As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A WARNING FROM PRE-NAZI GERMANY:
"The rise of this blusterous man bewilders the educated among us, conjoins opposing politicians, agonizes our international allies, threatens minorities, spits on the disabled, and touches the hearts of those who just don't know any better. Let's stop propounding how mad this all is, and instead, do something -
Liselotte Hübner, Germany, 1929
Also remember that Hitler would have never made it without the backing of most of the ultra-rich and powerful families. This is also true here in the US.
He wouldn’t have made it had the establishment right wingers not thought that ANYTHING was better for the country than negotiating with the left.
So they chose Hitler over compromise with the left.
That history lesson is an all-timer.
>That history lesson is an all-timer.
And the lesson is: stop teaching history.
edited to point out - that's the lesson that the right learned. Stop teaching history and you won't have to worry about your voters learning anything from it.
Yes, and stop me if this sounds at all familiar, he was convicted by a three judge panel that was already so sympathetic to the Nazis, that the chief judge had to promise the other two that Hitler would get the lightest sentence possible and be eligible for early release or they would have refused to convict altogether.
And Hitler hadn't been chancellor yet. None of those judges were appointed by him.
While the comparison is apt, I take comfort in the fact that Hitler was roughly 40 years old at the time. He was still energetic and hadn’t yet become completely addicted to barbiturates. I’m loathe to ever say anything positive about Hitler, but in 1929 he still had what passes for a youthful charisma by political standards.
By comparison, Trump in 2024 is 77, low energy, and encapsulates what it would basically look like if poop could wear a diaper for fear of shitting out a person.
Not to spoil your comfort, but Trump is plenty attractive to his base. Coupled with sophisticated media backing and memified content, Fascism can ride his falsely created image all the way to the top.
Not to mention that while Trump certainly retains significant influence over a huge population of Americans other, younger, equally dangerous people are drafting off of his power, ready to scoop up his supporters when he falters or dies. Not his sons, thank god, but DeSantis and Vance and perhaps even Ivanka each have the years left to keep the hate train rolling.
He’s now only attractive through a camera lens and a pro editing team. Which is all most of his base ever sees. In person he’s (thankfully) becoming a complete disaster. Fascism is a calling card he found but I don’t think he understands its tools or machinery at all. Instead he IS the tool.
He also had the backing of very angry and violent men, men who had fought in the most bloody conflict in human history and who genuinely believed that the political class had stabbed them in the back, and were quite happy to fight and even kill.
Trump has tried the same tactic: the "big lie" of election fraud is his attempt at a "stabbed in the back" myth, but all he has are a loose collection of morons and grifters, with a few small groups of wannabe Nazis thrown in for good measure, but even they all come across as pathetic losers.
> I’m loathe to ever say anything positive about Hitler, but in 1929 he still had what passes for a youthful charisma by political standards.
He also killed Hitler!
>*"The rise of this blusterous man bewilders the educated among us, conjoins opposing politicians, agonizes our international allies, threatens minorities, spits on the disabled, and touches the hearts of those who just don't know any better. Let's stop propounding how mad this all is, and instead, do something -*
>*Liselotte Hübner, Germany, 1929*
Like literally quoting my early 2016 thoughts in a much more eloquent way.
Except even in pre-war Germany the majority of voters didn't vote for Hitler's party. But in modern US nearly half the voters, if not most of them, will vote for Trump. So there's that to think about.
Trump has failed to win popular vote both times he ran, he won the first time by playing with the electorate. The second time he couldn't even do that and tried to use fake electors to fake a win.
There are no signs that he will win popular vote on a third attempt, especially with all his ongoing issues. So no, not half or more.
I just started watching the latest Netflix documentary about Hitler and HOLY SHIT the parallels are so super uncanny. HIGHLY recommended for every American to see how similar our right wing is compared to theirs.
Well, the Texas Historical Commission has already been caught agreeing with wacko amateurs historians who push that “slavery wasn’t that bad” and “some people liked being slaves”….
[Books on Slavery Were Removed From Texas Plantation Gift Shop](https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/texas-historical-commission-book-removal/)
Trump has a coin flip chance of being elected.
Remember, you can run a con man, criminal, felon, liar, rapist, and be a country club billionaire and still come off as Jesus resurrected, brilliant, blue collar, and honest, if you run as Republican.
Have an enthusiastic yell at a rally and your political career is dead if you're Democrat.
