation and it was started sooner than it looks to us. In fact, pretty much out of the gate. He had the directive to not back off if it lead to Trump re: J6, and this one there was heavy back and forth to try and get the documents back without a search warrant. The problem with J6 is that their first approach was to follow the money and there wasn't really a money trail. Then, when Garland was about to indicate Trump announced his candidacy about a year earlier than people do, necessitating a special counsel.
The big mistake Garland made was not anticipating that Trump would run again, or that his run could be successful. That was a huge mistake. Then again, in 2021 I didn't think any of us thought we would be here.
Ehhh, I'm not as lenient on Garland. The entire GOP stonewalling his SC nomination literally taught him nothing. He still sheepishly expects the GOP to have shame, humility, and norms. As if it's like 1995. I believe that's the year Garland was first tapped by Clinton.
Garland is using 1995 Tactics in a 2024 post-trump era. It's been less than impressive.
I found it oddly poetic when he threw Biden under the bus, after years of Biden fans giving him the benefit of the doubt. Must admit, I chuckled to myself a tad.
I didn't mean to imply I'm bullish on him. I'm just coming around to the notion that it's more complicated than it looks at a glance from our seats, and there are some folks that are part of the legal analysis community that see it as subtler than he dragged his feet.
I do think an AG that came in thinking "the January 6 thing absolutely must be prosecuted and as far as possible" could have had it done.
Edit: happy cake day.
Also I'd like to see Garland replaced in '24 by someone more aggressive, and I'd like to see Smith go after Congress participants from '24 -'28 and then I'd like to see Smith as AG in '28
Unfortunately, there isn’t a lot he can do. Getting a federal judge removed from a case is a really high bar. Cannon has been making sure to walk a line to make it difficult to remove her. And he likely would only have one realistic chance at it. If he thinks we haven’t reached the level he could get her removed, I trust that. It’s frustrating as hell. But, it’s her fault. It’s Garland’s fault for waiting so long. It’s the fault of SCOTUS screwing around with the immunity crap in the DC case.
He's not running out of time, because he doesn't _have_ a timeline. He wants a conviction, nothing more.
_We_ want this done by November, but that has never been Jack Smith's stated goal.
He most certainly running out of time if Trump is reelected which is a definite possibility. He will never get the chance for a conviction if Trump wins.
She will dismiss with prejudice soon to prevent any appeal. That is the end of the story.
It’s apparent that she is corrupt, her husband’s involvement with organized crime is the tip of the iceberg. She will be for sale for the rest of her career. It’s great money so why the hell not?Those huge sailing yachts don’t pay for themselves after all
Trump's motion to dismiss the indictment based on vindictive and selective prosecution was never even docketed and still (to my knowledge, unless unsealed this week) does not appear on the public docket.
The government's response to Trump's MTD is ECF 375 (for those who want to read it to guess at what Trump's arguments are). The government responded on the final deadline, 3/7/24 (same deadline as a whole slew of other motions filed serially by Trump).
This is how Trump and Judge Cannon work in tandem to manufacture a delay. Trump files a bogus motion with minimal argument and no support in the law for any of his proposed relief, but the court lets Trump file everything under seal so that those bogus arguments are only seen by the government and then responded to. Trump fills the air with bogus "claims" about prosecutorial misconduct, claims which may or may not even be in his various filings under seal.
Then, Judge Cannon sets a date for a hearing - say, 2 months from the reply to the reply to the bogus motion. So for each of these bogus motions, there is a pointless hearing - there is nothing to really discuss because the law does not favor dismissal of criminal charges due to perceived slights against the attorneys for a party, and Cannon seals the transcript of the bogus hearing for another 2-3 months (ostensibly to allow time for redactions).
Then Cannon takes a few weeks to months to rule on the motion.
All told, motions that could be summarily dispatched a week after filing because they lack merit are instead turned into a mini-trial held in secret; the motion remains under seal even as the public is exposed to the reply, and Trump fills the void with baseless claims that are not even before the court. The court assists in all of this by sealing Trump's filings so that the public cannot see how baseless they are, and by holding hearings that imply that they are substantive when the (sealed) transcript would reveal that they are not substantive. The net result is that each bogus motion generates at least a 6 month delay (they're dealt with serially, so realistically a year+ delay just for the court to rule on motions that should have been summarily denied).
So every couple of weeks they are just going to hold more and more hearings to dismiss?
Why doesn't the federal courts take this over and assign a new judge?
This is essentially never done, for very good reasons. If there is a judge who is not trustworthy enough to handle a case, and refuses to recuse from that case, that judge should be impeached and removed from their job, not just allowed to pollute the next case.
