Judge Cannon is going to be removed from Smelvis' case

[malaise]

She is clueless -the Special Counsel won't stand for this madness

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/18/politics/classified-documents-case-judge-presidential-records-act/index.html


Federal Judge Aileen Cannon issued an order Monday for lawyers to submit instructions for a trial jury in former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case – signaling that the debate over whether Trump had the authority to keep documents from his White House could remain a central issue of the case, which could help him at trial.

But – to the surprise and confusion of several legal experts on Monday – Cannon asked the attorneys in the case to consider how to incorporate into the trial the Presidential Records Act.

The request is an unusual one that leads both sides into hypothetical, untrodden territory.

Cannon asked both the Justice Department and defense team to contemplate how a jury could be told to weigh the criminal law around national security records if Trump could say the PRA gave him authority to keep documents he chose.

[PCIntern]

1. My mother of blessed memory

Worked at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard during WWII and she was not allowed to discuss one iota of her job there for the rest of her life. With anyone…and she didn’t.

I can imagine how trivial her job was but fifty years and more later, not one word. To anyone.

This guy takes top secret documents, stores them next to a toilet, shows them to civilians who have no standing and that’s just fine? Bull and Shit.

And you know…you KNOW he copied and gave away/sold important ones. Of COURSE he did.

[Duncanpup]

2. Your mom and her generation saved the world

[malaise]

3. Precisely

Great post

[Rhiannon12866]

4. Kudos to your mother who was clearly a patriot. TFG who is running to lead this country would sell to the highest bidder

[Best_man23]

27. My dad had a TS clearance for more than 20 years

Received the clearance during World War II and had it because his primary duty was torpedo maintenance. Retired as an E-9 Master Chief in the late 1960s after serving a tour off the coast of Vietnam in 65-66. From that day until the day he died, he NEVER said a word about any aspect of what he did, where he went, or what he worked on during his time in the service.

Found out years after he died he was part of the team who helped solve the torpedo issues the Navy had during the early part of WW II.

[2naSalit]

41. I was a lowly census worker...

In a low supervisory position and there are things I am sworn to never talk about or share as per my oath and mandate of law. Even the enumerators who go out and collect data are sworn to silence on some segments of info, for life. I should know, I took and administered the oath so many times...

Unless one lacks respect for such things as oaths and law, this is a no-brainer.

[marble falls]

52. Imagine my house, my wife was 28 years with CIA. I have clearances from my service. She will not ...

... drop any hint of a secret. And I say, "I was a submariner, I have no idea where I went, I have nothing in my duty station on board I can discuss."

Meanwhile, on shore during my hitch, the only place on base where cameras were allowed, was the one place a secret material was stored.


Anyone who takes a state secret, means to expose it.

[mitch96]

56. My best buddy was in the Navy. He was posted to a nuclear sub.. When ever anything comes up about what he did

or where they went he just say he can't talk about it.. That was 50 someting years ago and he still won't talk about his time on a sub...
m

[LiberalFighter]

5. Does Cannon even know what is in the PRA?

Or how it came about?

[malaise]

7. Apparently not

She is clearly unqualified for that position

[rampartc]

8. she will be a supreme court justice if she can stretch this out past november

i'd move to jamaica if i could only find a source for medicinal marijuana on that island.

[bucolic_frolic]

6. "We've reached a point where I'm in over my head. What do you guys suggest?"

[JT45242]

9. One of best friends was air force...

Besides his training, on the day he retired he had to sign again multiple times that if he talked about what he did, each incident would be up to ten years in jail and $10,000 fine.

He was an NCO.

There is no gray area. Thus is BS.

Literally anyone else who showed that (real) billionaire from Australia info on military plans would already be sitting in jail.

[True Blue American]

20. My Dad worked at the Atomic Plant

He had to have full security clearance.

Lame brain Trump and his SIL would never have passed. People have to understand what traitors that family is.

Back then we had true Patriots. This cult has nothing but rage and hate.

[radical noodle]

37. One more thing they have....

Greed

[FalloutShelter]

54. I know... this is insane.

My dad was also at the Philadelphia Navy Yard and my in-laws worked on the Manhattan Project.

They are spinning in their graves. This would absolutely blow their minds.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. She is clever like the donald, a little bit smarter than him, but very unwise (as unwise as he is)

It might actually help the Court to have PRA issues clarified before trial, but aiLoose Cannon's way of going about it is backassward and could get her removed from the case for bias and ignorance of the law.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. There's nothing to "clarify"

the latest action dealing with the PRA was this (where Nixon's disposition happened when he/his estate was caught between 2 laws and a remedy was devised to deal with that) - https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2000/June/336civ.htm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CIV

MONDAY, JUNE 12, 2000
[phone]

WWW.USDOJ.GOV
TDD [phone]


GOVERNMENT ANNOUNCES SETTLEMENT OVER
NIXON PRESIDENTIAL PAPERS


WASHINGTON, DC - The government has reached a settlement agreement to pay former President Richard Nixon's estate $18 million for his presidential papers, tape recordings and other materials, the Justice Department announced today. In 1992, a federal court of appeals had ruled that the estate was entitled to be paid the fair value of those materials. The Nixon family at one point had asked that the papers be sold to the United States for up to $35 million plus 25 years of interest, which would have brought the asking price to more than $200 million.

