221 Comments

This is such a thorough piece and so dense that I’m going to read it again tomorrow. I appreciated your summary, especially helping lay people try to understand this quagmire.

Expand full comment

Exactly. Don’t talk down. Educate. Read a few times, it’s clearer. Expect the reader to stretch.

Expect the American public to rev up. More and more will come.

A well-educated public is our best and only defense - against the dangers of racism driven autocracy, The Big Lie stuff, rank prejudice and voter suppression and our present sick sad Supreme Court.

May our Attorney General read Joyce Vance here and tool up.

May he listen to MSNBC and read the public’s expectations. The MSNBC team is tops.

Maddow and O’Donnell lead so well. Reid is powerful. The guests are so well informed.

Mara Gay is pure sunshine.

And Joyce Vance is matter of fact brilliant. No emotion. Just the facts, ‘Mam. Remember that show: Jack Webb? Dragnet? We’re 80 plus a lot. We remember.

FOX is not America. We are better than that.

Expand full comment

Joyce Vance *is* brilliant, but as to "no emotion"? I'm not sure about that. As a Cafe Insider and Sisters in Law fan, I can hear her voice in the lines of this column and I find myself smiling and even chortling from time to time. Her timing is impeccable. Not to mention -- I don't believe "screw the pooch" comes up all that often in legal commentary. <g>

Expand full comment

Thanks. What does screw the pooch mean? Please understand: i read people. All my 83 years. Joyce Vance is simply the best and most talented person, good through and through. Damning her with feint praise, she’s a first class lawyer and I have directed 60 at the SEC in my dim youth and employed too many over the years. Joyce Vance compares to AG Nicholas de B. Katzenbach, a friend and supporter of mine when I needed him most - he volunteered, pro bono. She is in his class.

Expand full comment

"Screw the pooch" = mess up in a really big way, although I'm told that the literal meaning is back there somewhere in its etymology.

Coincidence: For a while the Katzenbachs had a summer camp next to my family's on Martha's Vineyard (late '70s/early '80s?). I didn't know them beyond saying hi when we passed on the (very long dirt) road, but we had some good friends in common. My father occasionally got mistaken for Nick. They didn't look much alike, but they were about the same height and both of them were bald.

Expand full comment

Nicholas “Nick” de B. Katzenbach and Lydia King Phelps Stokes Katzenbach hosted us there. Crippled by arthritis, Nick met our plane and drove us back. We’d flown nonstop from Driggs, Idaho. Had just the right amount of Jet A, and a tail wind. That weekend was devoted to Rudy Giuliani and Wall Street lawyers’ double dealing and my sad and weak decision and www.sblewis.net was the result. President Clinton on his last having spent a tough 30 minutes with me in an HIA kitchen in Portland decided. Unique in Wall Street. Will out the double dealing if I can find the patience. Nick was annoyed with the DOJ and contemptuous of Rudy and the SEC. Both were corrupt. Nick had courage. No better existed than Nick. He asked to work pro bono. Never mentioned a fee. I’d spent $6.5 mm on creeps that were effectively complicit. It’s a good story. The honest lawyer in Wall Street is a glacial anomaly.

Expand full comment

Superb! My burning question: What are chances the 11th Circuit panel will not only favor DOJ’s appeal but also, and as critical, remove Judge Cannon from the case, especially in light of Trump’s motion put before Cannon on Tuesday (very same day) to unseal the warrant! Yikes.

Here’s where you really helped. I did not realize they were vetting “ callous disregard,” and I knew nothing of the relevance to Richie! I thought they were fleshing out whether there were a case precedent for appointing a Special Master “prior to an indictment.” Over and over again would ask, “Have you found such and such?”’ I did not hear the term “callous disregard” as the central point of law. I did not understand that appointing a Special Master would be predicated only if “callous disregard” could be demonstrated.

