Judge Aileen Cannon

[colddiesel]

This judge was appointed by Trump after he lost the 2020 election but before Biden was inaugurated. She has already made some idiosyncratic decisions in Trump's case with regard to the original seizure of documents. Very inexperienced in criminal trials, she has now been allocated his trial. After her earlier decisions were thrown out on appeal, it will be interesting to see how she deals with procedural issues, particularly what evidence may be ruled admissible or not.

She is also slated to conduct a complex (Health Fund) fraud trial, the preliminaries of which will have taken almost 2 years before it starts in July or September 2023, so there are likely to be long delays.

One interesting feature of the Judge is in her sentencing; she has applied a number of consecutive rather than concurrent jail terms.

It is hard to see this being tried before early/mid 2024.

 

[Chobham]

This judge was appointed by Trump after he lost the 2020 election but before Biden was inaugurated. She has already made some idiosyncratic decisions in Trump's case with regard to the original seizure of documents. Very inexperienced in criminal trials, she has now been allocated his trial. After her earlier decisions were thrown out on appeal, it will be interesting to see how she deals with procedural issues, particularly what evidence may be ruled admissible or not.

She is also slated to conduct a complex (Health Fund) fraud trial, the preliminaries of which will have taken almost 2 years before it starts in July or September 2023, so there are likely to be long delays.

One interesting feature of the Judge is in her sentencing; she has applied a number of consecutive rather than concurrent jail terms.

It is hard to see this being tried before early/mid 2024.

That would be the case no matter which judge were to draw the case.

 

[schism666]

she has fewer hours clocked in a courtroom than the time required to be fulyl trained on the french fry station.

 

[ll74]

she has fewer hours clocked in a courtroom than the time required to be fulyl trained on the french fry station.

What are the requirements to be a judge on the court?

 

[schism666]

What are the requirements to be a judge on the court?

i have no idea nor was that my point.

 

[ll74]

i have no idea nor was that my point.

I get your point. She's qualified to be a judge. Regardless, she is the judge on this case.

 

[schism666]

I get your point.

really?

She's qualified to be a judge.

if that were the case then there was no need for this post.

Regardless, she is the judge on this case.

regardless of what?

 

[ll74]

really?

if that were the case then there was no need for this post.

regardless of what?

The left is looking for a scapegoat if things don't work out.....this is the one.

She's qualified. The thread is cover and is dumb. Either you trust the court system or you don't....it's not about one judge

 

[schism666]

The left is looking for a scapegoat if things don't work out.....this is the one.

She's qualified. The thread is cover and is dumb. Either you trust the court system or you don't....it's not about one judge

you should have quoted the op which bunched your panties, not my post which has nothing to do with either of you.

 

[ll74]

you should have quoted the op which bunched your panties, not my post which has nothing to do with either of you.

Can you tell me why her having not a lot of experience is relevant then?

 

[schism666]

Can you tell me why her having not a lot of experience is relevant then?

yes.

 

[ll74]

yes.

Glad you have that loaded up in case things don't go the way you want

 

[schism666]

Glad you have that loaded up in case things don't go the way you want

the fact that you think it went the way you wanted is funny as shit.

 

[phrodeau]

Nobody in America has experience trying presidents for federal crimes involving national security. It’s like hiring the best test pilots to walk on the moon.

 

[ll74]

Cannon's rulings are just as valid as someone with 30-40 years experience on the bench.

 

[colddiesel]

she has fewer hours clocked in a courtroom than the time required to be fully trained on the french fry station.

It's not that simple. She has plenty of hours logged in court but as a prosecutor before she became a judge. A lot of her work since her appointment has been on administrative decisions where fairly consistently. she has supported the views of prosecutors (particularly on issues of admissibility). Obviously as the matter proceeds she will be under the public microscope, and it will be interesting whether she leans towards her previous views, either supporting prosecutors, or any political preferences for the man who appointed her. Either way she will be embroiled in political controversy. If she has any common sense she'll find a reason to recuse herself.

 

[ll74]

It's not that simple. She has plenty of hours logged in court but as a prosecutor before she became a judge. A lot of her work since her appointment has been on administrative decisions where fairly consistently. she has supported the views of prosecutors (particularly on issues of admissibility). Obviously as the matter proceeds she will be under the public microscope, and it will be interesting whether she leans towards her previous views, either supporting prosecutors, or any political preferences for the man who appointed her. Either way she will be embroiled in political controversy. If she has any common sense she'll find a reason to recuse herself.

Why would she recuse herself? That's absurd.

 

[ll74]

Oh...I see where this came from

https://www.salon.com/2023/06/15/ex...of-experience-is-reason-enough-to-remove-her/

Good luck with your expectations....she has no reason to recuse and her boss won't step in.