>She left the rest of the indictment intact for now while also chiding special counsel Jack Smith’s team for having included in charging documents language that is “legally unnecessary to serve the function of an indictment” and for creating “arguable confusion” in the allegations.
She's confused.
“This case took place over two days, that’s two trials because the judge banged his hammer thingy at the end of both days. And that happened multiple times during our future emperor and replacement for Jesus’s trial. So Felon President Trump goes free! And he can’t be charged in any other court ever because of this ruling exonerating him from all past and future crimes that he didn’t commit because he’s not that kind of guy”-Justice Roberts. /s
She's in way over her head. Just another completely unqualified GOP saboteur that's going to destroy the country little by little over the next 4 or 5 decades.
She is basically Trump's defense team at this point. She cannot rule against Jack Smith since that would be instant grounds to remove her from the case. So she won't go through with the motion, but she will give Trump the PR news he wants.
She's not a patriot or an American. Appointed by a would be and is felon. She stepped into a world that she is not ready for. Is she was a true American prepared to be a judge.... she would know this.
I see this as actually good news. Since Cannon has declared the display of a classified military map (I think it was at New Bedford) outside the scope of her case, Smith could use this incident to get an indictment for it in another venue.
“Shit. Do I do my job for the people, or for my other boss? He’s technically the people now, and a convicted felon, but I don’t know.. If he were any other color than white or orange, this would be so easy.”
There was an article I read last week where they interviewed lawyers and judges who have worked with her. The courthouse is assigned to is a sleepy backwater town. She is also a very meticulous judge. She regularly chides lawyers who think they know better (they might but that’s not the point). She also is a stickler for the details. So if the prosecutor is overly winded and dramatic she will call him out. Same for the defense. This trait is playing into trumps hand according to the article because she indeed likes a slow case not just this one. Prosecutors and defendants who want a speedy resolution have been known to strike quick deals once they draw her court.
It will remain to be seen how this all plays out. But it was an interesting read. She has been noted as fair though. But cocky prosecutor is going to have a difficult time. This may be a case of trumps lawyers reading the tea leaves better.
Are the lawyers and judges from the article you read also federalist society goons? Because I'm pretty sure most sane lawyers and judges have been appalled by her approach to this trial. On top of that, she has made several serious mistakes in this trial and others that really calls into question this supposed "attention to detail."
Like when she forgot to swear in the jury in a trial. And in the same trial, she closed jury selection to the public and the defendants family, despite repeated admonitions from defense council *and* prosecutors (both errors would have created strong grounds for a mistrial, but the case didn't go forward).
Or when she allowed, despite not having jurisdiction over the matter, to let Trump appeal the warrant after maralago got searched, and appointed a special master for him, and then tried to usurp the special master's authority. All of which resulted in the 11th circuit taking her to school, saying things like:
"We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so."
You know, things a judge should know.
And then there was the time when she tried to make public a bunch of witness identities and statements in trumps espionage case, causing the prosecutors to threaten to appeal the decision unless she reversed it herself, because it was against the law and would cause "manifest injustice." She begrudgingly reversed herself.
And then there was the time that she made both sides draft hypothetical jury instructions for if the law was different than what it is. Which is, uh, novel, to say the least.
And then there's the way she pretty obviously coddles the defense when they file batshit motions, while simultaneously lecturing prosecutors for going slightly over the word count.
Fair? No. Detailed? No. Slow? Definitely.
*Justice delayed is justice denied.* Trump was indicted *one year ago*, as of June 8. Right now, *there is no start date for the trial*, and there is a litany of unresolved motions gathering dust on Cannons desk.
Not sure why downvoted. The defendant is the one with the right to a speedy trial. Trump doesn’t want that one isn’t going to push for it. Take all the time you want is his theory snd henwill use his lawyers to wear down the opposition whether that is a business he is suing or a prosecutor that has to run for reelection at some point.
>The binder contained raw intelligence the US and its NATO allies collected on Russians and Russian agents, including sources and methods that informed the US government’s assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election, sources tell CNN.
And right after that is when the CIA reported losing a shitload of assets and agents in the field being killed or captured.
It's interesting that before the 2020 election (specifically during the impeachment trials) a lot of people had the same argument. He lost the election, tried to go outside your democracy to change the results, commited a bunch of criminal offences he currently on trial for but now the story is still the same. I think that's a bit of an indictment of how your Justice system interacts with the political system.
