516

Judge Aileen Cannon Is Quietly Sabotaging the Trump Classified Documents Case (slate.com)

submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

On Friday, District Judge Aileen Cannon issued a new order in the Donald Trump classified documents case adding to the mountain of evidence that she is firmly in the former president’s pocket. Trump appointed Cannon in 2020 and the Senate confirmed her appointment in the days after he lost the 2020 election. It’s deeply offensive to the rule of law for judges to bend the law to benefit those who put them on the bench. Sadly, Cannon does just that.

Cannon’s new ruling rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s entirely standard request that she order Trump to state whether he intends to rely on an “advice of counsel” defense ahead of the trial, currently scheduled for May 20. Advance notice of the defense helps expedite a trial because defendants asserting it need to provide additional discovery to prosecutors—raising the defense means that defendants must disclose all communications with their attorneys, as the defense waives the attorney–client privilege.

Judge Cannon’s brief order asserted that Smith’s motion was “not amenable to proper consideration at this juncture, prior to at least partial resolution of pretrial motions” and further discovery.

Sound innocuous? It’s anything but. Instead, it’s part of a pattern we’ve already seen of Cannon laying the groundwork for delaying Trump’s trial—until it’s too late for a jury to be empaneled and the case tried to verdict before the election.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] zergtoshi@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Remind me: doesn't a pardon include or rather imply an admission of guilt?
Because no guilt, no grounds for pardon, right?
Can pardons be effectively handed out for all kinds of crimes? Or are there crimes, which just can't be pardoned - strictly from a legal point of view of course.

[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

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

[-] Tyfud@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

You can be pardoned for crimes you haven't committed yet, legally speaking.

[-] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 9 months ago

Not crimes you haven't yet committed - you can't pardon an assassin for murder then send them on their way

It can be crimes you haven't been convicted of, which is what I think you meant to say

[-] ShortFuse@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's more DoJ policy, which is legally like an employee handbook: precedent that it is to be followed when deciding to prosecute cases. It would still need to go to court and be weighed by a judge.

Edit: On the topic of civil or state charges, it can be argued as admission of guilt, but again, up to the court to decide.

The President ultimately gets to decide who to pardon. Everything else relates to the Office of the Pardon Attorney/DoJ is there to "help" the President make the president make his decisions. And Trump has already ignored the norm and pardoned whoever he wanted.

this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024

516 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19136 readers

4070 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News