"It's our belief that presidential papers belong to all the American people," said David W. Ogden, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Department's Civil Division. "This settlement brings to a close 20 years of litigation surrounding President Nixon's papers. Given the Court of Appeals decision, this is a fair resolution for the American taxpayer."

The Nixon papers and tapes were acquired by the government under a law enacted by Congress in 1974, to prevent the destruction of any "Watergate" related material. In 1978 Congress enacted the Presidential Records Act to ensure that the papers of all future Presidents are the property of the American public. The Nixon papers are located and will remain at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, Maryland.

In 1991, the federal district court in Washington, D.C. agreed with the government that the materials were not Mr. Nixon's private property, but that decision was overturned a year later by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which sent the case back for a determination of how much the 44 million documents, 950 secret tapes, and other materials were worth. Last year, after a five-month trial, the district court took the matter under advisement.

###

00-336

Federal Register update (includes a good description of what Presidential materials would include) - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/03/08/2016-05149/nixon-administration-presidential-historical-materials

[Bernardo de La Paz]

19. "Clarify" if only to clear out some defense nonsense, but since she is biased she bungled it. . . . nt

[BumRushDaShow]

29. Just the fact that she introduced "hypotheticals"

that would now obfuscate what is a clear law that has been in effect for the past almost-50 years, suggests malfeasance.

As it is, there were big media productions made out of determining the whereabouts of Obama's, Biden's, and Pence's records to provide a "Squirrel!" distraction. But then the reasons behind those instances are deemed irrelevant when it comes to 45 and his deliberate attempt to not only keep government records, but to obstruct the return of them.

[3Hotdogs]

28. Jesus Jumpin' Christ -- the two pink ice cream cones and their

husbands got 9 million each, for public property.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. They originally wanted $200 million

[moniss]

11. I look at this move as

possibly her looking to get some sort of "end phase" ideas and then use that ahead of trial as justifications during motions to exclude this or that. She'll say something along the lines of "You said this is how the jury should see the instructions and if I allowed this in it would conflict with that in my opinion. So it is excluded." It's a BS move on her part to be working the end of the trial at this point especially when she's got all of this pre-trial in front of her that she hasn't ruled on. It's like tell me what the cake should look like going into the oven and I'll work backwards from there and go get the ingredients at the store. Someone doesn't know how to get the cake going but they know how to screw it up so it's a mess and then they can say "Well I was working with what you all said you wanted so don't blame me."

[Emile]

12. Delay Delay Delay and now this. .

[Hermit-The-Prog]

13. traitortrump's loose cannon wants to be provided with an excuse to dismiss the case.

[dem4decades]

14. Do you really think the Special Counsel can remove her?

She knows what she's doing, probably has real legal experts making sure she's doing it perfectly.

[BeyondGeography]

16. Ben Meiselas: Jack Smith is being asked to engage with situations that violate the law

ergo he must appeal to the 11th Circuit.

Judge Cannon just issued an order requesting the parties “engage” with two hypothetical scenarios for potential jury instructions regarding the espionage act as applied to Trump’s willful retention of national defense information. Both hypotheticals are legally flawed and assume Donald Trump, as a former president, has special powers to willfully retain national defense info (he does not). It’s unclear what she even means by having the parties “engage with” these hypotheticals. Both hypotheticals are egregious and the second one is extra egregious since she wants to the government to accept as true that Trump has the sole ability to designate national defense information as his personal property and somehow instruct a hypothetical future jury on this. As I read it, she is asking Jack Smith to “engage” with two scenarios that both violate the law which he should not do. Is she setting a trap that if he responds to the scenarios she than tries to act like the government has accepted both these legally flawed scenarios as true or allowed?It’s such an unusual and unprecedentedly bizarre and dangerous order. But if I am Jack Smith I am thinking if this constitutes a “final order” for purposes of an interlocutory appeal and telling the 11th Circuit that both of these scenarios violates clearly established law and so an appeal is needs since the government can’t be compelled by a judge to “engage” with situations that violate the law.

Link to tweet

?s=61&t=EcvWMxA1syxTf8zqNwq-IA

[malaise]

26. Thanks for this

Rec

[ancianita]

42. So the very act of Smith's even answering this is what, a trap? Moss says he should answer it.

No tv lawyer I've seen has pointed out what Meiselas has. I wonder ...

