So, what's everyone think. Is Judge Cannon incompetent or corrupt enough....

[Thomas Hurt]

to back the Pig in this train wreck?

[Samrob]

1. Corrupt enough. Hate to admit being on the wrong side. nt

[magicarpet]

2. With the judicial leniency Judge Cannon has shown,....

.... trDUMP and his attorneys - I am amazed McConnell did not place Cannon on the Supreme Court.

Cannon could move mountains for trDUMP on the high court - each and every ruling in trDUMP's favor.

[Raven]

3. I think she might be tempted but two things might cause her to deny the motion for a Special Master.

One is that there is absolutely no law on Trump's side and the other is the very real damage to this nation's security that would be done by allowing the Motion.

[BootinUp]

4. Neal Katyal was saying that if the judge appoints a special master

he thinks the Solicitor General will immediately file in the Supreme Court to block.

[Bettie]

6. And then, it is a complete crap shoot

because who knows what the fascist five will do?

[BootinUp]

7. For me its not entirely clear

that the SC is ready to jeopardize national security for the orange menace.

[Bettie]

9. It isn't a done deal

because it doesn't actively harm people that Alito or Thomas hate, but I have zero trust in the court these days.

[lark]

27. It's also not clear that they care anything about the country/constitution.

They care about promoting Chrstofascism and not much else.

[Carlitos Brigante]

19. Isn't it the Fasc. 6 now? nt

[Bettie]

25. You're right

I inadvertently gave Roberts the benefit of the doubt. My error.

[Carlitos Brigante]

26. I have especial disdain for him. Because unlike the other 5 lunatics. At times

he appears to know better. But still manages to do the wrong thing. With one or two exceptions. These aren't judges. They're politicians.

[WarGamer]

8. SCOTUS will play a big role in ANY prosecution of Trump.

SM is appointed, DoJ takes it to SCOTUS... Trump's SCOTUS.

SM request denied, Trump takes it to SCOTUS.

Trump indicted, Trump challenges the indictment arguing that no law was broken because he was POTUS at the time thus couldn't break the law. Silly argument of course... but it'll get pushed to SCOTUS.

This is the first time in US history this has happened... SCOTUS will certainly take the cases to set precedent.

[Ocelot II]

5. The fact that she was appointed by TFG does not mean she is either.

Many of the judges who ruled against him in his 60+ unsuccessful election cases were his appointees. His Supreme Court appointees also threw out his election challenges. The thing about lifetime appointments for federal judges, as problematic as that can be, means judges are not beholden to the president who appointed them. Her resume indicates she has quite a bit of experience in federal criminal procedure, and I don't expect her to jump the rails in this case. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cannon%20SJQ%20-%20PUBLIC.pdf

[Bettie]

11. So, she wasn't one of the completely

unqualified ones?

Gives one a little hope.

[RockRaven]

10. Probably. The very fact she didn't shut it down immediately is a bad sign. It should never have

appeared before her in the first place, and she is entertaining arguments which she ought not even be listening to.

She also might be corrupt enough to do it, yet still not do it. It's possible it doesn't serve her interests to back him now, whereas in the abstract she would back him if it just so happened to serve her interests.

[Ocelot II]

12. That's not how it works. When a party makes a motion for some kind of result or relief,

even if it's of dubious merit, they are entitled to a hearing, and the party opposing the motion also gets to be heard. That's basic due process, and no judge would have denied the motion without any hearing. What this judge actually did was open the door wide open for the DOJ to present its position, and she even allowed them to submit a memorandum twice as long as the local rule's normal page limit. Then she gave TFG's lawyers less than a full day to respond to an overwhelming argument, and they completely failed to address most of DOJ's points. But the proper procedures are being followed.

[BootinUp]

15. Good points!

[RockRaven]

18. The court is not obligated to evaluate the merits of motions when they are in the wrong venue.

Despite TFG's lawyers false claims to the contrary, they could have sought the same relief from Judge Reinhart -- and she could (and should) have decided that his court, not hers, was the appropriate venue. She did not.

[Ocelot II]

20. Venue means the *district* where a case is heard. Both Cannon and Reinhart

are based in the Southern District of Florida. There are eight courthouses within that district: four in Miami and one each in Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Fort Pierce and Key West. Reinhart is in West Palm Beach and Cannon is in Fort Pierce, but the venue is the Southern District of Florida, regardless of which judge hears the case or which courthouse it's heard in. The DOJ's memo did not object to the venue because the venue was the same.

[RockRaven]

21. The perils of using words with term-of-art and vernacular meanings. Substitute "setting" or

any other synonym you like.

Am I wrong that she could have decided the matter belonged in from of Reinhart instead of herself without evaluating the merits?

[onenote]

22. Ding ding ding!

Over and over the armchair lawyers on DU claim that Trump's complaint/motion should not have been assigned to Cannon and/or shouldn't even have been filed in the Southern District of Florida, but none of them can explain why DOJ didn't seek a change of venue or object to the assignment of the case to Cannon. There is no question that if those arguments had any merit, DOJ would have raised them. That DOJ didn't tells you everything you need to know

[Ocelot II]

23. Yup. DOJ didn't object to Cannon hearing the motion, and they would have done

if there was any basis for it. I'm guessing TFG's lawyers filed in Fort Pierce because they wanted to get away from Reinhart, but judges are assigned randomly so they couldn't have counted on getting any particular one anyhow. IMO DOJ's position is so strong that it doesn't matter who the judge is.

[onenote]

24. Exactly.

[UTUSN]

13. K&R

[MLAA]

14. Don't rule out both incompetent and crooked.

[Ocelot II]

16. Don't assume it, either.

[Ocelot II]

17. It was pointed out in another thread that if this judge hadn't set this motion on for hearing

and allowed the DOJ to file a 37-page memorandum, the world would never have seen this:



And that photo could be a game-changer.