Legal experts criticized Cannon’s pace in scheduling for the classified docs case with some accusing the Trump appointee of setting an elongated timeline to the former president’s benefit.

“It really appears Cannon is slow-walking this case to benefit Trump,” former federal prosecutor Randall Eliason, wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “She’s already had these motions for weeks, and schedules the hearings more than two weeks from now? And this after taking weeks to issue a standard protective order.”

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    110
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not shocked. The only question is the percentage of this caused by her subservience and the percentage caused by her incompetence.

    • flossdaily@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fortunately there are 3 other criminal trials against Trump that she can’t ruin with her corruption.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Several lawyers who have appeared before Cannon described her as “generally competent and straightforward” — as well as “someone who does not otherwise have a reputation of being unusually sympathetic to defendants.” However, the sources, speaking anonymously to keep from publicly criticizing a judge before whom they may appear again, added that Cannon is “demonstrably inexperienced,” particularly when unexpected issues arise or her actions are questioned.

      Salon

      • eestileib
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh come on she’s obviously in the tank for him. F Salon.

        • Maeve@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It answered op’s question. So if she’s not incompetent, despite inexperience, the ace seemed clear enough to me.

  • ZeroCool@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trump appointee betrays nation to benefit Trump, now here’s Tom with the weather…

  • gravitas_deficiency
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The fact that a judge isn’t required to immediately recuse themselves if they’re picked for a case that involves the person who appointed them is insane. Sure, they’re “supposed to be impartial”, but judges are very obviously not being impartial… and there’s effect zero legal recourse for that.

    • morphballganon@mtgzone.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If that were a thing, the right would clamor that it should also apply to judges appointed by the defendant’s political opponents, and that would get all the cases against Turnip Dump tossed

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        She shouldnt be dismissed for being appointed by Trump.

        She should be dismissed for being a die hard pro-trumpists who has tons of trump merchandise and a clear, personal bias towards Trump and has attended his rallys in full Trump face paint.

      • gravitas_deficiency
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Though that sounds like it might make sense, if you actually think about it, it’s actually nonsense.

      • Resonosity@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        But this excludes all other judges that were appointed by 1) a different Republican president than Trump, and 2) a different Democrat president than Biden, no?

        Unless all judge terms are shorter than 1-2 terms for presidents (haven’t read all state/federal codes), this would leave a lot of judges left that would be considered less biased towards/against those under their prudence. No need to go nuclear devil’s advocate for this one.

          • Resonosity@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not claiming they would act in good faith, just that they would have less (unconscious) biased towards plaintiffs/defendants. Conscious biases would still be in play

  • Delusional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If after every single time someone mentions x and they have to write formerly known as twitter, they might as well just call it twitter. X is never going to stick because it’s dumb as shit.

    • mibo80@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Got a real “the artist formerly know as Prince” vibe, but not nearly as creative as using an unpronounceable glyph, I suppose.

      • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        He did want to be referred to as ‘the artist’. It’s was a comment on how impersonal the business of music was. As in contracts princes would be referred to as the artist.

    • Crisps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      When they name it back they need to start saying ‘the platform formerly known as the platform formerly known as Twitter’

  • Ashyr
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d give anything to live in a world without headlines that include blast or slam.

  • CapgrasDelusion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Shocking no one. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if she’s literally in contact with Trump. Through an intermediary or directly.

  • chrischryse
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can’t they just have someone else work on it instead of her?

    • TechyDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe that the DOJ can appeal to the higher court to try to get Cannon removed from the case. If they try that and succeed, Trump’s lawyers will claim that they are going judge shopping to find one biased against Trump. If they try and fail, then this might result in Cannon acting even more in Trump’s interest.

      From what I can see, the DOJ’s strategy is to play the long game. They’re making notes of everything Cannon does incorrectly while trying to work with her. This way, if they eventually ask for a new judge, they’ll be more likely to get one and it will be evident that they didn’t go running to ask for a new judge immediately.

      • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Jack Smirh is in charge of all thing Trump for the DOJ. He’s got Trump on 80+ charges and is ready to go to court. Time schedules, as always, are set by the court.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m actually fine with this. The DC case is streamlined and will likely result in a conviction long before the documents case could get anywhere even if it were an impartial judge. It’s better this way since the documents case will involve classified materials that can’t be shared publicly that’ll make the conspiracy theory nutjobs even more nuttier (and possibly violent) than usual.

    Better to have Trump already in prison while that case is going on. He can be ferried from federal prison to Florida back to prison, then over to Georgia for that trial. The secrecy involved with the evidence in the documents case won’t matter much to anyone if he’s already incarcerated and we’re seeing a televised trial in Georgia at the same time.

    I kinda suspect it may be why Smith didn’t challenge Cannon being the judge presiding over the documents case. Though I doubt that, Jack Smith seems like a straight shooter to me. At any rate, it’s probably good for that case to be delayed.