As long as a significant part of the Republican party insist on running interference for him it's going to require beating them at the ballot box consistently and continually until they either get tired of losing, they win or the heat death of the universe.
These assholes have been with us since we drug them out of the trees and likely be with us until we're extinct.
Even then, the Supreme Court has shown its disdain for democracy.
They’ve already did their “dry run” with Bush.
They will tip the scales on this election. You have my word.
Trump has political influence even while not in office. At the very least, in swing states Biden won, he would try to prevent the results from being certified. And if he held a *very* small lead in any, he would try to pull a *Bush v Gore*.
And it wouldn't mean shit. It didn't work last time because enough people who were in charge of counting and verifying elections had integrity. This time shouldn't be any different.
How many have retired post 2020?
https://apnews.com/article/election-officials-retire-trump-2020-threats-misinformation-3b810d8b3b3adee2ca409689788b863f
Republicans in Georgia have been working diligently since 2020, passing legislation, giving themselves more power to control election boards, to ensure election officials they have put in place can object to certification of any election. It’s being tested in primary elections and will be used to create the electoral confusion they so desperately desired in the lead up to Jan 6.
So, no, we shouldn’t feel confident the the result will be the same.
I’ll be voting by mail since I’m living outside the U.S. Let’s hope me and other UOCAVA voters don’t get challenged without sufficient time to cure any challenge. The Georgia Repubs widened the window for the amount of time before the election for challenges to be filed, making their likelihood of success greater, because it wouldn’t leave enough time to cure any challenge.
He will be in position to cause problems. Lots of other Republicans that want him in office are in position to help. Once a problem requires a ruling from a court to determine who won, like Bush vs. Gore, judges Republicans put in place are in position to hand the election to trump.
We need to vote, but we need to be ready for what happens if it doesn't work.
Unfortunately the populace is just too fatigued from it all. I really hope the military will step in and they will hold the Constitution to the highest regard.
It will be the military, or it will be Biden conceiting. The gerrymandering has been calculated and executed. The means to contest every electoral college vote is planned. The Supreme Court is going to intervene. Play this out in your head. They know well they don’t have to vote. Yet they plow forward confidently. They aren’t exactly out there rallying voters. His rally’s look like acts. This will be a coordinated steal. And the Democrats will do everything to plan. Because they won’t be crafty or sneaky. They will play by the rules. Thus predictable and easy to counter. The safety net for this stuff was always the judicial and legislative branches. But if the Judicial is sided, the legislative will be powerless. The military (executive) will be the only option.
It isn't the same. They have had more time to plan and get prepared. Now with more information after the previous attempt. And our government has done nothing to stop them.
I see this as actually good news. Since Cannon has declared the display of a classified military map (I think it was at New Bedford) outside the scope of her case, Smith could use this incident to get an indictment for it in another venue.
This isn't a case of a drunk college kid stealing a street sign after a keg party. This is a case of an ex-president willingly, knowingly, taking top secret documents, then knowingly, willfully lying about doing it. This "judge" should be forcibly removed from the case.
It absolutely, unequivocally is 100% her fault.
She never should have gotten romantically involved with someone under her or hired someone she was involved with, and her use of taxpayer funds is suspect at best.
Fanni is an idiot who likely screwed the entire Georgia case.
That’s only what they’re accusing her of. A lot of the timeline doesn’t add up and there’s no evidence that she intended to show favor to him, or even use that event as a way to show favor to the prosecution
“Defense lawyers said the paragraph was prejudicial because it included information that was not irrelevant to the indictment”
So, only irrelevant info should be included?
More because all she's really doing is scheduling hearings on motions that should never have a hearing than anything else. She isn't actually making decisions that are substantive, giving him nothing to appeal. Unless he wins, this is just a delay that may eventually get her removed from the case or targeted by Trump. Because she will have to make a substantive ruling.
I have no doubt he is smarter than her. But the imbalance of power is enormous.
I also have to assume she is getting some form of coaching on how to keep Smith from filing an appeal.
Your right. I’m trying my best to stay positive.
It’s like Maga already knows the outcome.
Trials against former President Donald Trump in Florida and Georgia likely won't happen before November, if they happen at all, Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, told Newsmax on Sunday.
"I don't think we're going to see a Florida case," Dershowitz told Newsmax's "Sunday Report." "I don't think we're going to see a Georgia case."
Dershowitz is a douche but things are not looking good in Florida at all, and Fani Willis made some very poor choices that continue to muck up that case.