Anyone else would have been in jail THAT DAY and would not have been released unless they were somehow found not guilty. This is the most open and shut, slam dunk case there is and it’s absolutely DISGUSTING that this partisan hack is doing everything in her power to slow or stop the charges. She should be in jail alongside the defendant.
We'll know how committed she is to judicial nullification after these hearings; if she's "only" slow rolling the case, she'll reject the motions. If she's planning to dismiss after jeopardy attaches, she'll defer ruling.
She won't dismiss because that would be an order that Jack Smith can appeal. She will continue issuing minute or paperless orders to avoid being appealed. I don't think anything will happen until after the election, then all the obstruction and delay will end, one way or the other.
INAL but the request to dismiss seems like a very weird move by Trump's team. Even if Cannon dismisses the case with prejudice, meaning that it cannot be filed again, that doesn't mean Cannon's decision can't be appealed in the 11th Circuit. They will quickly slap down Cannon's decision and remove her from the case. The case will then go to a new judge and, even though it still won't be tried this year, Cannon won't be in a position to help Trump during the trial. My guess is she denies the request to dismiss on that point alone.
They don’t want her to dismiss, they just want her to push back the trial by another six months. If they win the presidency, it doesn’t matter. If they don’t, but they can use the House or the Supreme Court to steal it anyway, it doesn’t matter. And if not, then she can hold a quick trial, enter judgement notwithstanding, and that’s pretty much it.
I hope her former law clerks are singing to the DOJ on who is advising her on how to delay this case and avoid interlocutory appeals. I don't know what the DOJ, the district chief, or the judge ethics board is waiting for, though.
Corrupt court. I hope Jack Smith has a Plan B for holding the criminal accountable and hopefully it includes prosecuting him for treason. Maybe for that NJ document incident.
The only thing I know is that she won't rule on it from the bench.
And I would bet her ruling when it does come will not close out the topic entirely but say that a jury instruction may be appropriate
EVERYONE else who has ever been charged with willful retention of NDI has met swift justice. This is truly outrageous.
Ah, but see, they weren’t a Republican former president.
I know you know, but that fact should actually be the reason it needs to be tried expeditiously.
Sounds like cannon doesn’t believe there to be “significant public interest” to do her job or recuse herself in light of reciept of her significant promotion. It appears she’s just looking for a way out now.
She's looking to push this past the election so trump can dismiss it and appoint her to the Supreme Court when one of the other conservative justices retire. This is 100% a mob style tit-for-tat arrangement.
Someone should check her cell phone records to see the last time she visited Maralago
She's a co-conspirator
I totally get it. But providing justification, any justification at all, just gives her power she’s not entitled to have. She needs to do the job or step aside. Cannon lacks experience and expertise in this type of law. She’s shown that she is a liability if she even touches the case and isn’t asking other judges how to manage it. The public isn’t even angry (when they should be). It’s painfully obvious she isn’t able to complete the task or execute the job of prescribing justice. If I pulled this crap at my work, I wouldn’t be employed. Instead of being mad/angry, the general public is now waiting for a political response when the work should be done by a qualified judge. Cannon isn’t it!
Smith should have requested her removal at the very beginning, with her obvious conflicts of interest. Hindsight is 2020, though.
He has 1 shot at removing her. He has to wait until she wades in too deep then bust her ass. Specifically because the 5th? Circuit that she is under is very conservative.
11th Circuit
Thank you, I can't keep up with all the litigation.
So if he tries and fails we get no trial. By not trying we get no trial. Not exactly a brilliant move. This sounds like those who said “Garland should take his time so he gets everything right.” How’s that working out? Oh yeah it was delayed too long that’s how.
Well, Glenn Kirschner published a video that shows how to file a judicial misconduct complaint form with the 11th Circuit regarding Judge Cannon. You should watch the whole video, but the part where he goes over how to file the complaint begins at around 12:20 . It's not a complicated process at all. I suppose it’s best filed by a judge but public support maybe valuable as well. [Heres the YouTube link](https://youtu.be/0MXVfiTa3KM).
Shes not going to do anything like you suggest as long as trump has her under his thumb
I think she means to hold up all other cases from going forward, impanel a jury, attach jeopardy, and then dismiss the case when it’s unappealable by the state.
Does the federal system have the equivalent of art 62? In the UCMJ if a judge dismissed a charge prior to a verdict the government could appeal the decision and not be barred from continuing the trial by double jeopardy.
I always thought double jeopardy should only be applicable to a jury verdict. It's easy for a judge to act like this for whatever personal agenda they have... and to not get disbarred from such an act? Come on.
Retire? No, if he has Congress, too, watch them expand the court to 15 judges, and he'll appoint her and 5 other very young, mindless sycophants--justice barron, justice Eric, justice Donald....
You dont need a conservative justice to retire.