It was nervy, and I thought inappropriate, if not an intentional lie, for Trusty to assert that Biden directed the “raid,” which Trusty knew better, and which one of the judges jumped in to correct, when in fact, DOJ issued a warrant signed by a judge. In the same sentence, Trusty labeled Biden a political rival, which he was not when the search took place. In fact, Biden hasn’t yet formally declared for 2024. Trusty sounded like a conspiracy peddler, mouthing the kind of smack talk we hear from Majorie Taylor Green or Don, Jr. at Trump rallies or right wing media. You can lie to the press but I thought lawyers couldn’t lie like that in the courtroom. I must be naive. I realize Trusty humiliated himself. But why wasn’t he ejected from the courtroom?

Expand full comment

The question of whether Judge Cannon might be removed, is an interesting one, but I think the answer is no. It's possible, but very rarely done, for the government to ask the court to assign the case to a new judge on remand.  Here, the court will likely be fairly explicit to Judge Cannon about what she is to do or they may vacate her order outright -  there was a conversation between the court and the government's lawyer, about the proper relief to grant here. It's not outside the realm of possibility, but it would be an extreme step for the court to take.

Expand full comment

Thank you for responding: In setting up an interview with Andrew Weiss-mann, Lawrence O’Donnell introduced the idea that the 11th C. might remove Cannon from the case, although in responding, Weissmann worked masterfully around that line of thought without denying that removal was “out there” lurking in the background. Her defiance of binding case law, I think, is a subject not only of judicial concern- plummeting confidence in the legitimacy of the courts - but also of intense national concern. “Callous disregard” is a term better applied to Judge Cannon.

Expand full comment

Joyce, can you also address the notion that several commenters have advanced, about sanctioning Judge Cannon? My understanding is that judges cannot be sanctioned, no matter how crazy the ruling might be. Also, what about the forum shopping—is there a lack of jurisdiction argument here? Can/should a judge dismiss a matter for filing it in the wrong judicial district without a motion by the defense? Just wondering…

Expand full comment

Hope Joyce is correct that the 11th "may vacate her [Cannon's] order outright".

Expand full comment

A lawyer named Trusty, working for Trump. Dickens couldn't have done as well.

Expand full comment

Definitely Dickensonian! Lol!

Expand full comment

I'm sorry, but Callous Disregard™ is a personal trademark owned by Donald J. Trump, and may not be used without his permission.

Expand full comment

I thought Melania grabbed that prize when she wore that jacket up those stairs a couple three years ago.

Expand full comment

Remember Jack Smith is reviewing all of these proceedings and he’ll have something important to say on any rulings.

Expand full comment

Smith will be in charge of this matter going forward. That's why DOJ filed a statement in advance of argument, saying he had reviewed the pleadings and was in agreement with everything in them. It's now his baby.

Expand full comment

Thanks Joyce.

Expand full comment

Yes, Jack Smith not only sent a letter to the 11th C. approving each legal point of DIJ’s appeal prior to the hearing but also sent a letter immediately after the hearing on certain points in the arguments. He is “all in.” Mr. Smith Goes to Washington 2.0.

Expand full comment

🎉

Expand full comment

Or at least sanctioned officially by somebody. Can we start to have some real consequences please? Thank you.

Expand full comment

Joyce, is there precdent for this?:“...remove Judge Cannon from the case”

Expand full comment

Trusty is being paid to represent Trump, which inevitably involves presenting nonsensical and mendacious arguments to the Court. Attorneys do this all the time when representing criminal defendants. It's their job. What they cannot do is present falsified evidence.

Expand full comment

I do love the word 'mendacious'.

Expand full comment

Lawyers can be just as corrupt and disingenuous as any power hungry entities.

Expand full comment

Yeah. Grownups never cease to disappoint me. Every time I trust one...

Expand full comment

I always look forward to your publications! The longer they are, the happier I am!!

Expand full comment

Thanks for letting me know. I was afraid I was pushing it with this one.

Expand full comment

Never too much! We are here to understand all the nuances, no matter how long it takes to parse the details. Your ability to break down the legalese is admired and essential for those of us who don’t speak the language. Thank you, thank you!!

Expand full comment

I agree. Never too much.

Expand full comment

We wouldn’t be here if we weren’t interested in the details!

Expand full comment

Those details are fascinating to me and I suspect most of us who are not lawyers!

