Wake me up when actual consequences follow... So far it has just been a horrible tease
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
323 points (99.1% liked)
politics
18870 readers
3822 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah. We all are. Her having any part of that case has been a total farce.
she requested that the parties in the case draft different versions of their proposed jury instructions based on their competing interpretations of laws governing classified materials and presidential records.
Can someone inform me how jury instructions are normally created?
This "defendant and prosecutor write your jury instructions" seems like a blatant attempt to get the more favorable one to Trump (the lawyers will always try the most extreme reading) and then try to wipe her hands clean.
She's going to eventually get herself removed from the bench and possibly disbarred for this abusive behavior.
Then she will get a raise and be on fox news for a decade
She ain't gonna do shit and Trump will never face any real consequences ever except from historians 30 years after the next Great War. After the last literal 11th hour reduced bailout it suddenly became all clarity and nihilistic wisdom to me. Trump has already destroyed America. It's already too late.
Trump didn't destroy the country. He just stepped into the gaping wound that the narcissists that populate this land left open.
More like he stuck his greedy little hands in there and pulled out the entrails.
I'll believe it when I see it.
She'll just get a commentator gig on NewsMax, which will likely pay a lot more. Or, she could go to Fox, but would probably have to bleach her hair first.
Sure, but she won't be an attorney or judge, which is the good thing. NewsMax is a bubble that we can ignore.
i don't want to hear about Jack's feelings, i want to hear about his results
The article is editorializing through that headline and it is based on the magazine's or the author's interpretation of the filing. No way that Jack Smith has expressed emotions publicly on this matter.
I Am Jack's Complete Lack of Surprise
I Am Jack's Inflamed Sense of Rejection
I Am Jack's Smirking Revenge
Nah, this is good to hear about - I don't really care about his feelings either but Cannon is a corrupt and incompetent judge.
Cannon is a corrupt and incompetent judge.
Corrupt, yes, but I'm not so sure about incompetent. If she were incompetent then there would be tricks to help Trump that she missed, but as far as I know she's executed every opportunity for corruption perfectly.
Do you have evidence that she's anything less than a goddamned veritable virtuoso of corrupt traitorousness?
Cannon is doing everything she can to just give Dummy Tbags a win.
Blatant corruption.
Obstruction of justice*
I guarantee that it'll come back to bite her. The judiciary does not take kindly to rogue judges.
Ahh yes. Just like all those penalties for Matthew Kacsmaryk that will arrive aaaaany day now.
Federal judges serve for life. There’s not a whole lot anybody can do about this.
What are you basing this on?
Courts self manage their own judges. Usually an appeals court or a state supreme court will punish judges for misconduct. At the Federal level, I'm not sure if it starts at an appeals court or the SCOTUS, but they can definitely punish and remove federal judges as well. Impeachment is also an option, but that's a hard one to do.
I hear you, and those things seem nice at a glance, but I don't agree with your sense of guarantee. We're seeing an upending of things that "usually" happen, or that "definitely can" happen, especially with "self-managed" entities such as the SCOTUS. Have you seen judges actually get held accountable recently, even locally?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Special Counsel Jack Smith went toe-to-toe with U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon over her requests for jury instructions in Donald Trump’s classified documents case.
In a scathing filing submitted Tuesday, Smith accused Cannon of operating on an “unstated and fundamentally flawed legal premise” when she requested that the parties in the case draft different versions of their proposed jury instructions based on their competing interpretations of laws governing classified materials and presidential records.
“If the Court concludes […] that a President has carte blanche to remove any document from the White House at the end of his presidency; that any document so removed must be treated as a personal record under the PRA as an unreviewable matter of law; and that, also as a matter of law, a former President is forever authorized to possess such a document regardless of how highly classified it may be and how it is stored, that would constitute a “clearly erroneous jury instruction that entails a high probability of failure of a prosecution,” the special counsel added, noting that they would appeal if such a decision were made.
Smith also argued that the proposed scenarios align not with established legal interpretations but with Trump’s post hoc justifications for keeping the documents.
There is no basis in law or fact for that legal presumption, and the Court should reject Trump’s effort to invent one as a vehicle to inject the PRA into this case,” Smith wrote.
Cannon, who was appointed by Trump to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in 2020, has been criticized for her apparent indecision and slow-walking of major decisions in the case — allowing Trump’s defense team to languish as the former president seeks to delay his criminal trials through the November election.
The original article contains 594 words, the summary contains 296 words. Saved 50%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!