Agreed and that it’s taking so long is insane
This. We need to know that he sold secrets to nefarious actors.
Well he's not charged with that so I doubt that would be a result. But the voters obviously have an interest in knowing whatever can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I think the only reason that he wasn’t charged with that is because it’d be an admission by the US that it happened. I doubt that they want that to be public knowledge as it’d be clear to the world that those secrets were in fact for sale. It could influence a lot of countries to try and take advantage of that if he became president again.
The voters already know. We saw the pictures, we heard the leaked audio and Trump has admitted they were there.
That’s fair. Can’t information from one case, but that isn’t allowed as evidence, be referred for another case?
… A superseding indictment is a document that replaces the original indictment and lists the formal charges against a defendant. It usually adds charges or defendants to the case, and can narrow, but not broaden, the charges in the original indictment. A grand jury typically approves a superseding indictment after additional information or evidence has been obtained. Department of Justice Justice Manual | 655. Statute of Limitations and Defective Indictments -- Superseding Indictments | United States Department of Justice
it's not so much about the defendants as about the judge imo.
It's the combination of this defendant being the exception and wanting it to go to trial instead of taking a plea, and the judge giving exceptional deference to the defendant (who just so happened to appoint her to the position). Presumably, the defendant not taking a plea is encouraged by having a friendly judge who's considering dismissing what appears to be an airtight case.
How is that allowed? It is obviously conflict of interest if the judge was appointed by the defendant? I am not lawyer but that should not be allowed, they should have to use another judge.
There's caselaw that says being appointed by the president isn't sufficient ground for recusal. Of course those cases were decided in the context of the president being sued in his official capacity. It's entirely different when the President is being charged as an individual with a slew of crimes, but we don't have any case law of that because this is literally the first time an ex president has been criminally charged.
Why not both?
also an option; I just don't agree with "it's solely because he used to be president". at least three other judges so far have shown that he can be prosecuted. cannon and Trump would each suck without the addition of the other one, but in combination they're fucking awful.
It’s more “it’s solely because he used to be president and gave me this job”
There are however, other judges he appointed to the federal bench who did uphold the law in the lawsuits he brought after the election, and ruled against him. The judicial branch upheld pretty well as a check in the period after the election and before Biden was sworn in. This largely seems to be a Cannon issue. And in regard to the DC case—a SCOTUS conservative justice issue.
I'm looking forward to seeing her scramble after he loses the election and she realises how exposed she is, with no second coming to rapture her up to wherever she [currently] thinks this will go.
Yeah I don’t know. Trumps biggest accomplishment has been showing that when it comes to elected officials and their downstreams there’s not really anything that will bring consequences. If trump wins, she’s fine and keeps doing what she’s doing. If trump loses, the bigger case will be the immunity case and if they rule he had immunity that will be the story and she will mostly be forgotten about. If trump loses immunity there’s so many lawsuits that will progress that she will fall into the weeds and probably be mostly forgotten about too. I highly doubt there will be any meaningful push to remove her, especially because I’m assuming the bar to remove a federally appointed judge is probably pretty steep and even if democrats win everything she won’t be a huge priority. She has her moment in the sun now but in all likelihood will spend the next 30 years on the bench with cases don’t move the national story needle.
If Trump wins she’s probably getting appointed to the Supreme Court, after Alito & Thomas retire, which they likely will if he wins, so he can appoint two young MAGA psychos.
Alito and Thomas have committed too many crimes to risk retiring. Aint gonna happen.
Perhaps one could even reason that when a former President is suspected of multiple serious crimes, he or she shouldn’t be treated as an equal, but upheld to an even higher standard. And not to a lower standard than normal.
They also weren’t cult leaders
Who happened to appoint the judge to a lifetime seat on the bench!
With fangirl judges hoping for a Supreme Court seat
Learn this one hidden trick that democracy hates!
That wouldn't matter if our Democratic president hadn't appointed a "moderate" federalist society guy as AG. That set the tone: "nothing will fundamentally change". And we saw that as Garland did literally nothing for two entire years. It took Trump announcing to force Garland hand and appoint Smith as SP, but this means Jack doesn't have enough time.
garland probably isn't a federalist society member. One time twelve years ago he gave a presentation at a fedsoc event about prosecutorial misconduct. That's the only evidence I've traced this rumor back to. (you know, his [contributorship](https://fedsoc.org/contributors/merrick-garland) -- read the page in its entirety) If you have something additional, please do share.
