Thursday night, prosecutors alerted federal Judge Aileen Cannon in Southern Florida that after Trump’s lawyers asked her to delay his trial there because it was too close in time to his trial in the District of Columbia, they turned around and asked the Judge in D.C. to delay the trial there as well. I wrote that night that I wondered whether Judge Cannon, who has been so unstinting in her criticism of prosecutors, might have some to spare for Trump's lawyers now.
Wondering silently if Smiths team is quietly collecting data on Judge Cannon and planning to go to the circuit court to look for relief sometime soon.
Joyce Vance has taken Judge Aileen Cannon to task in the most legal of ways. Rarely, if ever, do we have the opportunity to learn the scope of a judge's knowledge and responsibilities when making rulings. Thank you for this expert lesson about the judiciary, as expressed in 'Judge Cannon's Response.
WOW! Judge Cannon is certainly showing where her loyalty lies. And it isn’t with the law and the people of this country. I wonder if she takes vacations with Clarence Thomas.
She is far from impartial. It has been evident from the outset that she is biased and unfit to sit on the bench. The filing was 19 words over this ridiculous 200 word maximum.
Jack Smith should consider going to the 11th Circuit. This faux judge can’t be allowed to keep hearing this case.
Yikes! (I said something else to myself)
Thank you Joyce. Victor Frankl said there are only two kinds of people decent and indecent. We know where Judge Cannon resides.
Judge Cannon might be counting on becoming a Justice of the Supreme Court if Trump or another Republican is elected president. A sweet lifetime appointment for which she is not qualified.
In not seeking Cannon's recusal before proceedings began, what was Jack Smith thinking -- that somehow "optics" matter? No, for the Trumpists it's all abuse of power and disregard for the law and the Constitution. To paraphrase Maya Angelou: "When fascists show you who they are, believe them the first time."
A predictable outcome to the former president's efforts to make the judiciary as partisan and favorable to him as possible.
Joyce, you wrote: "Perhaps she wants to avoid displeasing people whose support she thinks she may need in the future." Bingo. I suspect the support she expects to seek isn't just in the voting booth or the halls of the Federalist Society.
When will the 11th District step in and reprimand her for clearly not knowing her job and being biased towards Trump?
I don’t understand why the prosecutors haven’t asked for her removal. Her bias and snark are evident. She is a stain on the judicial system.
Is it too late to ask for a different judge?
Is there any, even remotely possible, way to remove her from this case?
I had suggested that it would be worth the sturm und drang to get Trump convicted before this judge, in a part of the district that voted for him. I may have been wrong. It may well be time for the special prosecutor to turn to the 11th Circuit--or at least the chief judge of the district--about re-assigning the matter.
Joyce, is it too late for them to try and get her removed from this case?
Trump will never go to trial in Florida.
Judge Cannon is steering the Trump legal saga into uncharted territory, and not in the way that one might expect from a federal judge. The unfolding events in her courtroom are more than just legal maneuvers; they are a clear sign that Trump may successfully skirt a trial with Cannon at the helm.
Right out of the gate, Cannon's approach to Trump's defense team screams of a favoritism that's troubling to anyone expecting a fair legal process. She's doling out extensions and delays like candy at a parade, constructing a protective bubble around Trump that could very well ensure he never stands trial.
When you stack up her actions against her past as an appellate litigator, the picture gets even more jarring. Cannon's willingness to jump on the prosecution for a 200-word breach of conduct, while mum on Trump's team playing hide-and-seek with their motions in D.C., is a staggering display of judicial imbalance.
This isn't just a story about legal filings and courtroom spats—it's a narrative about a judge whose courtroom demeanor and decisions don't align with the gravity of a case involving a former President. The tug-of-war with the Special Counsel’s office, the bias in favor of Trump—it all adds up to a case stalled before it can even start.
Looking back at Cannon's previous rulings that didn't pass muster with the 11th Circuit, it's not just a pattern; it's a predictor. It suggests that her current trajectory in handling Trump's case isn't just a deviation from norms—it's a potential collision course with judicial review and questions about her fitness to preside over this case.
And let’s talk about second chances. The Special Counsel's office must be kicking themselves for not pushing for Cannon's recusal from the get-go. It was a misstep that might have rerouted this whole legal drama to a place where a trial was a possibility.
Putting it all together, what you get isn't just partiality; it's a judicial blockade. Under Judge Cannon's watch, it seems Trump’s day in court may be just a mirage, challenging the bedrock principle that justice is blind—that in America, no one is above the law.