General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Unfit for the bench": Experts accuse Trump judge of "obstruction of justice" over Mar-a-Lago ruling
Political observers on Monday said U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon "engaged herself in obstruction of justice" by ruling that the U.S. Department of Justice must halt its review of materials seized at former President Donald Trump's Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago.
Cannon, who was appointed by the former Republican president and confirmed after he lost the 2020 election, ruled that Trump "faces an unquantifiable potential harm by way of improper disclosure of sensitive information to the public" if the review of the materials, which included documents marked "confidential" and "top secret" continues.
Political scientist Norman Ornstein noted that lawyers for Trump hand-picked Cannon to oversee the case.
Link to tweet
Cannon "has violated her oath and is unfit for the bench," he tweeted, adding that her ruling is "a clear-cut impeachable offense."
Link to tweet
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/unfit-for-the-bench-experts-accuse-trump-judge-of-obstruction-of-justice-over-mar-a-lago-ruling/ar-AA11wSe8?cvid=3bf377334eba4c63b8598bc007a7ca4b
leftyladyfrommo
(18,874 posts)Johonny
(20,895 posts)Let's not fool ourselves.
Botany
(70,594 posts)He and my late father were long time friends .
kacekwl
(7,022 posts)on all the nightly news shows.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,631 posts)Link to tweet
1. She says Biden hasnt weighed in on whether docs protected by Exec Privilege. Nonsense. The archives letter (which DOJ submitted to the Judge) makes it clear current President thinks none of this ...
is privileged. Archivist says it is not a close question
2. Judge enjoins the entire investigation because some of the material might be subject to Executive Privilege. But Executive Priv isnt some post-presidential privilege that allows Presidents to keep documents after ...
they leave office. At most, it simply means these are Executive documents that must be returned to the archives. It doesnt in any way shape or form mean they cant be used in a criminal prosecution about stolen docs...
3. She says the reputational harm to Trump justifies a special master. Thats insaneevery crim deft has reputational harm. Are we now going to have special masters in every crim investigation?
4. She says the Special Master should screen materials for exec privilege, without ever once explaining what specific material is subject to exec priv, particularly when the incumbent President rejects the assertion. How is the Master supposed to figure that intricate Q out?
5. She says that because some tiny percentage of materials might be privileged, the entire investigation over all the materials has to stop. Thats a bazooka when one needs at most a scalpel.
6. She tries to enjoin the Exec Branch from using these materials in an investigation, but the govt has already reviewed all the materials. It makes no sense.
7. She says Trump suffers irreparable harm in interim, but the only harm she isolates is he wont have the docs back during the investig. Thats not irreparable, he can get them back later &if they are improperly used to bring an indictment, he can move to dismiss the indictment
8. Her analysis of standing is terrible. Trump wouldnt own these docs anyway, so why does he get a Master over them? If there is some marginal claim to some attorney client docs, that handful of material can be separately dealt withyou dont enjoin the entire investig for that
9. Her jurisdictional analysis is similarly awful. She let Trump forum shop for a judge, instead of letting the magistrate judge evaluate these claims. The appearances here are tragic.
Thats just a few of many more problems. Frankly, any of my first year law students would have written a better opinion.