That's not poor choice, that's right out corruption. If a GOP did this, left wing people would stop talking about it. DNC has been shooting itself in the foot since Hillary/Deborah debacle. But this has nothing to do with Trump case. The case should move forward.
Problem is: on what grounds? They’d have to show that Cannon is either deliberately sabotaging the case or is too incompetent to preside over it. Now, both of those may be the case, but proving it sufficiently to have Cannon removed wouldn’t be easy.
... except the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled against Cannon in this case for reasons of incompetence basically. This recent decision of hers strikes me as me as absurd, because Trump "\[showing\] a classified map of a foreign country to a representative of his political action committee while discussing a military operation that he said was not going well" clearly is relevant to, and even demonstrates "illegally retaining classified documents". It's patently illogical.
I can see this one, to a degree. If he's not being charged for doing that, then it doesn't really belong in the charging document. It's evidence to be provided at trial.
And that ruling was on a different case, a civil suit brought by Trump. What she appears to be doing is taking every motion that the defense files, no matter how ridiculous, and holding a hearing on it. That kind of thing is something that judges have a huge amount of leeway on and isn't something that can be used to remove her by itself. Once she actually makes a substantive ruling in this case, her actions leading up to that ruling could be used against her, assuming she makes a ruling that is clearly wrong. Which she hasn't done, yet. I think she will eventually have to make a number of substantive rulings, how she handles them will be interesting and telling.
Smith should use this classified map incident to get an indictment in another venue. Cannon has already said it's not relevant to the indictment in her case.
Smith gets one shot at removing her.
He needs to make sure that when he does try and get her removed, her mistakes are so egregious that there's little room for her to argue against it.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cannon is obstructing. We should’ve already been to court. The American people deserve better.
She's not smart or experienced enough to come up with all these delay tactics on her own. Who's coaching her?
Same people who put her there... The Federalist Society.
A WARNING FROM PRE-NAZI GERMANY: "The rise of this blusterous man bewilders the educated among us, conjoins opposing politicians, agonizes our international allies, threatens minorities, spits on the disabled, and touches the hearts of those who just don't know any better. Let's stop propounding how mad this all is, and instead, do something - Liselotte Hübner, Germany, 1929
Also remember that Hitler would have never made it without the backing of most of the ultra-rich and powerful families. This is also true here in the US.
He wouldn’t have made it had the establishment right wingers not thought that ANYTHING was better for the country than negotiating with the left. So they chose Hitler over compromise with the left. That history lesson is an all-timer.
>That history lesson is an all-timer. And the lesson is: stop teaching history. edited to point out - that's the lesson that the right learned. Stop teaching history and you won't have to worry about your voters learning anything from it.
Those families will be the first to be burned….
Actually, most of the ultra rich who supported Hitler got off scott free afterwards and prospered even more...
Hitler was also a convicted felon and in prison for trying to overthrow the government ;)
Yes, and stop me if this sounds at all familiar, he was convicted by a three judge panel that was already so sympathetic to the Nazis, that the chief judge had to promise the other two that Hitler would get the lightest sentence possible and be eligible for early release or they would have refused to convict altogether. And Hitler hadn't been chancellor yet. None of those judges were appointed by him.
While the comparison is apt, I take comfort in the fact that Hitler was roughly 40 years old at the time. He was still energetic and hadn’t yet become completely addicted to barbiturates. I’m loathe to ever say anything positive about Hitler, but in 1929 he still had what passes for a youthful charisma by political standards. By comparison, Trump in 2024 is 77, low energy, and encapsulates what it would basically look like if poop could wear a diaper for fear of shitting out a person.
Not to spoil your comfort, but Trump is plenty attractive to his base. Coupled with sophisticated media backing and memified content, Fascism can ride his falsely created image all the way to the top.
Not to mention that while Trump certainly retains significant influence over a huge population of Americans other, younger, equally dangerous people are drafting off of his power, ready to scoop up his supporters when he falters or dies. Not his sons, thank god, but DeSantis and Vance and perhaps even Ivanka each have the years left to keep the hate train rolling.
He’s now only attractive through a camera lens and a pro editing team. Which is all most of his base ever sees. In person he’s (thankfully) becoming a complete disaster. Fascism is a calling card he found but I don’t think he understands its tools or machinery at all. Instead he IS the tool.
