"Manifest injustice": Jack Smith calls out Judge Cannon's "clear error" in new filing

[BumRushDaShow]

Last edited Fri Feb 9, 2024, 04:14 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Salon

Published February 9, 2024 8:58AM (EST)


Special counsel Jack Smith’s team on Thursday said U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon made a “clear error” by refusing to shield witnesses in former President Donald Trump’s documents case. Smith’s team asked Cannon to reconsider her order granting Trump’s request to unredact portions of their motions for discovery, rejecting the Justice Department’s concerns about potential harm to witnesses.

The special counsel’s motion argued that Cannon made a “clear error’ that defied 11th Circuit Court precedent and would cause “manifest injustice.”

"That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered, would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment, as has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved," the filing said.

Smith’s team on Wednesday revealed that authorities are already investigating a series of online threats made to potential witnesses in the case. "The Court's conclusion that the Government's witness-safety concerns are too speculative or generalized is misplaced," Thursday’s filing said. "A court's duty is to prevent harms to the witnesses or the judicial process 'at their inception,' before they are realized and dysfunction envelops the trial."

Read more: https://www.salon.com/2024/02/09/manifest-injustice-jack-smith-calls-out-cannons-clear-error-in-new-filing/

---

Link to filing (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.294.0.pdf

[TwilightZone]

1. I know she's a hack, but this should have been a no-brainer.

She seems to be just rubber-stamping whatever Trump wants, but even the hackiest of hacks should understand that protecting witnesses should be paramount. There's literally nothing positive to be gained by not doing so.

[LiberalLovinLug]

44. NOTHING POSITIVE?

If she manages to pull this off. To use her client's.....er I mean the defendant's...weak arguments to push the trial past inauguration day, and her boss.....I mean the defendant...wins the Presidency, then he can take it from there

That or he looses, and she and her co-conspirator....I mean the defendant.,..still manage to usurp justice by other means when the trial finally does get underway, and either he's exonerated, or the punishment is severely less than precedent.

What could be more positive than that for her? She is imagining it already. Basking in the orange glow of her MAGA Master. If one of those Marxist commie judges on the SCOTUS ever croaks, she's imagining that she'll be first in line. (can you imagine?)

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. If Loose Cannon digs herself any deeper, Smith might get a higher court to move the case away from her. . . . nt

[LiberalFighter]

10. I would think this would be enough.

[ShazzieB]

23. I sure hope so!

Jeopardizing the safety of witnesses is no joke. If she blows this off again like she has before, she'll be giving him the ammunition he needs.

[Lucky Luciano]

42. A considerable delay in that case. Probably what fuckface wants.

Then he can try to slide into dictator role and be done with this.

[iluvtennis]

14. Smith should iniate that process ASAP. n/t

[ShazzieB]

24. He may just be waiting for her response to this.

I hope she's too stupid to realize what thin ice she's on and gives him the ammunition he needs to get her traitorous, Trump-worshipping ass thrown off this case.

[PortTack]

28. Amen to that!!

[ananda]

22. Yes, setting the groundwork to have her dismissed.

Good!

[Rebl2]

33. We can hope

[Mysterian]

3. Expose this corrupt judge for what she is

Cannon will rue the day she ever heard the name Jack Smith.

[FakeNoose]

46. You know what? Maybe Judge Cannon isn't corrupt...

Maybe she's scared shitless and trying to get removed. It's no secret that Chump will get revenge against everyone he thinks is not doing enough to "help" him.

It seems that every step she has taken so far has led to the point of her being removed from the case.

Let's hope that's her plan ... and it's working.

[Prairie Gates]

4. Lawyer Brigade incoming to tell us Cannon was right

3...2...1...

[lastlib]

12. Nope. We don't entertain trolls here.

Cannon's a tRump stooge, and this decision was eminently wrong.

[Prairie Gates]

16. LOL

I've seen 10,000+ posters whose legal positions (incessantly stated) would make the Federalist Society blush.

Tra la, though.

[TomSlick]

41. Not from me.

Cannon is clearly and egregiously wrong. My only question is whether this can be taken up on an interlocutory appeal. I don't know the answer but I'm sure Jack Smith does.

[druidity33]

47. Wait... you know bmaz too? nt.

[onenote]

51. Member, I guess, of the "Lawyer Brigade" here. And while the motion to reconsider should be granted by Cannon

Smith didn't help matters by, as he essentially admits in the motion for reconsideration, failing to discuss the applicable legal standard for deciding whether to keep material under seal in his original opposition and by not providing specific evidence to back up the argument that disclosing the information in question would pose a substantial risk of harm. He has corrected those omissions in the petition for reconsideration and made what I believe is a sufficient case for Cannon to reverse herself, notwithstanding the fact -- which he again acknowledges -- that the courts do not like it when legal arguments and factual submissions that could have been made in an initial opposition are made for the first time in a request for reconsideration.

So,was the initial decision correct? No. Did Smith drop the ball somewhat in the initial opposition thereby opening the door for the incorrect result? To a certain extent, yes.