Expand full comment

Thanks Joyce. I was feeling encouraged until you said that Dearie’s decisions would be appealed. UGH! Hopefully the 11th circuit will quickly put the kibosh on Trump’s bs & justice will prevail. Thanks!!

Expand full comment

 Judge Dearie is working for Judge Cannon, here, so she was always going to have to adopt or reject his advice. And there was always going to be an appeal by whoever is aggrieved by that decision. So this isn't unexpected, it's just that frequently, folks don't focus on the appellate process. Since I spent a chunk of my career running an appellate division in a US attorney's office, it's always at the forefront for me.

Expand full comment

When I worked in NY State courts, it was the first thing I learned, that attorneys and judges work with the understanding that decisions will be appealed. Nobody wants to be overturned or their victories tossed out by a higher court ruling, so dotting the i's and crossing the t's is crucial. It's why I was so shocked by Aileen Cannon's faulty ruling - she had to know she was wrong and she'd be overturned.

Expand full comment

I agree. Had the same reaction.

Expand full comment

Even though she barely qualified for her post (and her thin resume should also raise eyebrows), it just makes no sense that she'd not see she was damaging her reputation. Add that to the fact that Trump's lawyers filed their motion 70 miles away from Mar A Lago even though there's a federal courthouse 15 minutes away.

Expand full comment

Well done! Thanks, Joyce.

Expand full comment

Danger Will Robinson. 😂 I say that as well. Fewer and fewer know what it’s from. You have chickens AND remember Lost in Space. (And a brilliant legal mind)

Expand full comment

I have a colleague named Dr. Zachary Smith. Nobody understands why that amuses me so.

Expand full comment

I had a colleague named Richard Wacker one time. He preferred to be called Dick. True story.

Expand full comment

My thoughts exactly. Joyce may be dating herself a little here but I loved the reference.

Expand full comment

Joyce, I understand that federal judges have wide discretion, but Judge Cannon's rulings in this case seem indefensible. Is there accountability for such conduct beyond a damaged reputation? (besides impeachment)

Expand full comment

Getting reversed in a case like this, as she was the first time, is a pretty significant piece of reputational damage. Federal judges have life tenure but for those who want to advance to a higher court, do national committee work, or develop a reputation  for scholarship in an area of expertise, a reversal that highlights an utter disregard for the law can be fatal. It may not seem like a lot to people who are outside of the legal profession, but it is significant for her.  She was put on the district court bench to be on a fast track to the 11th Circuit. I think that's off the table now.

Expand full comment

One win!

Expand full comment

Even though Judge Cannon’s likely to be marginalized by her peers and her advancement stifled, whatever she suffers professionally will be discreet. Apparently there is a large swath of the country who won’t feel justice has been served until we can see some sort of public accountability. You know, what I can’t forget is this: while we were reveling at the Thanksgiving table, before and after the feasting, you were toiling away on that longest-ever post. You and Jack Smith .... heroes.

Expand full comment

I am an attorney (I know, ick) and I mention this only as a basis for my opinion. No immediate accountability for an abuse of discretion. No impeachment for a mere abuse of discretion. Without thinking of the trump appointees, we don’t want judges to be afraid of issuing opinions on issues that might be novel or unpopular. Think: civil rights for marginalized groups. No matter how much I hate what judge cannon has done, all that has been shown is just abuse of discretion, a poor decision.

Expand full comment

Also an attorney here. I just wonder if it is "just abuse" if it is somehow shown that the lawyers manipulated the filing to be in front of her. But you're probably 100% correct, even if we have that info.

Expand full comment

More likely sanctions for TFG’s attorneys. There’s a remedy for lack of jurisdiction beyond upbraiding her for her poor choice.

Expand full comment

Follow ‘da money.

Expand full comment

Ethically, she should have turned down the case. Trump's lawyers apparently filed their motion in her court deliberately. It appears to be true because her court was not closest to Trump's locale. The DOJ could move to disqualify her.

Expand full comment

Of course, trump was forum shopping; this move is hardly unique to trump’s lawyers. And on what basis is her conduct unethical? There is no conflict of interest even though she was appointed by trump nor is there a conflict based on her decisions. Again, I think we need to tread lightly when talking about the judiciary. Do you want only Republican-appointed judges hearing hypothetical claims against President Kamala Harris?