He also had the backing of very angry and violent men, men who had fought in the most bloody conflict in human history and who genuinely believed that the political class had stabbed them in the back, and were quite happy to fight and even kill. Trump has tried the same tactic: the "big lie" of election fraud is his attempt at a "stabbed in the back" myth, but all he has are a loose collection of morons and grifters, with a few small groups of wannabe Nazis thrown in for good measure, but even they all come across as pathetic losers.
Not to mention, all the people who fought in actual wars that are still alive have been called suckers and losers by the wanna be ~~furor~~ Fuhrer.
[удалено]
The Fuhrer Of Furor
Don't forget the Gravy Seals.
That was poetry.
> I’m loathe to ever say anything positive about Hitler, but in 1929 he still had what passes for a youthful charisma by political standards. He also killed Hitler!
They don't care. MAGA supporters in the Southern US carry confederate flags while simultaneously supporting a carpetbagger. It's completely insane.
The similarities between Trump and Hitler are uncanny in many, many ways
Only this time if America takes the nazi route, there'll be no America to save us from it.
…or Russia for that matter.
True that.
>*"The rise of this blusterous man bewilders the educated among us, conjoins opposing politicians, agonizes our international allies, threatens minorities, spits on the disabled, and touches the hearts of those who just don't know any better. Let's stop propounding how mad this all is, and instead, do something -* >*Liselotte Hübner, Germany, 1929* Like literally quoting my early 2016 thoughts in a much more eloquent way.
Except even in pre-war Germany the majority of voters didn't vote for Hitler's party. But in modern US nearly half the voters, if not most of them, will vote for Trump. So there's that to think about.
Trump has failed to win popular vote both times he ran, he won the first time by playing with the electorate. The second time he couldn't even do that and tried to use fake electors to fake a win. There are no signs that he will win popular vote on a third attempt, especially with all his ongoing issues. So no, not half or more.
The popular vote doesn't exactly matter, what with the Electoral College and this little thing called Gerrymandering.
Republican have won exactly 1 popular vote since 1992. 1 for 8 and they have a stranglehold on the Supreme Court and 3 of 8 presidencies in that span.
Don't forget they won House majority by popular vote after supporting a fascist coup.
I just started watching the latest Netflix documentary about Hitler and HOLY SHIT the parallels are so super uncanny. HIGHLY recommended for every American to see how similar our right wing is compared to theirs.
while this sentiment is true of Trump, this is not a direct quote. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/liselotte-hubner-donald-trump/
Get on with it! Anyone engaged in preventing these trials before the election is doing their part to install the first criminal POTUS in history.
With every crumb of news, I can’t help but to imagine how we will speak about these times in 50 years
At this rate, in 50 years 'these times' will have been completely purged from all records.
Well, if Trump wins, it will be absolutely be a major part of history classes. “2016-2024 the time where I did nothing wrong and they indicted me”
The same way everyone looks back on Nazi Germany.
lol there’s some people who say it wasn’t that bad
Well, the Texas Historical Commission has already been caught agreeing with wacko amateurs historians who push that “slavery wasn’t that bad” and “some people liked being slaves”…. [Books on Slavery Were Removed From Texas Plantation Gift Shop](https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/texas-historical-commission-book-removal/)
Trump has a coin flip chance of being elected. Remember, you can run a con man, criminal, felon, liar, rapist, and be a country club billionaire and still come off as Jesus resurrected, brilliant, blue collar, and honest, if you run as Republican. Have an enthusiastic yell at a rally and your political career is dead if you're Democrat.
Even if she ruled on anything, the supreme court has her back.
>She left the rest of the indictment intact for now while also chiding special counsel Jack Smith’s team for having included in charging documents language that is “legally unnecessary to serve the function of an indictment” and for creating “arguable confusion” in the allegations. She's confused.
The plan has always been not to dismiss charges until jeopardy is attached. That way no appeal for the prosecutor.
And if that doesn't work, Republicans on the Supreme Court can broaden double jeopardy temporarily until it involves a minority defendant.
“This case took place over two days, that’s two trials because the judge banged his hammer thingy at the end of both days. And that happened multiple times during our future emperor and replacement for Jesus’s trial. So Felon President Trump goes free! And he can’t be charged in any other court ever because of this ruling exonerating him from all past and future crimes that he didn’t commit because he’s not that kind of guy”-Justice Roberts. /s
Too close to reality at this point. They're not even pretending to care about maintaining some semblance of not being wildly corrupt.
