She needs to be removed from the bench.

Surprise request??? These things are fucking standard in these situations. Fucking media always giving these extremists legitimacy via platforming their bs.

Journalistic integrity is dead and capitalism killed it

Aileen "Special Master for Master Trump" Canon doesn't get to complain about wasted time.

Timeline of events:

Woodward is a lawyer hired by the Trump PAC to represent Trump's co-defendants, including Nauta, and Tavares. De Oliveira is represented by another lawyer, Irving, also hired by the Trump PAC.

Tavares changed lawyers to one that is not funded by the Trump PAC, and has changed his testimony.

Prosecution files paperwork citing concerns about Woodward's ability to cross examine Tavares or call his credibility into question during closing arguments. At that time, the prosecution did not request a hearing because it wasn't clear that Tavares would be a witness yet.

Side note, lawyers are required to maintain privilege even after they are fired. Woodward may have privileged information about Tavares that would create an ethical conflict, like for instance if Tavares told Woodward something in confidence and then lied about it on the stand, Woodward would be in a quandry. He cannot challenge the testimony without breaching his responsibility to his former client, and he cannot give a closing argument where he says "That guy's a liar, and I would know because I was his lawyer."

So this was a known, expected issue.

During this hearing, the prosecution announced that they intend to call Tavares as a witness, and requested the separate hearing.

Woodward played dumb, saying he hadn't prepared to argue this point, and how shocked and appalled he was that such a thing could even be questioned. This despite the fact that there was already a previous hearing for Irving, who represented three other witnesses and will have one of his associates do thise cross examinations.

The judge, deeply in the bag for Trump, played along with the farce. However, she will be required to hold the hearing, and will likely need to rule that Woodward cannot cross examine Tavares or attack his testimony in closing arguments. Anything less, and it will be a layup appeal for either side. The prosecution could argue that Woodward was utilizing privileged information, and the defendant could argue that he did not get a proper defense because his lawyer had competing interests.

So while we can predict the outcome, it's also likely that she will use this as another reason to stall the trial and pretend she isn't trying to drag it out and give Trump a chance to be elected before he gets convicted. The judge admonishing the prosecution is just a little cherry on the shit sundae that is this trial. The concerns were raised previously, and the cited caselaw is "ibid." The judge was looking for a reason to justify an attack on the prosecution.

It's really impressive to see MAGA official in action when they think they can't be touched. Just openly and brazenly doing whatever the fuck they want and not even pretending to justify themselves. This is kind of behavior is what you would expect from a group of people that does not believe in the legitimacy of our government at any level, and I think that applies. Basically, all positions MAGA can occupy bend towards the goal of replacing our government with a single man who knows their wishes and can "cut through the bullshit" to "just fix everything", just don't call it a dictatorship.

Is she trying to get removed from this case?

This is the best summary I could come up with:

US district judge Aileen Cannon abruptly postponed the hearing after getting the request to prevent the lawyer from doing cross-examination and closing arguments of a former client at trial – which came after prosecutors had first said they would not seek disqualification.

She added she was “disappointed” that David Harbach, one of the prosecutors, had raised the request without warning, and without citing supporting cases from the southern district of Florida.

The hearing was the second in a pair of proceedings scheduled so Trump’s co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, could be told of their lawyers’ prior representation of witnesses during the grand jury investigation who could testify against them at trial.

The complication emerged at the hearing for Nauta, when prosecutors said they could not be sure how Woodward might cross-examine “Trump Employee 4”, identified by the Guardian as the IT director of Mar-a-Lago, Yuscil Taveras.

But asking to preclude Woodward from doing closing arguments was a new request in the eyes of Cannon, who pressed Harbach on why it was being raised for the first time at the hearing.

De Oliveira’s language skills have been a topic of discussion inside the Trump legal team for months, according to people familiar with the matter.

The original article contains 737 words, the summary contains 206 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

I get the source of ire, assuming the bot summary is correct:

"prosecutors had first said they would not seek disqualification."

then...

"getting the request to prevent the lawyer from doing cross-examination and closing arguments of a former client at trial"

And that they...

"raised the request without warning, and without citing supporting cases from the southern district of Florida."

I still think she's an asshat, but in this case, seems justified...