https://www.vox.com/2023/6/13/23757893/aileen-cannon-donald-trump-jack-smith-indictment-mar-a-lago-maga
Aileen Canon, the judge presiding over Trump's classified documents case, is one he appointed. This is the same judge who previously ruled in his favor to stop the DOJ from continuing their criminal investigation into Trump while a "special master" was appointed to review the docs first. Even worse:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/judge-rules-trump-blocks-review-seized-classified-records-2022-09-15/
Cannon rejected Justice Department arguments that the records belong to the government and that because Trump is no longer president he cannot claim executive privilege.
The judged ruled that classified government documents...don't belong to the government...and that Trump still has executive privilege even though he was no longer president.
The Trump-appointed judge's ruling was so terrible and devoid of legal merit that not only was it over turned in an appeal, two of the judges who overturned the ruling labeled Cannon’s decisions favoring Trump: “a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations” and warned that Cannon’s approach “would violate bedrock separation-of-powers limitations.”
The kicker? That statement was from two other Trump-appointed judges, one of whom is a prominent figure in the Conservative Federalist Society.
So a Trump-appointed judge whose rulings were so bad they were overturned and ripped apart by other Trump-appointed judges, will preside in Trump's case. From the Vox link:
If Cannon remains the judge on this case, it is unlikely that special counsel Jack Smith will convict Trump — no matter how strong the evidence may be.
The American legal system at work.
20 Jun 23
@vivify saidViv: The judged ruled that classified government documents...don't belong to the government...and that Trump still has executive privilege even though he was no longer president.
[youtube Legal Eagle]_S8R2Nri5pU[/youtube]
https://www.vox.com/2023/6/13/23757893/aileen-cannon-donald-trump-jack-smith-indictment-mar-a-lago-maga
Aileen Canon, the judge presiding over Trump's classified documents case, is one he appointed. This is the same judge who previously ruled in his favor to stop the DOJ from continuing their criminal investigation into Trump w ...[text shortened]... onvict Trump — no matter how strong the evidence may be.[/quote]
The American legal system at work.
She ruled no such thing. From the Order:
"Plaintiff ultimately may not be entitled to return of much of the seized property or to prevail on his anticipated claims of privilege."
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2022/09/SpecialMasterOrder.pdf p. 12
The ruling appointing a Special Master was absurd and as I predicted at the time was quickly reversed by the appellate courts. But it is baseless paranoia to imagine that Judge Cannon's appointment (done randomly) means Trump will get off scot free.
20 Jun 23
@no1marauder saidSo when the article states the judge "rejected" the argument that the documents belonged to the government, is that article wrong?
Viv: The judged ruled that classified government documents...don't belong to the government...and that Trump still has executive privilege even though he was no longer president.
She ruled no such thing. From the Order:
"Plaintiff ultimately may not be entitled to return of much of the seized property or to prevail on his anticipated claims of privilege."
https:/ ...[text shortened]... anoia to imagine that Judge Cannon's appointment (done randomly) means Trump will get off scot free.
21 Jun 23
@vivify saidYes it is. Reporting of legal issues by the media is usually pretty terrible esp. but nor only when non-lawyers do it.
So when the article states the judge "rejected" the argument that the documents belonged to the government, is that article wrong?
I linked to the Order; it's only 24 pages long. Read it and tell me where it anywhere rejects such an argument.