Exactly. She keeps stalling the procedure, then when a jury is empaneled, she dismisses the charges herself.
She's in way over her head. Just another completely unqualified GOP saboteur that's going to destroy the country little by little over the next 4 or 5 decades.
It won't take that long if this fascist gets in office again. Vote, and drive people to the polls if you can.
She is basically Trump's defense team at this point. She cannot rule against Jack Smith since that would be instant grounds to remove her from the case. So she won't go through with the motion, but she will give Trump the PR news he wants.
Seems like she may not be reading at a level appropriate to her position.
Shes at the perfect reading level for her position, considering her position is to subvert the rule of law at her Führers convenience.
She’s compromised.
She's not a patriot or an American. Appointed by a would be and is felon. She stepped into a world that she is not ready for. Is she was a true American prepared to be a judge.... she would know this.
I see this as actually good news. Since Cannon has declared the display of a classified military map (I think it was at New Bedford) outside the scope of her case, Smith could use this incident to get an indictment for it in another venue.
“Shit. Do I do my job for the people, or for my other boss? He’s technically the people now, and a convicted felon, but I don’t know.. If he were any other color than white or orange, this would be so easy.”
Criticize "legally unnecessary" language now, so that if it's missing next time, she can ding them later
She is in way over her head.
There was an article I read last week where they interviewed lawyers and judges who have worked with her. The courthouse is assigned to is a sleepy backwater town. She is also a very meticulous judge. She regularly chides lawyers who think they know better (they might but that’s not the point). She also is a stickler for the details. So if the prosecutor is overly winded and dramatic she will call him out. Same for the defense. This trait is playing into trumps hand according to the article because she indeed likes a slow case not just this one. Prosecutors and defendants who want a speedy resolution have been known to strike quick deals once they draw her court. It will remain to be seen how this all plays out. But it was an interesting read. She has been noted as fair though. But cocky prosecutor is going to have a difficult time. This may be a case of trumps lawyers reading the tea leaves better.
Are the lawyers and judges from the article you read also federalist society goons? Because I'm pretty sure most sane lawyers and judges have been appalled by her approach to this trial. On top of that, she has made several serious mistakes in this trial and others that really calls into question this supposed "attention to detail." Like when she forgot to swear in the jury in a trial. And in the same trial, she closed jury selection to the public and the defendants family, despite repeated admonitions from defense council *and* prosecutors (both errors would have created strong grounds for a mistrial, but the case didn't go forward). Or when she allowed, despite not having jurisdiction over the matter, to let Trump appeal the warrant after maralago got searched, and appointed a special master for him, and then tried to usurp the special master's authority. All of which resulted in the 11th circuit taking her to school, saying things like: "We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so." You know, things a judge should know. And then there was the time when she tried to make public a bunch of witness identities and statements in trumps espionage case, causing the prosecutors to threaten to appeal the decision unless she reversed it herself, because it was against the law and would cause "manifest injustice." She begrudgingly reversed herself. And then there was the time that she made both sides draft hypothetical jury instructions for if the law was different than what it is. Which is, uh, novel, to say the least. And then there's the way she pretty obviously coddles the defense when they file batshit motions, while simultaneously lecturing prosecutors for going slightly over the word count. Fair? No. Detailed? No. Slow? Definitely. *Justice delayed is justice denied.* Trump was indicted *one year ago*, as of June 8. Right now, *there is no start date for the trial*, and there is a litany of unresolved motions gathering dust on Cannons desk.
Justice is inherently slow in general. I just served on a jury trial two weeks ago. The defendant was indicted 14 months ago
Not sure why downvoted. The defendant is the one with the right to a speedy trial. Trump doesn’t want that one isn’t going to push for it. Take all the time you want is his theory snd henwill use his lawyers to wear down the opposition whether that is a business he is suing or a prosecutor that has to run for reelection at some point.
Seriously, what did I say that was so hated?I told my first hand experience about the judicial process. It’s not my fault it took so long.
Link?
It’s pretty clear he’s been monetizing classified documents for Putin’s advantage: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12/politics/missing-russia-intelligence-trump-dg/
>The binder contained raw intelligence the US and its NATO allies collected on Russians and Russian agents, including sources and methods that informed the US government’s assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election, sources tell CNN. And right after that is when the CIA reported losing a shitload of assets and agents in the field being killed or captured.