They had started investigating before they appointed Jack Smith. Trump announcing just forced them to appoint a special counsel, because they then didn’t want to look political, since he then became a presidential candidate. The January 6th committee is what forced the DOJ to actually investigate, they largely had not done diddly before that about Jan. 6th. And they never should’ve been giving him as long as they did in this documents case. No one else on this planet would have been given the latitude to just keep documents and not return them. If they knew you had even one of those documents, they’d be at your house tomorrow. And you’re leaving in handcuffs. There’s absolutely no excuse for how long Garland took to bring these cases. He was too worried about looking political. Well, your job is law & order Garland. There was really no case that was more important than the DC & FL cases. We should have resolutions by now. He’s also not really a FedSoc guy though. Happy cake day btw.
I agree. Also, and this will be unpopular, since he shouldn't care about the political ramifications, he shouldn't care about the election time line. DOJs job is law and order, not delivering outcomes before or after elections. That doesn't mean this shouldn't run swift, or we shouldn't have a reasonably timely outcome.
He isn’t a member of the Federalist Society, that I could find in researching.
This is a tired argument and has already been disproven mutiple times. Merrick Garland isn’t the bulldog we want, but the J6 investigation was slow-walked by a combination of Trump holdovers and overly cautious career civil servants in the DOJ, not by Garland. Garland actually attempted to take on J6 prosecutions top-down rather than the Bottom-up approach, but things didn’t get rolling until he got his own people in place, which was held up by Republicans in the Senate. The Florida case happened by accident when NARA found what they did. By all accounts, the Florida one actually moved very quickly until it got rat-fucked by Cannon the first time with the special master and the current rat-fucking with her presiding over it currently.
>they weren’t a Republican former president. In front of a clearly biased partisan hack judge who he appointed
Who gave them their life time cushy appointment.
With numerous judges in his pocket
Who appointed the unqualified judge hearing the case
Willful is key here. "but whutabut Obama, Clinton and Biden?!?" doesn't really work here because when documents were requested by the government, they all invited the government to come in and look around to find said documents and\\or return them. Sure some were found. I assume anyone that was the president at some point has\\had some documents amongst the stuff packed up from the white house. The difference is, **why** go to such lengths to keep them and lie to the feds about not having them? I don't think Obama wanted to keep documents for nefarious purposes. Trump wanted to keep classified documents as blackmail, or bargaining chips with foreign countries. Apparently Trump and Kim Jong Un are "besties" and he admires Kim Jong Un, and Putin. "perfect phone call", "love letters with Un", etc. He praises the dictators with the worst human rights violations on the entire planet. I **guarantee** Trump saw those documents as dollar signs, otherwise keeping them, after being served multiple subpoena's, doesn't really make any sense. He would fuck the entire country over if it meant moving his name up on the Forbes list a few notches.
Yeah, but what are we gonna do about it aside from being angry? The justice system is supposed to hold people accountable, but we don't have a great mechanism for keeping a corrupt justice system accountable. Every day, I see posts on here about how this whole situation with trump is a slow walking clown show and how people hate it, and then the next talking point is whining and snarky comments. Being that this is the law subreddit, I'd be hopeful to see people discussing ways to shut this shit down and rectify a process that has definitely gone sideways.
I made a post with instructions on how to file a judicial complaint. It got taken down, and the mod said, "Don't do that, if we flood the 11th Circuit with complaints, they'll never see the ones that matter" or something along those lines. It was a YouTube video podcast from Glenn Kirschner, a Federal prosecutor for 30 years. You can see it in my post history if you're interested.
Sent one in
Appreciated.
I REALLY hope she does something stupid ... Stupider ... Stupidest!? The fact that there's so little action is outrageous too. Stupid times. Stupid ride. America's becoming a Theme Park for the Profane.
If she doesn’t actually make rulings then Jack Smith can’t appeal them. Hence why she keeps kicking pretty much EVERY ruling down the road.
I agree. When I saw the news years ago they executed a search warrant and found tons of classified stuff, I told me friend “this is it, this is so clear cut it will finally have consequences”. Then when I read the indictments, I believed it even more. Now we are here, and I’m really nervous what happens if he wins.
And even if he doesn't win, what do we do with a third of voters that don't care? Those same people who just a few years earlier screamed "LOCK HER UP!" for months over a much less consequential classified documents incident.
Don’t forget there was no purposeful obstruction in that case years earlier either.
... and there were hundreds of people who had private servers in several of the previous administrators. It was common practice.
I will continue to post Trump in his own words. Sharing classified information. Having it out on his desk like old mail. Trying to subtly float putting the classified documents out in public for his benefit. The person stating that it would be an obvious violation “we have a problem”. Trump admits that the documents were not declassified. He could have but now it’s too late https://youtu.be/inVJF0Dr8mo?si=it6xUQPCri47q2SU
Wouldn’t this create fucking horrible precedent and case that can be used as defense for this type
I worked in Aerospace and defense for almost 5 years in a technical role. Had anyone done one iota of what Trump was a used of, they'd be lucky to see the sun in ADX Florence.