[BeyondGeography]

44. If his answer is she's at odds with the law they're on the same page

[ancianita]

46. Okay, thank you. Do you think he will appeal to the 11th Circuit based on this Order? Because to me, it

looks as if she's implicitly affirmed that she can make the defense's position on the law an actual jury instruction. She looks as if she's willing to give the jury instruction on how to reason a Dismissal of the trial altogether.

[BeyondGeography]

48. I hope he does and not just for the purposes of this case

Trump’s interpretation of the PRA which she has regurgitated in her second scenario is sheer madness. We wouldn’t want any Presidents to have the power to declare highly classified documents their personal property and keep them. This should be clarified before this case goes to trial and she clearly isn’t willing to go there.

[ancianita]

51. Me, too. This fits the standard of "egregious." In her case, mere rebuke by the 11th just won't work.

[Baitball Blogger]

17. Too bad we can't do to Cannon what they did to Fani Willis

But I guess our side doesn't know how to do a deep investigation that probably crosses legal lines.

[gab13by13]

25. It's not over with Fani

Trump just appealed judge McAfee's decision to keep Fani on the case. Is there no limit to the number of appeals that Trump or anyone else can make?

[Baitball Blogger]

40. It seems to be his only strategy.

Today he's suing ABC for defamation.

[BlueKota]

53. I cannot believe lawyers are still willing to represent him at this point.

How are they okay with him suffering no consequences while most of them lose money, their law license or worse go to prison?

[MichMan]

18. Where did it say she is being removed from the case?

There was nothing in the link in the OP that states that

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. It is the OP's conjecture. Doesn't have to be in the link. General Discussion is not LBN

"Smelvis" in the thread Title might help you. It likewise is not in the linked article.

[MichMan]

22. Pure fantasy then

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Not fantasy, it is a real and distinct possibility open to Smith

Some commentaries by legal beagles advise Smith to go for it by appeal to the 11th Circuit, who have knocked Cannon twice previously.

[Kingofalldems]

30. I bet the MAGA people will be really upset if it happens.

[malaise]

24. Thank you

[Think. Again.]

32. On this entire topic...

...the wording of the poster's opinion in the title of their post is what you're focussed on?

[MichMan]

33. It said she was being removed

My mistake for not realizing the OP was merely fantasizing.

[Think. Again.]

35. Fantazing, predicting, stating a hope, whatever...

...it's the poster's perogative to write our titles as we wish.

[MichMan]

43. Of course, or maybe space aliens abducted him

[3Hotdogs]

34. How often have Fed judges been removed from a case before it begins?

What were the circumstances? I'm guessing it has never happened.

The internet tubes tell us that judges can be de-judged, (hey I coined a new word) only for crimes and misdemeanors. I can't find anything about removal from a single case, beyond self-recusal.

Also, at least 86 judges are now in their 90's and still (kinda) functioning. The oldest is 96.

[Think. Again.]

38. Well, luckily, there are set rules...

...concerning motions to disqualify judges.

Unlike you, I'm guessing it has happened.

[3Hotdogs]

39. ---just that a google search turned up no instances.

[FailureToCommunicate]

36. Clearly she's looking for delay delay delay. And throwing anything at the wall to do it.

She's just another one of TSK's useful idiots. Sad.

[jaxexpat]

45. This sort of trap is likely in a system wherein a single person is designed to be a full 1/3rd of the government.

Inevitable, really, any laws defining boundaries on executive prerogatives are necessarily open-ended as to be vague, even ambiguous. Every occasion where they come into play will be dependent on refinement and specificity for their applicability. Did anyone here ever actually believe our justice system would, with ease or certainty, seriously curtail the activity of a determined, amoral and adversarial POTUS or ex-POTUS without, at minimum, 2/3 of the government decidedly/reliably in hand?

The half-truths of politics are real and living, often writhing, aspects of human interaction, unavoidable for non-hermits and void of certainty. The CIC designation predictably flushes the military fetish fear mongers from their holes, shivering, with every rumor/whisper of "threats to national security". Franklin's, democracy......"if you can keep it", epithet referred to just this sort of situational "fortitude evaluation" for the citizenry. Will cell phone junkies and Starbucks addicts pass such a test?

In time for election day? In time for anything to do with justice? Whuddaya think?

[Kingofalldems]

47. Kick and rec for those who are triggered by this thread.

How dare you have an opinion!

[Silent3]

49. Correction: Cannon *should be* removed

And we should all know by now the enormity of the chasm between should be and will be.

[onenote]

50. No she won't

I know folks keep saying this, but it isn't going to happen. Smith won't even ask for it to happen.

[Blue Owl]

55. She looks the same way Katie Britt sounds

Empty-headed and breathless for her special pantload man

[Native]

57. My favorite paragraph from this article...

Moss said the second scenario appears to be the equivalent of a judge in a murder case asking how to advise a jury to weigh the facts, “if the murder had taken place during The Purge” – referencing a movie where all crime is legal for a set period of time.