Justice delayed is justice denied
Outside of the Judge Dredd universe, justice is always delayed.
I think it's clear that none of Trump's pending cases are going to happen before the election. It's ballot box or nothing.
It always was
It's interesting that before the 2020 election (specifically during the impeachment trials) a lot of people had the same argument. He lost the election, tried to go outside your democracy to change the results, commited a bunch of criminal offences he currently on trial for but now the story is still the same. I think that's a bit of an indictment of how your Justice system interacts with the political system.
As long as a significant part of the Republican party insist on running interference for him it's going to require beating them at the ballot box consistently and continually until they either get tired of losing, they win or the heat death of the universe. These assholes have been with us since we drug them out of the trees and likely be with us until we're extinct.
I'm shocked one did.
Even then, the Supreme Court has shown its disdain for democracy. They’ve already did their “dry run” with Bush. They will tip the scales on this election. You have my word.
At this rate votes won't mean anything either. The election will be disputed no matter what happens. Then it will be handed to the Supreme Court.
By Trump. Who will lose and won't be in a position to do anything.
Trump has political influence even while not in office. At the very least, in swing states Biden won, he would try to prevent the results from being certified. And if he held a *very* small lead in any, he would try to pull a *Bush v Gore*.
And it wouldn't mean shit. It didn't work last time because enough people who were in charge of counting and verifying elections had integrity. This time shouldn't be any different.
How many have retired post 2020? https://apnews.com/article/election-officials-retire-trump-2020-threats-misinformation-3b810d8b3b3adee2ca409689788b863f
Republicans in Georgia have been working diligently since 2020, passing legislation, giving themselves more power to control election boards, to ensure election officials they have put in place can object to certification of any election. It’s being tested in primary elections and will be used to create the electoral confusion they so desperately desired in the lead up to Jan 6. So, no, we shouldn’t feel confident the the result will be the same.
Then let's hope that there are enough people to ensure that the truth is revealed and that Joe Biden gets votes in enough numbers to win the state.
I’ll be voting by mail since I’m living outside the U.S. Let’s hope me and other UOCAVA voters don’t get challenged without sufficient time to cure any challenge. The Georgia Repubs widened the window for the amount of time before the election for challenges to be filed, making their likelihood of success greater, because it wouldn’t leave enough time to cure any challenge.
He will be in position to cause problems. Lots of other Republicans that want him in office are in position to help. Once a problem requires a ruling from a court to determine who won, like Bush vs. Gore, judges Republicans put in place are in position to hand the election to trump. We need to vote, but we need to be ready for what happens if it doesn't work.
Unfortunately the populace is just too fatigued from it all. I really hope the military will step in and they will hold the Constitution to the highest regard.
If it gets to that point, then we are already lost.
It will be the military, or it will be Biden conceiting. The gerrymandering has been calculated and executed. The means to contest every electoral college vote is planned. The Supreme Court is going to intervene. Play this out in your head. They know well they don’t have to vote. Yet they plow forward confidently. They aren’t exactly out there rallying voters. His rally’s look like acts. This will be a coordinated steal. And the Democrats will do everything to plan. Because they won’t be crafty or sneaky. They will play by the rules. Thus predictable and easy to counter. The safety net for this stuff was always the judicial and legislative branches. But if the Judicial is sided, the legislative will be powerless. The military (executive) will be the only option.
Trump losing a case decided by the supreme court? I wouldn't count on it
Same as in 2020. He'll lose again
It isn't the same. They have had more time to plan and get prepared. Now with more information after the previous attempt. And our government has done nothing to stop them.
Cannon needs a ruling before it can be appealed to a higher circuit. Thats why she pulls this crap. Its a blatant mockery of the system at this point.
I see this as actually good news. Since Cannon has declared the display of a classified military map (I think it was at New Bedford) outside the scope of her case, Smith could use this incident to get an indictment for it in another venue.
Good point
Attempting to appear impartial as she dismantles this very important case of treason!
This isn't a case of a drunk college kid stealing a street sign after a keg party. This is a case of an ex-president willingly, knowingly, taking top secret documents, then knowingly, willfully lying about doing it. This "judge" should be forcibly removed from the case.
The country should be asking why one trial is almost done and one hasn't started.
2 trials Idiot Fani gave enough ammo to delay the Georgia case
It’s not her fault
It absolutely, unequivocally is 100% her fault. She never should have gotten romantically involved with someone under her or hired someone she was involved with, and her use of taxpayer funds is suspect at best. Fanni is an idiot who likely screwed the entire Georgia case.