I have faith that the 11th Circuit will straighten out Judge Cannon’s erroneous decisions.

Expand full comment

This has my incompetence meter pegging to the right. More than a poor decision to me anyway. Surely there are sanctions for gross incompetence, aren’t there? and if not, why not?

Expand full comment

But, but, but ... Cannon made her decision with great intention in spite of binding case-precedence ... Trump did not prove “callous disregard.” Cannon’s ruling seems an expression of unwarranted, willful bias for Trump, and against overwhelming case law.

Expand full comment

There absolutely must be.

Expand full comment

Compelled to follow up today: I commented (somewhere in Civil Discourse) on Kyrsten Sinema, convinced she would turn on the Senate Democrats. At the time, she had recently and quite publicly declared an alliance with Mitch McConnell - just before the election when the “Red Tide” seemed a fait accompli. But now, she’s betrayed just the same -threading the needle as an Independent and driving a stake in the Democratic majority. It’s not surprising after her remarks this fall to a crowd of Republican donors assembled in the McConnell Center in Lexington, KY on the UK campus. Miss Fickle.

Expand full comment

But she registered as an independent.

Expand full comment

Pundits said Sinema waited until after the runoff election 12/6 to announce so she wouldn’t be blamed for the loss of a seat. Michael Moore gives a history of her voting record on his Emergency Podcast today 12/9 on what it all means. A good listen.

Expand full comment

Excellent as always Joyce. It just gets so frustrating at how slowly the wheels of justice turn. This guy has been out of office for nearly 2 years & we are still waiting for the first shoe to drop in multiple jurisdictions!! As you can see patience is not necessarily one of my virtues when it comes to karma....

Expand full comment

It would be nice if the shoes started dropping and continued to drop one after the other.

Expand full comment

An excellent point, and one that I had not considered. You are absolutely right. I guess reputational damage will have to suffice. I hope that Judge Cannon has reached her career peak/end on the bench.

Expand full comment

Cannon shouldn’t have equitable jurisdiction. Plain and simple. It’s a faulty premise.

Expand full comment

Joyce, we subscribe just for your legal nerdy explanations, particularly of the 11th circuit appellate process. And the chickens. And the knitting. This was a great explanation of the court back and forth. I for one brought popcorn and will be popping it on Sunday evening to be ready for the opinion on Monday. Hope that’s not too optimistic. Thanks for your work to keep us informed!

Expand full comment

Great idea. I too will be waiting to see if the corn pops.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Joyce, for such a clear summary!

We’ve been surprised in the past by unprecedented decisions that appear to favor Trump for no discernible legal reason.

Expand full comment

We have, and I confess I won't breathe easily until we see the actual opinion here, but the signals in oral argument were good.

Expand full comment

No, ma'am, it's well within the range of understandability by any adult citizen who wishes to understand what's going on, in my humble opinion.

One of the most elegant way of demonstrating American government is to show it in its intended action pursuant to its careful design.

The legal system is one of the most comprehensible illustrations of design-in-action, or it can and should be. The 11th Circuit is called upon to play out this demonstration and show the excellence of the plan and design of law and its process.

The elegant laws of the United States can be frustrated, twisted and used to exemplify a mockery of law. The more exquisitely crafted an item is, the more easily it can be deformed by shocking mistreatment.

The law is designed to focus the best efforts of reason and understanding in constructing solutions to problems in law; in ethics, in living. If reason is discarded and mischief is the only intention, the rules of law can be perverted in a way to amplify injustice. This is what is on the balance before the 11th Circuit. And Joyce, you have helped us immeasurably in understanding this.

The balance of law and equity and their conflicts matured long before the USA existed. It arose from many elements of English government and society long past. It is relevant today, as equity can be used in the fulfillment of justice, or in its frustration.

I am not legally trained, but am one of the many Americans who believe that our duty is to understand our laws, for their proper promulgation and improvement, and the pursuit of justice. The case before the 11th is a crucible of this process. Thanks, Joyce, for helping us see into the complexity.