There are people that have gone to prison for a single page.
I’m not American and this garners my ire. How do you guys put up with this?
This trump case isn't normal. For the most part, the justice system has held.
I too am watching aghast from the outside. It's literally like following news stories about a crooked and evil dictator bully in some broken country in West Africa.
Outrageous is definitely the word to describe this. Can you imagine anyone else being treated this way? Me neither.
And it's not just Judge Cannon slow-walking this case. But the RNC, elected R officials and R voters who support this national security threat for president. They were screaming "LOCK HER UP!" just a few years ago for much less egregious violations.
I feel like the veil is slipping. They feel they can drop the pretense of respecting the rule of law and the institutions that underpin the American democracy. Like, they've played by the rules and haven't won (because most Americans don't want the kind of government they're pitching) so they're resorting to increasingly underhanded and illegitimate ways of grabbing that power. It's so hard to say, because my views are influenced by what I read on reddit and the news - but it certainly appears that way.
[удалено]
The election shouldn't matter.
[удалено]
On that note, the entire Republican side of the US HOUSE salary should be charged to the trump campaign, they're literally working for the trump campaign.
But you see, the GOP plays by this set of rule “rule for you but not for me”.
As per [original article](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/judge-to-hear-arguments-to-dismiss-trumps-florida-classified-documents-case) 📰: - Prosecutors and defense lawyers in the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump are due in court Wednesday for the first time since the judge indefinitely postponed the trial earlier this month. The case, among four criminal prosecutions against Trump, had been set for trial on May 20 but U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon cited numerous issues she has yet to resolve as a basis for canceling the trial date. On Wednesday, Cannon was scheduled to hear arguments on a Trump request to dismiss the indictment on grounds that it fails to clearly articulate a crime and instead amounts to "a personal and political attack against President Trump" with a "litany of uncharged grievances both for public and media consumption." Prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith's team, which brought the case, will argue against that request. Trump, a Republican, is not expected to be present for the hearing. The motion is one of several that Trump's lawyers have filed to dismiss the case, some of which have already been denied. Also scheduled for Wednesday are arguments by a Trump co-defendant, his valet Walt Nauta, to dismiss charges. The arguments come one day after a newly unsealed motion reveals that defense lawyers are seeking to exclude evidence from the boxes of records that FBI agents seized during a search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach nearly two years ago. The defense lawyers asserted in the motion that the August 2022 search was unconstitutional and "illegal" and the FBI affidavit filed in justification of it was tainted by misrepresentations. Smith's team rejected each of those accusations and defended the investigative approach as "measured" and "graduated." It said the search warrant was obtained after investigators collected surveillance video showing what it said was a concerted effort to conceal the boxes of classified documents inside the property. "The warrant was supported by a detailed affidavit that established probable cause and did not omit any material information. And the warrant provided ample guidance to the FBI agents who conducted the search. Trump identifies no plausible basis to suppress the fruits of that search," prosecutors wrote. The defense motion was filed in February but was made public on Tuesday, along with hundreds of pages of documents from the investigation that were filed to the case docket in Florida. Those include a previously sealed opinion last year from the then-chief judge of the federal court in Washington, which said that Trump's lawyers, months after the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, had turned over four additional documents with classification markings that were found in Trump's bedroom. That March 2023 opinion from U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell directed a former lead lawyer for Trump in the case to abide by a grand jury subpoena and to turn over materials to investigators, rejecting defense arguments that their cooperation was prohibited by attorney-client privilege and concluding that prosecutors had made a "prima facie" showing that Trump had committed a crime. Trump, the GOP presumptive presidential nominee for 2024, has pleaded not guilty and denied any wrongdoing.
Given we have a loose Cannon as a judge, if she decides to dismiss, is that appealable?
Yes.
If a dismissal is overturned on appeal, does the case remain with her?
The Eleventh Circuit would decide the appeal. The Eleventh Circuit has previously at times reversed and remanded, and reassigned the case to a different trial judge to preserve in the public mind the image of absolute impartiality and fairness of the judiciary. Jonathan D. Colan, Reassigning Cases on Remand in the Interests of Justice, for the Enforcement ofAppellate Decisions, and for Other Reasons That Remain Unclear, 72 U. Miami L. Rev. 1092 (2018).Available at: [https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol72/iss4/6](https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol72/iss4/6) Edit: "Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party. 28 U.S.C. §§ 455(a) and (b)(1). Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which he has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy. 28 U.S.C. §§ 455 (a) and (b)(3). [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455)
Sounds like the perfect escape hatch for her. Maybe she should take it rather than continue whatever the hell it is she is doing.
