She's in over her head and indebted to Trump for giving her a position on the Supreme Court, when she lacked the type of experience for such an important position. She certainly wasn't picked because her resume made her more highly qualified than plenty of other candidates.
The whole narrative from Trump and his supporters is that he is being treated unlike any other criminal defendant. They are right. He is getting more preferential treatment than any criminal defendant.
It must be difficult with anyone with even the minimal interest in integrity and maintaining the rule of law to watch maga judge cannon...
Look. I am tired of you lying. Trump is NOT and adjudicated rapist. He was adjudicated as a sexual assaulter
Why doesn't maga judge cannon just declare trump innocent and end the charade of being an impartial judge?
Considering the fact that she was appointed as his coup and insurrection was being plotted I'd say she definitely was.
Consider the office of Jack Smith, the Special Counsel. It simply *must* be unconstitutional. Congress has mandated that U.S. Attorneys be Senate confirmed (after being presidentially nominated) and constitutional law mandates that U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. And U.S. Attorneys have (most of the time) limited geographic jurisdiction. The E.D. Pa. U.S. Attorney can prosecute federal crimes in Philadelphia but not San Francisco. And the N.D. Cal. U.S. Attorney can prosecute federal crimes in San Francisco but not Philadelphia. A Special Counsel like Jack Smith can prosecute *anywhere* in the whole country. He fuses the powers of ALL U.S. Attorneys in one (like the superhero Shazam fuses the powers of various Greek gods into one). And yet a Special Counsel like Jack Smith is not Senate confirmed. AND he cannot be removed at the pleasure of the President. Only the Attorney General can remove him, and even then only for cause. All of this is constitutional anathema AND it wildly flouts Congress. Finally, Special Counsels were created by mere regulation issued by the Attorney General. If that move is constitutional, then an Attorney General can totally subvert the Constitution and Congress by creating various DOJ officials by mere regulation and giving them powers that equal or exceed those of U.S. Attorneys. And if that can logically happen, then the congressional requirement of Senate confirmation is rendered meaningless and regulations by the AG can effectively leave U.S. Attorneys, creatures of statute, as nullities. Indeed, here’s a bonus point — the Independent Counsel statute was allowed to expire by Congress. Allowing the AG to largely recreate that system — by regulation — therefore flouts Congress in a separate way — not just by end running how U.S. Attorneys operate and are appointed and confirmed.
Aileen Cannon Is Who Critics Feared She Was The judge handling Trump’s classified-documents case has shown that she’s not fit for the task. By David A. Graham Cannon’s selection immediately stirred up worries. She had little trial experience, having been appointed to the bench at just 39. She was an appointee of Trump himself. And she had already raised concerns with her rulings in favor of Trump in a precursor to the case, which were later reversed by a sharply critical appeals court. These objections might have been premature: Interpreting a judge’s mindset, and assessing her shortcomings, from the outside can be difficult. But after a year of action—and, perhaps more important, inaction—from Cannon, it seems that many of the worst fears about her were not just well founded but understated: Her track record in the case has been extremely favorable to Trump, to a degree that undermines any faith in her ability to adjudicate it fairly going forward. The latest astonishing development is a New York Times report yesterday that two other federal judges in Florida’s Southern District sought to persuade her to step aside from the case and let another jurist take it. One colleague argued to Cannon that it would be better for a judge in Miami, rather than her satellite Fort Pierce courthouse, to deal with the case, in part because the Miami courthouse has a facility for sensitive documents, the paper reported. When Cannon demurred, the chief judge of the district called her and argued that her reversed decision earlier meant that her having this case would look bad. She again declined to hand it off. Whether Cannon’s colleagues were concerned about inexperience or bias is not clear from the reporting, but what is striking is that they seem to have reached the same conclusion that many outsiders did at the time and later: Cannon has no business presiding over the case. ... If Smith’s filings show a rising irritation, outsiders who have no need to be polite have not been. “The fact these motions are even being entertained with a hearing is itself ridiculous,” the national-security lawyer Bradley Moss told CNN. “The magnitude of the legal mistakes that are happening is weird. They’re always in the same direction, right? The legal mistakes are always Trump-favorable,” the University of Texas law professor Lee Kovarsky told New York. “It’s clear that she is going in a ridiculous direction,” Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge, told Politico. The attorneys Dennis Aftergut and Laurence Tribe wrote in Slate that Cannon “is quietly sabotaging” the case. “Judge Cannon is proving that she is not fit for this moment,” the former CIA attorney Brian Greer wrote in the Times. That these commentators would be critical of Cannon is perhaps no surprise—they include Democratic appointees, Trump critics, and federal prosecutors, all people inclined to be sympathetic to Smith. What affirms their concerns is that Cannon’s colleagues—people who intimately know the court, the law, and the judge herself—evidently agreed.
Yeah, same guy. The civil lawyer with no criminal law experience, so he's no expert. Trump wanted to make him acting attorney general just hours before the attack on Jan. 6, 2021, but backed off when Justice Department leadership threatened to resign en masse. Just a yes man willing lie, cheat, and steal for Trump. This is pretty funny .. Lawrence O'Donnell rips Trump co-defendant for being 'even stupider than I thought' O'Donnell explained, "Donald Trump doesn't seem to know that cable television actually passes through a cable, not over the airwaves — thereby completely avoiding the jurisdiction of the FCC…. Indicted lawyer Jeffrey Clark…. wrote a long tweet trying to insist that Donald Trump was right to say that cable television uses free airwaves. It was the most idiotic composition on that point that a lawyer or non-lawyer could have possibly come up with…. Today, Jeffrey Clark, in his Twitter communication with me, convinced me, beyond a reasonable double, that he is even stupider than I thought. https://www.alternet.org/jeffrey-clark-doj-2666416108/
Why is it the same damn picture of this woman? Some variety would be nice instead of including a stock photo in every publication.
Secret trip "to check on the boxes"... yea, sure. I wonder how many documents were buried with Invanka?
