Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
Oops Judge Cannon Just Eviscerated Jack Smith's Obstruction Case
Oops Judge Cannon Just Eviscerated Jack Smith's Obstruction Case
By golfboy
22 Apr 2024 6:27 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
22 Apr 2024 6:27 pm
She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
22 Apr 2024 6:47 pm
22 Apr 2024 6:53 pm
from 2 hours ago.golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
--------------------------------------------------------
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/22/politics ... index.html
Courthouse, in Fort Pierce, Florida, U.S. August 10, 2023. Marco Bello/Reuters/File CNN — Donald Trump’s valet Walt Nauta was told that if he was charged with lying to the FBI, the former president would pardon him when he won a second term in 2024, according to notes from an interview with a witness in the federal classified documents investigation.A redacted summary of the November 2022 interview given to the FBI by the witness – who is identified as “Person 16” and described as someone who worked in Trump’s White House – was made public in newly unsealed court filings in the criminal case on Monday.Nauta was charged in June of last year with lying to the FBI and obstructing the investigation by special counsel Jack Smith, along with Trump who was charged with obstruction and mishandling of classified and national defense information. Both men have pleaded not guilty.Nauta’s attorney declined to comment to CNN. Trump’s attorneys have not responded to CNN’s inquiry.
22 Apr 2024 7:08 pm
-----------------------------------------golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/attorney-warn ... =105228569
One of former president Donald Trump's current attorneys told special counsel Jack Smith's team that, within days of the Justice Department issuing a subpoena last year for all classified documents at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, she "very clearly" warned Trump that if he failed to fully comply -- but then swore he did -- "it's going to be a crime," according to sources familiar with the matter.Sources said the lawyer, Jennifer Little, told investigators Trump "absolutely" understood the warning, which came during a pivotal meeting at Mar-a-Lago with Trump and another attorney, Evan Corcoran, who had recently joined Trump's legal team.What Little allegedly told Smith's team earlier this year may shed further light on how Smith came to accuse Trump of knowingly violating the law, saying in his June 9 indictment against Trump that the former president defied a subpoena by hiding more than 100 classified documents from the FBI and even his own legal team, and then having his legal team certify otherwise.
22 Apr 2024 7:11 pm
-----------------------------golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... ack-smith/
Special counsel Jack Smith warned the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case that she is pursuing a legal premise that “is wrong” and said he would probably appeal to a higher court if she rules that a federal records law can protect the former president from prosecution.
Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.In a late-night legal filing Tuesday, Smith’s office pushed back hard against an unusual instruction from U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon — one that veteran national security lawyers and former judges have said badly misinterprets the Presidential Records Act and laws related to classified documents.
22 Apr 2024 8:05 pm
the judge is a trump appointed judge and was biased from the very beginning.golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
-------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgesh ... tes-judges
Conflict of Interest that Makes the Judge Unable to Fairly PresideConflicts of interest arises when a judge has a significant personal or financial connection that renders the judge unable to fairly preside over the case. When a judge has a personal or political interest in the case that removes their ability to be impartial, there exists a conflict of interest and a basis to remove the judge for cause.The conflict must be severe enough to influence the judge’s views and impede the judge’s capacity to render impartial decisions. When a conflict of interest exists, it may be necessary to assign a substitute judge to guarantee a fair hearing for the party seeking substitution. “Substituting” a judge is another way to describe the removal and replacement of the judge in a specific case---------------------- it will be simpler than **** to have her removed.
22 Apr 2024 8:12 pm
lol. And all the other judges who were appointed by liberals and are biased AGAINST Trump?jerrab » 22 Apr 2024, 8:05 pm » wrote: ↑ the judge is a trump appointed judge and was biased from the very beginning.
Hell, Engeron has already been overturned 5 times on appeal.
22 Apr 2024 8:14 pm
Where's your link?golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
22 Apr 2024 8:15 pm
Google it, numbnut. It's so easy, even a liberal can do it.
22 Apr 2024 8:19 pm
22 Apr 2024 8:20 pm
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opi ... -rcna89156golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 8:12 pm » wrote: ↑ lol. And all the other judges who were appointed by liberals and are biased AGAINST Trump?
Hell, Engeron has already been overturned 5 times on appeal.
22 Apr 2024 8:22 pm
golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 8:12 pm » wrote: ↑ lol. And all the other judges who were appointed by liberals and are biased AGAINST Trump?
Hell, Engeron has already been overturned 5 times on appeal.
she has already been overturned by a panel of judges some whom were trump appointed. she is biased to the extreme.