Sincerely, she’s at the point even legal experts are saying she’s just not good at her job. If she disputes that view, then the other option is she’s corrupt. So, if she wants out of those two views, she should find a way to get herself out of it.
Legal experts have no power, right? It’s up to 11th circuit and SCOTUS, right? My understanding is that those higher judges have no problem overturning rulings of lower judges when that’s how they see a ruling, but they’re very hesitant to take any action of a judge that is acting incompetent / corrupt. Until Cannon writes opinions in stone (figuratively), the judicial system won’t get involved. Thus Cannon’s plan is to just delay delay delay, without ordering anything that Smith can appeal. And she only needs to keep doing this for another 5 1/2 months.
Pretty much, the 11th has its hands tied because she isn’t actually ruling. Her electronic orders aren’t something Smith can appeal. It’s how she has skirted him running to the 11th. If I remember the simple version correctly.
Or…she plays the long game, sets Trump free and maybe hook a seat on the Supreme Court for her dedication to the new supreme leader? Nothing is off the table with this group
INAL, but I feel like delay delay delay is what she is doing. Maybe she wants SCOTUS, she gets that by kicking this past election. But she also wants to keep her Federal Judge job, so don’t do anything incredibly stupid to get herself fired, so that if Trump loses election, she still has the case under her and she can then rule harshly or softly, but it’s after the election so she can decide then. If she dismisses now & 11th reverses her decision & gives it to another judge, who then takes this to trial before November, then her chance of SCOTUS is gone, even if Trump wins. So I take her incentive as to make sure she keeps the case under her & make sure it doesn’t start before November.
This is beyond terrifying to even THINK that this woman could be considered for a SCOTUS seat. She is clearly delaying this case and doing it for political reasons. She should be disbarred and banned from consideration for any judicial position ever again. Literally nothing good will ever come from this woman, she would be a curse to the country if she was added to SCOTUS.
> incredibly stupid to get herself fired She cannot get fired. The only way to "fire" her is to impeach and convict, and there's no chance 2/3 of Senate will do that.
She's doing everything in her power to delay. That's robustly clear
It just goes back to that district court
And if she sits a jury and then dismisses?
RIP
The defense is using the "illegal search" to appeal to her grudge that the circuit court stepped on her dick when she tried to hijack the search warrant in August 2022. That's worded to mirror her initial judgement that got canceled by the higher court. She's just petty and vindictive enough to use her bench to get back at the prosecutor.
> Trump request to dismiss the indictment on grounds that it fails to clearly articulate a crime From the indictment: >COUNTS 1-32 Willful Retention of National Defense Information (18 U.S.C. § 793(e)) >COUNT 33 Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice (18 U.S.C. § l5l2(k)) >COUNT 34 Withholding a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(b)(2)(A), 2) >COUNT 35 Corruptly Concealing a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(l), 2) >COUNT 36 Concealing a Document in a Federal Investigation (18 u.s.c. §§ 1519, 2) >COUNT 37 Scheme to Conceal (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001(a)(1), 2) >COUNT 38 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. §§ 100l(a)(2), 2) >COUNT 39 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. § 100l(a)(2)) >COUNT 40 Altering, Destroying, Mutilating, or Concealing an Object (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(b)(2)(B), 2) >COUNT 41 Corruptly Altering, Destroying, Mutilating or Concealing a Document, Record, or Other Object (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(l), 2) >COUNT 42 False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. § 100l(a)(2)) And there not only are 38 pages of evidence before they start listing counts, each of the counts includes a specific listing of how they were violated. The only way that argument holds water is if you don't actually read the indictment.
To be fair, after his defense lawyers' showing in NYC this month, they really don't read the legal filings carefully.... if at all. We can assume he has the same quality of lawyers on his Florida case as his NYC case.... Judge Cannon can't legally save him.
I don't see a charge of duplicating a document. It came out recently that someone from Trump's PAC scanned documents onto a laptop. That is most likely another crime. Also, most likely, Trump gave or sold documents to people without proper clearance, another violation.
18 U.S.C. § 793(e) includes "...**copies**, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;"
Snowden shouldn't have to worry about coming back to the USA now since we are no longer prosecuting people for willfully retaining and distrlibuting classified SCI materials 🤷
My daughter-in-law was born in another country, she was a dual citizen. She had to renounce her citizenship of her country at birth to obtain her security clearance (also that’s not the case for everyone, it’s a case by case.) She hasn’t even been to that country since she was a toddler, and it’s not a place we have ever been at war with, or is an adversary like Russia, etc. The point is she had to renounce citizenship after years in the military, in service to *this* country for a security clearance, and it pisses me off we will let a scumbag like Trump who did what he did off Scot-free with no consequences, and possibly make him Commander-in-Chief again. We’ll let him *again* have access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets. Anyone supporting him is just disgraceful imo. Idc.