 

[jaF0]

^^^ Because she has already shown bias towards the Orangtan and been slapped down for it.

 

[RoryN]

She's at risk of getting a bullet in the back of her head if Trump is convicted, and the same if he isn't.

All other concerns of her competence aside, she needs protection. They'd better not fuck around.

 

[colddiesel]

Oh...I see where this came from

https://www.salon.com/2023/06/15/ex...of-experience-is-reason-enough-to-remove-her/

Good luck with your expectations....she has no reason to recuse and her boss won't step in.

No I have not seen that article. My initial interest was piqued by an article I read in the Sydney Morning Herald by a man called Walleed Aly whose concern was the political ramifications. My personal opinion is that if she stays on the case her whole history as a prosecutor is unlikely to make her sympathetic to Trump. As William Barr has pointed out, the known facts (so far) are very straightforward. It does not need a particularly skilled or experienced judge to try the case.

Its about midnight here Friday I'm gunna bed. Have at it!

 

[Rightguide]

This judge was appointed by Trump after he lost the 2020 election but before Biden was inaugurated. She has already made some idiosyncratic decisions in Trump's case with regard to the original seizure of documents. Very inexperienced in criminal trials, she has now been allocated his trial. After her earlier decisions were thrown out on appeal, it will be interesting to see how she deals with procedural issues, particularly what evidence may be ruled admissible or not.

She is also slated to conduct a complex (Health Fund) fraud trial, the preliminaries of which will have taken almost 2 years before it starts in July or September 2023, so there are likely to be long delays.

One interesting feature of the Judge is in her sentencing; she has applied a number of consecutive rather than concurrent jail terms.

It is hard to see this being tried before early/mid 2024.

Looks like the SCOTUS just backed up the discretion of lower courts to impose decisions to run sentences consecutively or concurrently.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-49_d18e.pdf

 

[Dribble]

She's at risk of getting a bullet in the back of her head if Trump is convicted, and the same if he isn't.

All other concerns of her competence aside, she needs protection. They'd better not fuck around.

This. But she wanted to play at the adult table...so...

 

[butters]

It's not that simple. She has plenty of hours logged in court but as a prosecutor before she became a judge. A lot of her work since her appointment has been on administrative decisions where fairly consistently. she has supported the views of prosecutors (particularly on issues of admissibility). Obviously as the matter proceeds she will be under the public microscope, and it will be interesting whether she leans towards her previous views, either supporting prosecutors, or any political preferences for the man who appointed her. Either way she will be embroiled in political controversy. If she has any common sense she'll find a reason to recuse herself.

i can't find it now, but a few days ago i read an article about the latest case she was handling, which had a lot of parallels to the indictments trump faces, some big company. How true it was due to the source, i can't really say though i don't tend to read the worst, life's too short. It mentioned wire fraud, money laundering, obstruction and more. In almost all instances she was siding with the prosecutors, and it could be said that it is giving her good practise before trump's trial.

Given this 'education' before the trump trial, perhaps it helps her be less concerned with any personal affiliations/biases towards trump and more concerned with doing her best job as a judge 'under the microscope'. I'd even go so far as to suggest that her getting assigned this job is a ploy to help lessen suspicions of foul play the maga world might experience if/when he's found guilty, inasmuch as 'well trump appointed her so the evidence must be really bad against him. It might appear on the face of things that trump is being handed an advantage: that helps appease his supporters and so calm things down on the violence front. Add to that trump's own delight at having a supposed 'trumper' judge with, as his own lawyers will be well aware of, a certain lack of experience in big trials, and the risks to her life are diminished since most the threats of violence WILL come from the extreme right.

The case seems a slam dunk, but she does have the power to control a lot of what evidence is presented to the jury down the road; since she is under such microscopic scrutiny, and given the overturning of past decisions she's made, maybe that will temper her future ones to toe the line of best law.

who knows, eh?

 

[Lazaran]

•
The obvious and most salient point, is that “Judge” Aileen Cannon has already given preferential treatment to the orange POS that appointed her, and been overruled by an appellate court.

“Judge” Aileen Cannon consistently siding with prosecutors in other recent cases provides the background / standard against which her rulings in this case will be evaluated.

If “Judge” Aileen Cannon suddenly starts ruling for the defense on key issues in this case, then she’s going to have some explaining to do.

I absolutely agree that “Judge” Aileen Cannon should recuse herself from this particular case. Conflict of interest and demonstrated partiality is present due to the circumstances of her appointment AND due to her earlier ruling in favor of the orange POS’s request for a special master to review the documents from Mar a lago. (A ruling that was laughably incorrect and obviously influenced by her loyalty to the corrupt individual that appointed her.)