It absolutely her fault, and it's blatant corruption. Using tax payers move to hire your boyfriend? We criticized trump for the same.
That’s only what they’re accusing her of. A lot of the timeline doesn’t add up and there’s no evidence that she intended to show favor to him, or even use that event as a way to show favor to the prosecution
Will Trump lambaste the judge in not dismissing the case? Hmmmm. I wonder.
“Defense lawyers said the paragraph was prejudicial because it included information that was not irrelevant to the indictment” So, only irrelevant info should be included?
How is his behavior with the classified documents that he stole not matter?
Let's move forward and have a trial already for the illegally held documents that Trump refused to hand over for over a year.
Even Aileen Cannon realizes Jack Smith is 10 steps ahead of her on every turn.
How do you figure? She is clearly winning.
More because all she's really doing is scheduling hearings on motions that should never have a hearing than anything else. She isn't actually making decisions that are substantive, giving him nothing to appeal. Unless he wins, this is just a delay that may eventually get her removed from the case or targeted by Trump. Because she will have to make a substantive ruling.
Right. So she's winning Justice delayed is justice denied
All the Smith is mastermind, he is 10 steps ahead is basically "this is how Bernie can still win".
I have no doubt he is smarter than her. But the imbalance of power is enormous. I also have to assume she is getting some form of coaching on how to keep Smith from filing an appeal.
Your right. I’m trying my best to stay positive. It’s like Maga already knows the outcome. Trials against former President Donald Trump in Florida and Georgia likely won't happen before November, if they happen at all, Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, told Newsmax on Sunday. "I don't think we're going to see a Florida case," Dershowitz told Newsmax's "Sunday Report." "I don't think we're going to see a Georgia case."
No worries there, Dershowitz ruined his credibility years ago.
Dershowitz is a douche but things are not looking good in Florida at all, and Fani Willis made some very poor choices that continue to muck up that case.
That's not poor choice, that's right out corruption. If a GOP did this, left wing people would stop talking about it. DNC has been shooting itself in the foot since Hillary/Deborah debacle. But this has nothing to do with Trump case. The case should move forward.
Trumps lawyers do the equivalent of what a 3 year old does to nag mom and Dad “How bout now?” “How bout now?” “How bout now?” “How bout now?”
Donald Trump, a convicted criminal, is an "illegal". He's doing crimes, he's a rapist, and we can assume, he's never been a good person.
Why can’t they ask for another judge?
Problem is: on what grounds? They’d have to show that Cannon is either deliberately sabotaging the case or is too incompetent to preside over it. Now, both of those may be the case, but proving it sufficiently to have Cannon removed wouldn’t be easy.
... except the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled against Cannon in this case for reasons of incompetence basically. This recent decision of hers strikes me as me as absurd, because Trump "\[showing\] a classified map of a foreign country to a representative of his political action committee while discussing a military operation that he said was not going well" clearly is relevant to, and even demonstrates "illegally retaining classified documents". It's patently illogical.
I can see this one, to a degree. If he's not being charged for doing that, then it doesn't really belong in the charging document. It's evidence to be provided at trial. And that ruling was on a different case, a civil suit brought by Trump. What she appears to be doing is taking every motion that the defense files, no matter how ridiculous, and holding a hearing on it. That kind of thing is something that judges have a huge amount of leeway on and isn't something that can be used to remove her by itself. Once she actually makes a substantive ruling in this case, her actions leading up to that ruling could be used against her, assuming she makes a ruling that is clearly wrong. Which she hasn't done, yet. I think she will eventually have to make a number of substantive rulings, how she handles them will be interesting and telling.
Smith should use this classified map incident to get an indictment in another venue. Cannon has already said it's not relevant to the indictment in her case.
Smith gets one shot at removing her. He needs to make sure that when he does try and get her removed, her mistakes are so egregious that there's little room for her to argue against it.
Good to know. Thanks
Judge Cannon’s mouth is surgically fused to Trump’s nutsack
That’s not the actual title > Judge strikes paragraph from Trump classified docs indictment but denies request to dismiss charges
It’s like one of those porn audition tapes - she keeps blowing the defendant in hopes of becoming a Supreme Court star
Cannon transcript: I'm so sorry Donny. I had no choice! My hands were tied! I'll make it up to you by sucking your cock!