[GreenWave]

5. Aileen is following the Alien and seduction of Trump Act!

[The Roux Comes First]

6. It's Very Hard for Me to Entertain the Idea That This "Own Goal" is Merely an Inadvertent Error

On the part of a highly educated intelligent member of our species.

[bluestarone]

7. Hope this is first step for

REMOVAL of this RUMP lover.

[edhopper]

8. When does Smith

ask for her removal? Long past time.

[drray23]

31. I think he was reluctant to do this at first because of the delays

However, its becoming clear that this trial is never going to happen before the election. The jan 6th trial has the best chance so far. Given this, Smith should cut his losses and go through the process of getting Canon removed as soon as he has enough legally sound reasons to challenge her and do so.

[onenote]

50. He doesn't. Certainly not for this order.

The Special Counsel provided certain information, including the names of witnesses and witness statements, to Trump and his lawyers in discovery. The production of that information was covered by a protective order that barred the disclosure of the information to the public absent the consent of Special Counsel or an order from Cannon. Trump sought to have some of that information, including the witness names and statements, unredacted and thus made available to the public. Smith opposed, but Cannon ruled against Smith with certain exceptions, applying the standard that is generally applicable when a request is made to keep trial related information under seal -- is there a "compelling governmental interest" to keep the information from the public. Smith filed a motion for reconsideration acknowledging that is the generally applicable standard but that 11th Circuit precedent holds that in discovery related disputes, the standard is the much more easily met "good cause" test for keeping the material sealed -- a test that he argued was readily met by evidence of past attempts at witness intimidation, harassment, and coordination. The problem is that, as Smith essentially concedes in his motion for reconsideration, he didn't discuss the applicable standard, and the fact that the bar is lower in discovery-related cases, in its initial filing opposing unredacting the documents. Nor did Smith provide evidentiary support in that filing for the assertion that making the information available to the public would pose a serious risk of witness intimidation, etc. That was, in my opinion, a screw up by the Special Counsel's office, which should have presented the strongest, most detailed legal and factual case against unredacting the documents when it first opposed it. Citing cases and providing factual evidence for the first time in a petition for reconsideration is frowned upon. Hopefully, nonetheless, Cannon will grant the motion and, failing that, the 11th Circuit will step in. However, given that the courts have struggled somewhat to define the standard applicable to requests to unseal information in a criminal trial, and given the failure by the Special Counsel's office to present the relevant legal and factual argument in a timely fashion, I doubt that even if Cannon sticks to her guns -- and she's already suspended her own order pending a decision on the motion for reconsideration -- and even if the 11th Circuit reverses her, it won't treat her handling of the issue as something so flawed as to warrant her being removed from the case.

[republianmushroom]

9. Jack is finally stopping the coddling. Thank you, Jack.

[Torchlight]

17. Coddling? lol!

[trusty elf]

11. I find it hard to believe that she was randomly chosen for this case.

[orangecrush]

13. I find it impossible to believe

And hope he gets her removed for this.

[mahina]

15. No doubt she hopes the same

I don’t imagine he selected her because she couldn’t be pressured and intimidated

And thats no fun

/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#:~:text=Previously%2C%20Cannon%20worked%20for%20the,U.S.%20Senate%20in%20November%202020.

“She was nominated by then President Donald Trump to become a district judge and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in November 2020.”

[ShazzieB]

26. I dont thnk anyone "selected" her for this.

IIRC, It was decided by a coin toss between her and the one other judge who was available
at the time.

[mahina]

34. I thought that might be ambiguous. If I am not mistaken she is a Trump nominated judge.

Last edited Fri Feb 9, 2024, 07:13 PM - Edit history (1)

Of course you’re 100% right about who gets tagged for the job that TrumP did not select her to hear his case, but he did get her in office by nominating her, though she has very little experience. It’s my guess he did so because he thought he could control her but that’s just a guess. Maybe it was for some better reason, but I don’t think so.

[ShazzieB]

36. Yes, Cannon was definitely a Trump appointment.

He stuffed the Federal courts with tons of his nominees. But from what I've read, they were all chosen by the Federalist Society, and he just rubber stamped whatever names they gave him.

[usaf-vet]

45. So, she is the mouthpiece, who is the brain, and the strategic planner. Some one or a team of someones.....

.... is behind the curtain.

Anyone who believes this strategy is her doing and her doing alone. Is stupid!

And don't say it's Trump; this is too important to the GOP to allow Trump to have the last word.

Maybe it is as simple as to ask who is bankrolling this defense of a traitor.

[AnrothElf]

18. I read at the time that there were only 2 judges it could be assigned to...

At the time. So it was a coin toss, and America lost.

[mahina]

35. True too. But Trump nominated her. She was confirmed in 2020. She had no judicial experience.

[EndlessWire]

19. Question: Is Cannon the Judge

that Jack would have to ask for a second search warrant, or is that always down at the Magistrate level? I want to know why this "locked rooms" business was revealed at this time. Just trying to follow along with Jack's strategy.

I don't expect this trial to happen until after the election. There is plenty enough time to do it right. Trump thinks that he can pull an "immunity rabbit" out of the hat. Of all the trials, this is the one that I want to see Jack nail big time. We sent lesser folk to jail for years on less charges. Logic would tell you that Trump did something with those classified docs. He wasn't interested in all those docs just as keepsakes. And there were empty jackets.

