Posted on 06/06/2024 9:41:30 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
The judge overseeing Donald Trump's classified documents case has been criticized by legal experts for her "baffling" rescheduling of a number of hearings in the already delayed trial.
Judge Aileen Cannon announced on Wednesday that there will be a shuffle of the timeline as she intends to rule on a number of legal arguments connected to the case. Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump in 2020, has already indefinitely postponed the start of the federal trial pending the outcome of several appeals and motions.
From June 21, Cannon will hold hearings on Trump's arguments that Special Counsel Jack Smith, the lead prosecutor in the case, was unlawfully appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland as it was not first approved by the Senate.
Cannon added a hearing on the gag order request from the Department of Justice to prevent Trump from making potentially inflammatory remarks about law enforcement ahead of the trial.
There will also be another hearing on Trump's arguments to suppress some evidence obtained following the FBI's search of Mar-a-Lago in August 2022 on the grounds of Trump's attorney-client privilege......
"This whole way she has conducted this case is wildly, totally, crazily unusual," Toobin told CNN's AC360 on Wednesday.
"And the allowing of outsiders to participate in a day-and-a-half hearing that most judges would decide on briefs or maybe give 10 minutes aside to argue is just another illustration that she is trying to kill this prosecution. That's the only conclusion you can draw."
When Garland announced the appointment of Smith in November 2022 as special counsel, he cited his "authority" as attorney general to do so.
The Justice Department allows the attorney general to appoint a special counsel under "extraordinary circumstances." When announcing Smith as special counsel,
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
AGAIN, this has nothing to do with the documents case.
Make that liberal lawyers who think they're experts.
“She’s crazy! She doesn’t masturbate on camera at all,” the perplexed Toobin stated.
“ wildly, totally, crazily unusual,” Toobin told CNN’s AC360”
Like spanking the monkey on a live zoom video call?
What is your justification that judge Cannon cannot be independent in this case? What in her judicial history brings you to this view? What other options are there - a Biden appointed judge, an Obama appointed judge (same thing really) - maybe go back far enough and find a W Bush appointed judge or would you say this isn’t fair because he was a Republican? The appointment is random. If you have evidence that judge Cannon donated to Trump or otherwise has a clear bias then please post it and I will agree with you but otherwise what do you suggest? What president appointed federal judge would be acceptable and for what reason would they not have the same issues you claim that Cannon is beholdened to Trump for if they could be seen as beholden to Biden or Obama or any Dem appointed judge?
LOL!
I didn’t even realize until I saw your comment.
He was the ass clown “knocking one out” on live TV back during COVID.
Im “baffled” that anyone still gives him a platform (other than his only fans channel of course)
Actually it’s not. It has the potential to be a conflict but only if the Judge feels that they cannot be impartial / it will affect their ability to be impartial. Judges frequently are able to remain Impartial despite “potential” conflicts. Sotomayor, Kagan and Ginsberg do it all the time. The bottom line is the judge makes the call.
How dare she protect the rights of the defendant when that defendant is named Trump!
She was appointed by President Trump. Now she’s sitting in judgment of a federal case involving the person who appointed her.
That’s a conflict of interest. It’s unarguable that it’s a conflict of interest and it really doesn’t matter if she can or cannot be impartial.
No, it’s a direct conflict of interest.
When has Kagan or Sotomayor or Kagan sat in judgment of the person who appointed her?
Name another time when this has happened.
This is the first time in US history that a President is indicted for possessing classified docs.
Being without precedent, this case becomes pioneering case history and future case law. There’s no protocol for how they proceed.
It is appropriate for Cannon to take her time with every detail. It appears there will be more presidents indicted from now on.
Again, what judge would be acceptable to you then who was appointed by a different president and why? The argument she is beholden to Trump for her job - same argument then for one who is beholden to Biden or Obama for their jobs so therefore according to you, they are beholden To favor who appointed them. Keep in mind, all these judges were also approved by Senate confirmation so it isn’t solely only the president. Also, Trump probably never even met her or dozens of other appointments and he went with someone’s recommendation.
“This whole way she has conducted this case is wildly, totally, crazily unusual,” Toobin told CNN’s AC360 on Wednesday. And the allowing of outsiders to participate in a day-and-a-half hearing that most judges would decide on briefs or maybe give 10 minutes aside to argue is just another illustration that she is trying to kill this prosecution. That’s the only conclusion you can draw.”
No, it’s not, Toobin, you self-manipulative slut.
Instead of shuffling papers and issuing unilateral pronouncements, Judge Cannon is: 1) inviting third party experts to present the governing law on this issue as they see it; 2) subjecting those experts to her own questioning, plus examination by both prosecution and defense; and, 3) doing both in open court so the citizenry can know what was said.
In this important case, both the Prosecution and Defense have interests that are not necessarily going to align with Constitutional and National interests. Jack Smith and the DoJ are naturally 100% biased towards themselves. It is imperative for outside legal experts to go beyond partisan interests. Judge Cannon deserves a salute, not criticism.
I guess Toobin is correct that openness, fairness, making fully informed and disinterested decisions, etc., is “highly unusual” these days.
“This whole way she has conducted this case is wildly, totally, crazily unusual,” Toobin told CNN’s AC360 on Wednesday. And the allowing of outsiders to participate in a day-and-a-half hearing that most judges would decide on briefs or maybe give 10 minutes aside to argue is just another illustration that she is trying to kill this prosecution. That’s the only conclusion you can draw.”
No, it’s not, Toobin, you self-manipulative slut.
Instead of shuffling papers and issuing unilateral pronouncements, Judge Cannon is: 1) inviting third party experts to present the governing law on this issue as they see it; 2) subjecting those experts to her own questioning, plus examination by both prosecution and defense; and, 3) doing both in open court so the citizenry can know what was said.
In this important case, both the Prosecution and Defense have interests that are not necessarily going to align with Constitutional and National interests. Jack Smith and the DoJ are naturally 100% biased towards themselves. It is imperative for outside legal experts to go beyond partisan interests. Judge Cannon deserves a salute, not criticism.
I guess Toobin is correct that openness, fairness, making fully informed and disinterested decisions, etc., is “highly unusual” these days.
BS, you are full of it.
“ No, it’s a direct conflict of interest.”
Actually, it’s not. As she is a federal judge, she is appointed for life. So there is nothing that Trump could offer her or threaten her with to influence her decisions. Unless you can point to a clear benefit or harm that would come to her as a result of her decisions based on her being appointed by Trump, there is no conflict. You just think it creates an appearance of a conflict, and many might agree and many would disagree. Under your interpretation, judges could not rule on any case involving the person who nominated them. Thus, Justice Jackson would have to recuse from any case brought against the Biden Admin, etc.
And it isn’t a conflict of interest when the judge sitting on your case was appointed by your political enemy.
Please keep up the good work!
Actually, it is.
“Under your interpretation, judges could not rule on any case involving the person who nominated them.”
That’s not what I said.
In a criminal court case, it’s a conflict of interest to sit in judgment of the person who appointed you.
In fact, it would be the definition of “conflict of interest.”
“And it isn’t a conflict of interest when the judge sitting on your case was appointed by your political enemy.”
Far less than one created when judging the person who appointed you.
So in your example, Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr is nominated by Joe Biden, it’d be totally legitimate for Saporito Jr. to judge a criminal case against Joe Biden? Of course it wouldn’t! That’s just silly!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.