Expand full comment

I really agree with this, and if there's a silver lining to the Trump era, it's that so many people are engaged with government, and thinking about how our democratic institutions should work

Expand full comment

These comments remind me of a quote by Thomas Jefferson that is written in my copy of The Constitution of the United States. It says ,"On every question of construction, (let us) carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

I look forward to the 11th Circuit Courts opinion, too.

Expand full comment

We are allowed to respect what is noble, to admire earnestness in improving our self-governance, and to favor the well-read, the wise and insightful, to admire admirable persons. We should encourage each other towards these virtues.

Those who pander to the corrupt, who are incapable of reason and justice, or too devoid of virtue that they mock any attempts by individual to become more just and wise; those are not persons fit to govern themselves or us. Why do we pretend that they should be heard again and again as they counterfeit reason and justice?

Expand full comment

This is the question I posed to anyone voting for the ill-qualified candidates who ran this past election, and one I will continue to use as the basis to open the eyes of these voters, starting now and continuing up to the 2024 election.

Expand full comment

. What a great explanation of how we got to where we are.

Expand full comment

This one is so complicated that it's awfully easy to lose track, and add to the fact that there are multiple cases going on at once, so, some days, I feel like I need a whiteboard with a chart on it 

Expand full comment

Joyce, collaborate with California Representative Katie Porter. Isn’t she a treasure! I’m afraid that on tfg, your whiteboard would be as massive as 1969’s NASA blackboards. And as densely written. 😁

Expand full comment

So helpful. So, when will President Trump be charged in this matter, found guilty, and be sentenced to spend the rest of his time surrounded by Secret Service at Mara-a-Lago?

Expand full comment

I don't have a good crystal ball on this. One big question is whether DOJ has hard evidence that Trump has more materials at other locations, in which case we would expect to see more search warrants, and that could slow things down. But clearly, regaining control of government documents, and especially classified materials has to be the north star here.

Expand full comment

Why would the former guy be sentenced to Mar a Lago, as opposed to ADX Florence, Florence Colorado? This is espionage and treason.

Presidents are not Kings , and Plaintiff is not President.

Expand full comment

Wouldn’t TFG have to have secret service protection in jail? On the other hand, if he’s in house arrest in MAL, at least half of the year will be too hot to be outside and the rest of the year he won’t be allowed out to play golf. He won’t be able to swan around in the dining rooms and crash events. It’s the Trump equivalent of living hell.

Expand full comment

I never thought of it that way 😂

But no, he should not be afforded special services. I’m pretty sure his Secret Service agents volunteer for the assignment. As I said, Presidents are not Kings, and Plaintiff is not President.

Besides, those Secret Service Agents conspired with him to acquire and hide the Classified Top Secret Documents. Give them the choice to protect him in Florence, or be convicted and serve beside him in Florence.

Expand full comment

First, AG Garland will issue the charges as an indictment. These must be bulletproof. Impregnable. Due process follows. Remember how Trump operates. Al Capone fell with tax evasion. Trump’s tax returns are now available. Numbers do not lie, Trump does. His CFO is talking. Slam dunk. Trump’s got no defense on taxes. Federal prosecutors have stolen national security documents: that’s a lay up. This is treason. Life in prison. January 6th is the worst. And dozens have been convicted for this one. Trump is accountable and The Big Lie charge will sweep in dozens of Republican politicians nationwide. Garland has no choice

Who will not be charged? Tucker the Fucker and the Fox Fix Mustafa Mond from Australia. Those bastards will likely elude Garland. RICO would probably not prevail against our First Amendment. However, we cannot be certain. FB et al and FOX are an echo chamber of seditious politics and behaviors that might well deserve changes. They are all part of The Big Lie.

In short, AG Garland must weigh it all - and various government officials and agencies and even those charged with protecting our democracy must be prosecuted and punished if we are going forward in a manner that will make it clear:

It’s a Republic if you can keep it is on the line in Trump. It’s the ball game.

That simple. And AG Garland and Liz Cheney know this.