I even want Ivana dug up now. He didn't love her; he's not capable of love. We should put that myth of buried papers to rest. After seeing the Queen of England's coffin borne along with difficulty by as many as eight soldiers, I don't think that the heaviness of Ivana's coffin means anything. But, I doubt if her ghost would care if we dug her up, just to see!

[Bluethroughu]

20. Has she now become a co-conspirator to allowing

Unauthorized people to access these documents??

[onenote]

52. No, she applied the wrong legal standard in response to a motion when the opposition didn't cite the correct standard

She has already put the decision on hold so no "unauthorized" people have gotten access to the information in question. She should grant the motion for reconsideration now that the proper legal standard and supporting evidence has been put before her. Time will tell whether she does that or sticks to her decision, notwithstanding the fact it has been shown to be erroneous.

[rubbersole]

21. Slobby would dox these witnesses immediately.

Intimidation is his only defense.

[onenote]

53. He already has this information. This is about whether the press and public at large should get it.

As a general rule, as a matter of constitutional law and common law, court filings are presumptively matters of public record. In this situation, the information in question was provided to Trump under a protective order that bars its disclosure to unauthorized individuals unless the Special Counsel consents or the court concludes disclosure is appropriate. Cannon applied a "compelling government interest" test, which is a high bar for keeping information sealed and which is the generally applicable standard But in this situation, involving discovery materials, a lower threshold applies -- good cause -- for keeping material under seal.

[Mr. Ected]

25. Delay, delay, delay, that's the name of the game

After filing a motion to reconsider, Smith will appeal this to the circuit court, which will assuredly rule in his favor.

However, in spite of this outcome, I doubt that Cannon will be removed. It seems that the DOJ (?) is taking great pains to keep this case in the hands of a Trump lackey.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. What is your evidence "DOJ is taking great pains" to keep her on it?

DOJ or somebody else? You are not sure but you assert the wobbly conjecture anyway.

Or are you going to tell us now that you have no evidence but you want to believe it so you just excreted it out?

[flying_wahini]

48. Well don't you think she should have been removed earlier? Nobody can tell what is in someone's mind

But it seems clear to me she SHOULD have been removed earlier. So somebody in the DOJ is working to keep her in.
Am I way off base?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

49. Yes, it is off base to say "don't you think that ..." is evidence of corruption

Conjecture is not evidence of corruption that DoJ is supposedly interfering with the Judiciary to prevent it from organizing itself the way it ordinarily does.

The Judiciary chooses and assigns judges. The DoJ does not. For the DoJ to get involved would require subversion of the organization of the Judiciary and the corruption of judges to keep silent about it, not to mention the Special Counsel and the Attorney General.

The person I was responding to has only conjecture to assert such foul corruption. It is a terrible accusation they have made. In the poster's defence, they did use the word "seems", so they have some wiggle room.

I think it is much more likely that Cannon, while being clearly biased, has not made an actual mistake that the Court above her could officially take notice. So even if Smith petitioned for removal, they could not act, I think. Up to now. Now, it is possible Smith might raise the issue above Cannon by the end of today, which is Cannon's deadline to the prosecutors to provide the evidence to tRump.

I am not a lawyer.

[3825-87867]

27. "Judge Cannon"

"You Don't Know Jack"*
or
You don't know jack____!


* Jackbox Games

[KS Toronado]

29. Love to see Jack Smith find a way to put her in the unemployment line for good.

She has no business being around a court room if people's safety is of no concern of her's. That plus she
shouldn't be picking sides who's winners and losers before the case even starts.

[bluestarone]

30. If she is removed, could

Another judge just step right in and continue? (hope so)

[drray23]

32. yes of course. it would be reassigned to another judge.nt.

[Shipwack]

39. Another judge would be assigned, however...

How much of a delay would this cause? Do they go back to square one? I doubt they would start over, but I just have a degree from Law&Order University....

I do think there would be a significant delay, but as someone has already said, Smith probably feels that getting this done before the election is impossible at this point.

It's frustrating... I thought that this was the most open and shut case. Unfortunately, Cannon has been dragging her feet, taking forever to rule on even the most cut and dried issues. When she finally rules it is often wrong, though often with a thin veneer of justification... just enough to give the illusion of non-bias. She might have gone too far this time, though.

[dalton99a]

37. Kick

[ffr]

38. "That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered,

would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment, as has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved," except for Judge Cannon, who is the one presiding judge that has not been subjected to threats, intimidation, and harassment.

Fixed!

[Cha]

43. YAY.. Oh I wish he could

LEGALLY take her out of commission!!

[madaboutharry]

54. I have a bit of a problem figuring this woman out.

She graduated from Duke and then went to law school at The University of Michigan, both very fine and competitive schools. She was unqualified due to her lack of experience, but I don’t think she’s stupid. Her rulings are politically motivated, which also makes her unqualified. What I don’t understand is her inability to leave her political views out of her decision making. She has to have some understanding that she is seen as a hack and a joke.

[ck4829]

55. Kick