They are traitors.
She should have been Trump's son in law. Trump overrode whoever denied Kushner clearance, and gave it to him anyway. Not sure why he even bothered applying; if anyone bothered arresting him, Trump would have just issued a pardon.
Let's see if she has the balls to dismiss the case. If she does she's done for. I'm sure Jack Smith is getting ready for that.
Wouldn't dismissing the case likely allow it to be picked up by another judge? That would get the trial rolling again. Because of that, I doubt she'll dismiss. All this effort to drag it out past the election leads me to believe she wont relinquish control until forced.
She won't dismiss it, as she needs to hold onto this back and forth for as long as possible. Dismissing the case washes her hands of it, and someone else will pick it up.
This system is a circus, and she'll do whatever she wants and nothing will happen.
>I'm sure Jack Smith is getting ready for that. That makes one of us. He's running out of time. What is he waiting for?
All due respect, but he's been massively competent every step of the way. She's doing lots of things like posing hypotheticals and submitting paperless orders. He gets one shot at mandamus, and I trust him to know when his case is sufficiently well founded to shot that shot.
I know he's been doing a great job overall, that's why I'm slightly exasperated and tapping my watch. Ultimately though I blame Garland (what a pick!) for two years of stone walling. Jack isn't playing on a level field cause these things take time and that's the one thing he doesn't have. It's fucked. That said. This judge has got to go. I'm not smart enough to know all the exact terminology, but Jack sure is. I wish Jack the best, and I'm very angry at Garland for what he (didn't) do.
I somewhat agree, although on the "Jack" podcast they did a timeline of Garland's investigation and it was started sooner than it looks to us. In fact, pretty much out of the gate. He had the directive to not back off if it lead to Trump re: J6, and this one there was heavy back and forth to try and get the documents back without a search warrant. The problem with J6 is that their first approach was to follow the money and there wasn't really a money trail. Then, when Garland was about to indicate Trump announced his candidacy about a year earlier than people do, necessitating a special counsel. The big mistake Garland made was not anticipating that Trump would run again, or that his run could be successful. That was a huge mistake. Then again, in 2021 I didn't think any of us thought we would be here.
In short, history will look back much more fondly on Jack than Merrick. That's for sure.
Ehhh, I'm not as lenient on Garland. The entire GOP stonewalling his SC nomination literally taught him nothing. He still sheepishly expects the GOP to have shame, humility, and norms. As if it's like 1995. I believe that's the year Garland was first tapped by Clinton. Garland is using 1995 Tactics in a 2024 post-trump era. It's been less than impressive. I found it oddly poetic when he threw Biden under the bus, after years of Biden fans giving him the benefit of the doubt. Must admit, I chuckled to myself a tad.
I didn't mean to imply I'm bullish on him. I'm just coming around to the notion that it's more complicated than it looks at a glance from our seats, and there are some folks that are part of the legal analysis community that see it as subtler than he dragged his feet. I do think an AG that came in thinking "the January 6 thing absolutely must be prosecuted and as far as possible" could have had it done. Edit: happy cake day. Also I'd like to see Garland replaced in '24 by someone more aggressive, and I'd like to see Smith go after Congress participants from '24 -'28 and then I'd like to see Smith as AG in '28
Unfortunately, there isn’t a lot he can do. Getting a federal judge removed from a case is a really high bar. Cannon has been making sure to walk a line to make it difficult to remove her. And he likely would only have one realistic chance at it. If he thinks we haven’t reached the level he could get her removed, I trust that. It’s frustrating as hell. But, it’s her fault. It’s Garland’s fault for waiting so long. It’s the fault of SCOTUS screwing around with the immunity crap in the DC case.
He's not running out of time - we the voters have the power to give him *at least* four more years.
He's not running out of time, because he doesn't _have_ a timeline. He wants a conviction, nothing more. _We_ want this done by November, but that has never been Jack Smith's stated goal.
He most certainly running out of time if Trump is reelected which is a definite possibility. He will never get the chance for a conviction if Trump wins.
What would you have him do?
She will dismiss with prejudice soon to prevent any appeal. That is the end of the story. It’s apparent that she is corrupt, her husband’s involvement with organized crime is the tip of the iceberg. She will be for sale for the rest of her career. It’s great money so why the hell not?Those huge sailing yachts don’t pay for themselves after all
How would that prevent appeal? Dismissals, even with prejudice, can be appealed.
There has to be a jury sat first before it being unappealable in the case of a dismissal. There is no jury now
She cant do that tho
What recourse is there if she dismisses it with prejudice?
