On Friday, District Judge Aileen Cannon issued a new order in the Donald Trump classified documents case adding to the mountain of evidence that she is firmly in the former president’s pocket. Trump appointed Cannon in 2020 and the Senate confirmed her appointment in the days after he lost the 2020 election. It’s deeply offensive to the rule of law for judges to bend the law to benefit those who put them on the bench. Sadly, Cannon does just that.

Cannon’s new ruling rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s entirely standard request that she order Trump to state whether he intends to rely on an “advice of counsel” defense ahead of the trial, currently scheduled for May 20. Advance notice of the defense helps expedite a trial because defendants asserting it need to provide additional discovery to prosecutors—raising the defense means that defendants must disclose all communications with their attorneys, as the defense waives the attorney–client privilege.

Judge Cannon’s brief order asserted that Smith’s motion was “not amenable to proper consideration at this juncture, prior to at least partial resolution of pretrial motions” and further discovery.

Sound innocuous? It’s anything but. Instead, it’s part of a pattern we’ve already seen of Cannon laying the groundwork for delaying Trump’s trial—until it’s too late for a jury to be empaneled and the case tried to verdict before the election.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Advocating shooting lessons in the wake of a 2nd Trump term is a call to violence under rule 6. Removed. 24 hour ban.

    • Thoth19@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Fortunately the rules allow for celebrating violence and advocating for nonviolent deaths. If you’re going to be pedantic about the exact meaning of your rules to stifle opposition, write better rules.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Rule 6 is NOT ambiguous:

        “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”

        Telling people to practice shooting if Trump is re-elected, or, hell, if ANYONE is elected, is advocating violence.

        • DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I advocate shooting lessons because you don’t want to hit the wrong object. Isn’t that a safe thing to advocate for? 😜

          Do we need to talk in code like unalive someone in Minecraft/Roblox?

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I absolutely encourage good firearms safety IN GENERAL. You’re never too young to learn good trigger discipline. ;)

            Advocating it in response to an election or other political event carries unfortunate connotations which isn’t allowed.

            I’m actually quite pleased at the number of gun groups that have popped up on Lemmy. Liberal Gun Owners for example, I think there’s one for LGBTQ shooters as well. Can’t recall the name of it.

        • Thoth19@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Since someone is going to be elected pretty much no matter what, “practice shooting if a tone is elected” is logically equivalent to “practice shooting”.

          Banning proponents of 2A is a bit weird for a politics sub but I like it. Gun nuts are crazy.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh, I have no problem with proponents of the 2nd Amendment, it’s when you start talking about the 2nd Amendment in connection with other people that there’s going to be a problem.

            “Trump just became the nominee? Better brush up on the 2nd Amendment…” Surely you see the tone there. It’s really no different than what Trump was saying on 1/6, only actually invoking weapons.