Does the AG have what it takes? Do we as people wish to bring our Civil War II to Court?

We came apart and President Lincoln acted. The Civil War and Lincoln produced a library of books and movies.

Trump’s Civil War is no less a War. The Germans, Japanese and Italians cost the planet over 80 million lives. World War III can wipe out mankind.

Ukrainians know. Trump types favor Putin’s approach. January 6 is Trump - Putin fascism front and center.

It’s put up or shut up time for racism, too. Sundown Towns are on the line. Rosa Parks to Emmett Till and MLK and Medgar Evans and millions and millions more. 

Thomas Jefferson wrote the song. Time for us to sing it. Paul Robeson fled to Europe and returned exhausted. He saw it all.

Ukrainians are our Front Line. The GOP Big Lie nut jobs are Putin’s atomic spies waiting for justice at Sing Sing. Their renamed children graduated Deerfield Academy as Meerpol. I met them at graduation.

Dear Heather earns a million a year for reciting fact.

Who will risk her franchise by telling us what’s happening here?

Who will connect the dots and put Bill Barr in the Dog House of our dreams? Barr drowned Robert Swan Mueller in his Big Lie. So much for that bastard.

We have a constitutional form of government. But the stench at SCOTUS is gagging our democracy top down. AG Garland was gagged by Mitch McConnell. Senators nearly saved hitler. Remember  Vandenberg from Michigan. Isolationist fascists were never outed. Their back.

Trump presents us with the most amazing opportunity. We can address MTG and her ilk along with Columbine and New Town and literally a thousand others. Colorado is in play. Arizona is barely surviving.

AG Garland, Sir, answer the call to freedom. The world needs to hear your voice.

Our children of every color are crying.

Till is the movie. We are on the stage. We’re playing every night.

Our MSM created Trump. FOX is sailing high. Tucker the Fucker is a preppy from St. George’s School, the weakest of the weak. Privilege kills.

Privilege kills.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson knows. Liz Cheney knows.

Our Black men jailed and charged with complicit defense counsel know. White prosecutors lied. By omission. Cops lie.

TILL may save us. If you’re not in tears and sobbing with TILL... see it again and again.

A Republic If You Can Keep It, Judge Garland.

Let us pray.

Expand full comment

I think you mean Medgar Evers. And praying is useless. We need to depend on the Justice Dept. and Merrick Garland not to let us down.

It's kind of interesting to see how fate works. It's ironic how Mitch McConnell kept Obama from nominating Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court only to see him become the US Attorney General who is actually the biggest threat to the Republican Party. In theory at least, Garland could burn it all down.

Expand full comment

According to Google, Esq. he’s entitled to protection for 10 years after leaving office, paid for by taxes.

Expand full comment

No. If he lands in federal prison, or in any prison, he would likely be housed in protective custody instead. He would never be put in gen pop because he's the biggest, fattest target imaginable. PC is 23 hours in a cell and one hour in solitude in an outdoor exercise area daily. For a narcissist like Trump, it would be hell on earth, and definitely he deserves it.

Expand full comment

Great question.

Expand full comment

EX-President Trump. FORMER President Trump.

Expand full comment

or 45 or FPOTUS.

Expand full comment

Yes. Former but never forgotten.

Expand full comment

He is no longer President Trump. That ship has sailed whether he is aware of it or denying it (😀) or what.

Expand full comment

Our first twice impeached charged, tried, convicted and incarcerated former president under house rule, Former President Donald John Trump, his tax returns published, his college and high school transcripts hidden - will be criminally charged for January Sixth for the record - and convicted for life with a record that matches or exceeds so many others and indicts the Republican Party for complicit cowardice, obstruction, provoking and enabling an insurrection and manslaughter.

Strong letter to follow.

Expand full comment

My vision has him at the Federal SuperMax in Florence, CO. Like the prisoner at Rikers said “We’re just criminals, he’s a Traitor!” He should never see the light of day unobstructed!

Expand full comment

Thank you Joyce for your clear explanations of the "legalese"... you give us Hope!

Expand full comment

Thank you Mrs. Vance for your expertise. Have a great weekend.

Expand full comment