- czech ( @czech@faux.moe ) 35•1 year ago
It’s an embarrassment to the system that this judge is still able to oversee trump cases after the special treatment she gave him last year. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/09/who-is-judge-aileen-cannon/
- keeb420 ( @keeb420@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
If the feds lose the case cane they appeal for judicial misconduct and get a retrail?
- curiosityLynx ( @curiosityLynx@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Sadly not. It might not even be appealable.
- MisterMoo ( @MisterMoo@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
I don’t believe you can try someone twice if they’re found not guilty.
- IHeartBadCode ( @IHeartBadCode@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Yep. Jeopardy refers to the danger of conviction, and the understanding is that the point when the 5th attaches is when a jury is sworn or the first witness is heard. In mistrial, the fifth does not attach so long as there is minimum delay between juries and the prosecutor has not had enough time to strengthen their case.
If the federal government wants to disqualify Judge Cannon, they must do so before this moment of attachment. Because if there is judicial misconduct the case can be halted but there’s no way that the disqualification process would satisfy minimum disruption, and thus Trump would be found not-guilty on a technicality with no possible way to bring back the Federal charges he faces.
- Froyn ( @Froyn@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
“Only break one law at a time.” If you’re going to drink underage, don’t drive. If you’ve got a defective tail light, don’t speed.
So even if this case (willful retention of documents and obstruction to their return) is tossed. They could use the same case and now prosecute for Treason (sharing/selling documents). He’d be lucky to get convicted on the first set of charges to avoid the second.
- mustyOrange ( @mustyOrange@beehaw.org ) 1•1 year ago
Not for the current charges. There probably more charges in other jurisdictions he can be tried in, though
- EvilColeslaw ( @EvilColeslaw@beehaw.org ) English17•1 year ago
Not a huge deal. Trump and Nauta get the list anyway. Filing it under seal just hides it from the public and press, and this denial was essentially that the prosecution didn’t even make an argument as to why it should be sealed. The court wants a reason, not “just because.”
- Snapz ( @Snapz@beehaw.org ) English10•1 year ago
Seems you’re trying to cosign garbage.
If witnesses are tampered with and trump/nauta were given the list exclusively outside of prosecution, it narrows the view of what likely happened.
If the list is wide public, the leonard leos and roger stones of the world can go attempt to tamper with these people on trump’s behalf.
You’re trying to say the wrong thing with confidence and hoping nobody calls you on it.
- EvilColeslaw ( @EvilColeslaw@beehaw.org ) English1•1 year ago
If they want it sealed for that reason, they need to ask for it to be sealed for that reason. Courts shouldn’t generally be accepting things without some reasoning, or taking into account arguments one side didn’t make when deciding on things like this. That’s part of why what this judge did before for Trump was such an egregious abuse of discretion.
And look, if I’m wrong about something I’m wrong about something. Wouldn’t be the first time, won’t be the last time. The implications about motivations aren’t really called for.
- jerome ( @jerome@kbin.social ) 9•1 year ago
Every person Trump favored was the lowest form of life on the planet.
- interolivary ( @interolivary@beehaw.org ) 4•1 year ago
That’s an insult to unicellular life
Another link without paywall https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/26/trump-witnesses-cannon-order-pretrial/