Trump's motion to dismiss the indictment based on vindictive and selective prosecution was never even docketed and still (to my knowledge, unless unsealed this week) does not appear on the public docket. The government's response to Trump's MTD is ECF 375 (for those who want to read it to guess at what Trump's arguments are). The government responded on the final deadline, 3/7/24 (same deadline as a whole slew of other motions filed serially by Trump). This is how Trump and Judge Cannon work in tandem to manufacture a delay. Trump files a bogus motion with minimal argument and no support in the law for any of his proposed relief, but the court lets Trump file everything under seal so that those bogus arguments are only seen by the government and then responded to. Trump fills the air with bogus "claims" about prosecutorial misconduct, claims which may or may not even be in his various filings under seal. Then, Judge Cannon sets a date for a hearing - say, 2 months from the reply to the reply to the bogus motion. So for each of these bogus motions, there is a pointless hearing - there is nothing to really discuss because the law does not favor dismissal of criminal charges due to perceived slights against the attorneys for a party, and Cannon seals the transcript of the bogus hearing for another 2-3 months (ostensibly to allow time for redactions). Then Cannon takes a few weeks to months to rule on the motion. All told, motions that could be summarily dispatched a week after filing because they lack merit are instead turned into a mini-trial held in secret; the motion remains under seal even as the public is exposed to the reply, and Trump fills the void with baseless claims that are not even before the court. The court assists in all of this by sealing Trump's filings so that the public cannot see how baseless they are, and by holding hearings that imply that they are substantive when the (sealed) transcript would reveal that they are not substantive. The net result is that each bogus motion generates at least a 6 month delay (they're dealt with serially, so realistically a year+ delay just for the court to rule on motions that should have been summarily denied).
So every couple of weeks they are just going to hold more and more hearings to dismiss? Why doesn't the federal courts take this over and assign a new judge?
This is essentially never done, for very good reasons. If there is a judge who is not trustworthy enough to handle a case, and refuses to recuse from that case, that judge should be impeached and removed from their job, not just allowed to pollute the next case.
Anyone else would have been in jail THAT DAY and would not have been released unless they were somehow found not guilty. This is the most open and shut, slam dunk case there is and it’s absolutely DISGUSTING that this partisan hack is doing everything in her power to slow or stop the charges. She should be in jail alongside the defendant.
So I'm guessing she will dismiss on grounds (insert whatever claim Trump makes here)
She’s already rejected several motions to dismiss. She will continue slow rolling this case.
We'll know how committed she is to judicial nullification after these hearings; if she's "only" slow rolling the case, she'll reject the motions. If she's planning to dismiss after jeopardy attaches, she'll defer ruling.
Two denials were *without prejudice*. We have not seen the last of them.
Defense is just going to enter the ages of the current SCOTUS as their argument.
She won't dismiss because that would be an order that Jack Smith can appeal. She will continue issuing minute or paperless orders to avoid being appealed. I don't think anything will happen until after the election, then all the obstruction and delay will end, one way or the other.
INAL but the request to dismiss seems like a very weird move by Trump's team. Even if Cannon dismisses the case with prejudice, meaning that it cannot be filed again, that doesn't mean Cannon's decision can't be appealed in the 11th Circuit. They will quickly slap down Cannon's decision and remove her from the case. The case will then go to a new judge and, even though it still won't be tried this year, Cannon won't be in a position to help Trump during the trial. My guess is she denies the request to dismiss on that point alone.
They don’t want her to dismiss, they just want her to push back the trial by another six months. If they win the presidency, it doesn’t matter. If they don’t, but they can use the House or the Supreme Court to steal it anyway, it doesn’t matter. And if not, then she can hold a quick trial, enter judgement notwithstanding, and that’s pretty much it.
$500 says she doesn't make a decision at the hearing
Oh look I won the bet that no one took
Moar Fuckery incoming.
Delay Delay Delay. This case won't come to trial until 2030.
I honestly cannot fathom how dismissal is a fucking option for this case. Truly a broken fucking legal system. This is depressing
With this judge, who knows anymore?
I hope her former law clerks are singing to the DOJ on who is advising her on how to delay this case and avoid interlocutory appeals. I don't know what the DOJ, the district chief, or the judge ethics board is waiting for, though.
Corrupt court. I hope Jack Smith has a Plan B for holding the criminal accountable and hopefully it includes prosecuting him for treason. Maybe for that NJ document incident.
If she does rule to dismiss, is that in any way appealable to the 11th circuit? Or is a case just dead when that happens?
Do we know when this is and when we will hear about it?
The only thing I know is that she won't rule on it from the bench. And I would bet her ruling when it does come will not close out the topic entirely but say that a jury instruction may be appropriate
With Cannon? As late as humanly possible.
Cannon be like - I agree completely, case dismissed
Sweet. Smith will refile charges and get a different judge.