15
Aileen Cannon refusing Jack Smith request in Donald Trump case sparks fury
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
15 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10179 readers
74 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Same, IANAL, but of all the things I see wrong with this specific judge, particularly in being involved in any Trump and/or political case, considering the blatant bias shown in past cases that a non-partisan judge would not make, I don't see, or get why this would be a particularly big deal.
I get knowing in advance what the defense will be arguing helps prepares, but I feel if something unexpected is argued, and requires more research, a request to continue the trial on another date should be submitted.
In this case, permitting such a delay would be to Trumps benefit, and it would be best to be prepared for any such strategy, and not need to submit any such delaying requests.
It'd be great for the DOJ if they could get the judge to disallow arguing distracting, time wasting, unrelated strategies, but this particular judge is such Trump groupie I doubt that would happen.