22 Apr 2024 8:24 pm
it will be too easy to have her removed.golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 8:12 pm » wrote: ↑ lol. And all the other judges who were appointed by liberals and are biased AGAINST Trump?
Hell, Engeron has already been overturned 5 times on appeal.
too
eeeeeasy
22 Apr 2024 8:39 pm
Why hasn't it happened?
22 Apr 2024 8:40 pm
an msLSD opinion case? lol
22 Apr 2024 9:01 pm
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/2 ... r-00058176
three-judge appeals court panel has granted the Justice Department’s request to block aspects of U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling that delayed a criminal investigation into highly sensitive documents seized from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.The panel ruled that Cannon, a Trump appointee, erred when she temporarily prevented federal prosecutors from using the roughly 100 documents — marked as classified – recovered from Trump’s estate as part of a criminal inquiry.Trump “has not even attempted to show that he has a need to know the information contained in the classified documents,” the panel ruled in a 29-page decision. “Nor has he established that the current administration has waived that requirement for these documents.”Two of the three judges on the panel, Andrew Brasher and Britt Grant, were appointed to the court by Trump. The third, Robin Rosenbaum, was appointed by President Barack Obama. In the unanimous decision, the judges declared it “self-evident” that the public interest favored allowing the Justice Department to determine whether any of the records were improperly disclosed, risking national security damage.“For our part, we cannot discern why Plaintiff would have an individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred documents with classification markings,” the appeals court wrote in an opinion that listed no individual judge as the author.While Cannon speculated in her ruling that allowing investigators continued access to the documents could result in leaks of their contents, the appeals panel brushed aside that concern.“Permitting the United States to retain the documents does not suggest that they will be released; indeed, a purpose of the United States’s efforts in investigating the recovered classified documents is to limit unauthorized disclosure of the information they contain,” the appeals judges wrote. “Not only that, but any authorized official who makes an improper disclosure risks her own criminal liability.”
22 Apr 2024 9:05 pm
----------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 214466007/
Federal appeals court has already overturned Cannon twiceProsecutors have already asked the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene a couple of times already.After the FBI seizure of classified records at Mar-a-Lago in August 2022, Cannon ordered a retired judge called a special master to review the documents for potential personal records. That temporarily prevented investigators from scrutinizing them.Prosecutors said the seizure resulted from a valid search warrant. Defendants typically don’t get to review evidence after a seizure, but could potentially challenge the evidence at trial.The appeals court initially overturned part of Cannon’s order and allowed authorities to continue investigating the documents during the special master review. The appeals panel called Trump's argument that he declassified the records and made them personal under the PRA a "red herring." ************ In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal," the panel wrote.The Supreme Court refused to review the decision.Then the appeals court overturned Cannon’s order for the special master and halted the review entirely."The law is clear," the three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit ruled. "We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so."
22 Apr 2024 9:13 pm
*******************************Smith had asked Cannon to rule “promptly” on her view about the PRA, which she did. But she refused to finalize the jury instructions before Trump’s defense presents its case at trial. To finalize jury instructions before the defense presentation would “unprecedented and unjust,” Cannon wrote.In reference to the jury instructions, Cannon replied in her Thursday order that “any party remains free to avail itself of whatever appellate options it sees fit to invoke.”Some legal experts said Smith should ask the appeals court to review Cannon’s lack of ruling on the jury instructions.Neal Katyal, a former acting U.S. solicitor general, said Smith has no choice but to ask the appeals court to review her proposed jury instructions."Judge Cannon just rejected Trump's bogus Presidential Records Act defense, but only for now," Katyal wrote on X. "I think Smith has no choice but to go to the 11th Circuit" to ask for a review.
23 Apr 2024 10:34 am
golfboy » 22 Apr 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ She unredacted documents showing NARA was coordinating with the White House, and that Trump was cooperating with NARA.
Document shows coordination between the White House and NARA.
No wonder Jack Smith redacted all that information.
Here's what that same paragraph looked like from Jack Smith:
23 Apr 2024 10:36 am
That woman is in the passing lane to night court...
Who is online
In total there are 3092 users online :: 7 registered, 14 bots, and 3071 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, Blackvegetable, Buck Naked, SouthernFried, Cannonpointer, nefarious101, Huey
Bots: proximic, Pandalytics, GPTBot, DuckDuckBot, YandexBot, Feeder, curl/7, facebookexternalhit, ADmantX, CriteoBot, Applebot, bingbot, Mediapartners-Google, Googlebot