So in every other court in the land this request would be laughed out of court. In Cannon’s world it requires 6 months of hearings.
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
I guess this goes along with what Jon Stewart described yesterday as the “due-ier process” Trump receives.
I wonder if there will ever be a point at which some component of the courts observes that she is bringing disrepute upon the system? Just an amazing performance.
I guess it isn’t sexy, but I would think the tone of reporting on this could be - uh - stronger.
If she can’t handle all the issues, she should be self-aware enough to realize that and get it re-assigned to a more seasoned judge.
Yeah, I realize that will never happen.
When, oh when, has she crossed the line where Smith has cause to get her bumped? What the @#$& does she have to do?
Is anyone looking into her bank accounts and/or communications with Trump associates and foreign governments? I’m very serious.
What I heard based on the pushback to thousands of complaints about her, is that it’s not what she does, but they need evidence that she’s ruling with a particular bias or with bad motives. Which is much harder to prove than just showing she’s making unusual or questionable rulings.
So what I gathered is that she can do almost anything she wants in her courtroom itself if it’s all based on her own judgment of what she thinks is best.
If she screws up too much that’s what appeals are for. But that comes after the verdict. (As always IANAL.)
I guess. Let’s try some reductio ad absurdum. What if it’s 10 years from now and she’s still working through pre-trial motions. Trump (now wheeled around like Mr. Potter in It’s a Wonderful Life) has his lawyers file a new one every month or two. Cannon will not rule from the bench on anything, and requires hearings with written arguments in advance, and amicus briefs welcomed.
Is there nothing that can be done?
It doesn’t work that way. If she screws up too much, then Trump is found innocent, and an innocent verdict can’t be appealed. Double jeopardy.
Although… It seems to me that I’ve heard of cases where, after the fact, it came to light that the court was extraordinarily corrupt in some way, and it was ruled that double jeopardy didn’t apply, because with the judge in the defendant’s pocket, the defendant was never actually in jeopardy in the first place. Am I correct in remembering that? Granted, that would necessarily be a very difficult case to make, but is there precedent?
I can’t find any report of such a thing. Here is an account of a person being found guilty of one charge and acquitted on another, and the result was so inconsistent that the whole case with both charges was to be retried.
The Georgia Supreme Court upheld that finding but SCOTUS reversed it in a unanimous decision, that an acquittal in inviolate and can’t be reversed.
Now, I suppose if Trump is acquitted and it’s found that it’s because he colluded with the judge, he can’t be retried for those charges but you can now charge him for whatever illegality he engaged in to get acquitted. No double jeopardy in that case.
It’s like reading Bleak House, only less uplifting.
No, there is little that can be done at this stage. But I trust Jack Smith will know how and when to make a move. I’m not expecting much until after the election, and then only if Biden wins. Which I have to believe will be the case.
Going only by things I’ve read and not an in-depth opinion, I think they actually are saying that they don’t agree with the message. Chief Judge William Pryor of the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit has been described as “ultraconservative” and has a track record pretty much consistent with that. It would be astonishing if someone like that was a party to removing Cannon.
If Biden does not win, Jack Smith will be imprisoned in the best case scenario, and put to death By The Order Of The King and confirmed by The King’s Court (formerly known as the Supreme Court) in the worst case scenario.
I wish this were hyperbole, but it no longer is. Well, not too much.
I thought that judges were constitutional scholars first, then judges.
This is just absolutely extraordinary. Aileen “Loose” Cannon is not just partisan and incompetent, it’s now plain that she is literally out of control in her boundless defense of Trump and no one is able to stop her. What an embarrassment to the American system of justice!
Maybe they don’t agree with the message. But they’re not saying that.
Aleman v. Judges of Cook County Circuit Court, 138 F.3d 302 (7th Cir. 1998)
Harry Aleman successfully bribed a Cook County Circuit Judge to acquit him of a murder charge in a 1977 bench trial. A grand jury returned a second indictment against Aleman on this murder charge in 1993 after evidence of the bribery surfaced. In addition, Aleman was indicted for the first time on a different murder charge. Alem an moved to dismiss both indictments, but the Illinois state courts rejected his arguments.
…
After numerous substitutions of counsel and judges, the Logan case proceeded to a bench trial before Cook County Circuit Court Judge Frank Wilson, who acquitted Aleman of the Logan murder in May 1977
…
Rizza also supplied corroboration of Aleman’s bribe of Judge Wilson in the Logan murder trial.
…
Judge Wilson fulfilled his end of the bargain on May 24, 1977, when he acquitted Aleman in a brisk oral ruling and quickly exited the courtroom. Cooley’s contacts in organized crime gave him a $3,000 “commission” for his work and an envelope containing $7,500 for Judge Wilson.
…
in December 1993, the Cook County State’s Attorney again charged Aleman for the Logan murder … Aleman claimed to the Circuit Court, as he claims to us on appeal, that the Logan indictment violated the Double Jeopardy Clause and that the prejudicial pre-indictment delay on both charges violated his due process rights. After an evidentiary hearing concerning the alleged bribe, the Circuit Court rejected the double jeopardy argument based on the overwhelming factual evidence that Aleman’s first trial was a sham.
Good find! 
Cannon DENIES motion to dismiss:
If she had dismissed it at this stage, though, couldn’t the case still have been brought again? Likely before a different judge? So denying the dismissal was pretty much a foregone conclusion.