DJT indicted on four counts related to January 6

Wait, did you just say that the ruling (an opinion that you don't agree with) was "hot garbage" and then call someone "an imbecile" for thinking that "any opinion that doesn't match (his) politics is 'stupid'" ?

OMFG!

Today former Trump advisor Peter Navarro reports to federal penitentiary to start his 4 month incarceration for contempt of congress. Navarro spearheaded the 'Green Bay Sweep', peddling conspiracy theories with the plan that swing states would not certify the election.

dailykos.com

Peter Navarro, conspiracy crank and former Trump aide, heads to prison

@HunterDK

Former senior Trump adviser Peter Navarro is due to report to prison Tuesday, and it couldn't happen to a more deserving person. In September, Navarro was convicted of contempt of ...

Link:www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/19/222...

Looks insane to me. Hard to figure out what she is even doing. There isn't even a trial schedule, and she is asking for bizarre and competing proposed jury instructions that seem to relate to the motions to dismiss that she has deliberately avoided ruling on. None of it even makes any sense as a matter of procedure. The prosecutors (and even Trump's lawyers) must be scratching their heads on what to do going forward -- the one thing Courts are supposed to do is provide clear directions on how to keep the process going forward, and Cannon is doing the exact opposite of that.

there are a few schools of thought out there.

1. Some are saying that Cannon is asking for help or cover to decide Trump's PRA immunity claim.

2. some are saying that she is in the tank for Trump and wants to not just grant the dismissal at this point on PRA because Smith will appeal. She wants to get to trial and then Tank the case for him. Then it is not appealable.

3. Others are saying she is just clueless and trying to please Trump while delaying, delaying, delaying.

Wackadoo stuff. My guess is that Jack Smith appeals it, and then we see delay as Citizen Donald appeals it when 11th circuit rules. Maybe Cannon gets the boot.

Where is the bar for having a judge removed from a case? I imagine it's pretty high.

It's almost like she is ruling on the motions to dismiss by making the parties draft jury instructions that, in part, essentially dismiss the case. And she's taking that old argument that Trump was floating out long ago that he could mentally declassify documents in his head while walking out the White House door, and applying it to the Presidential Records Act. She seems to believe that a president can make the unreviewable call in his head that a document is his personal record, and that's the end of the story. That's pretty much the opposite of what the Presidential Records Act was intended to do -- in fact, that's why it was enacted by Congress. But she wants the prosecution to draft a jury instruction saying the case is essentially over. Why? To what end? Just rule on the motion to dismiss. It's totally whacked.

I'm not sure an order to draft jury instructions can be appealed.

I think the prosecution's only option here is to ask for a Writ of Mandamus from the 11th Circuit, which is basically asking the 11th Circuit to issue an order to Cannon to do her job and decide the motions to dismiss and set a trial schedule. But that is an extremely rare move.

Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner opined that Jack Smith and his team are probably discussing now whether or not to file an appeal asking for her removal that would bring up all Cannon's missteps. How can justice be done with such bias and imcompetence.

And now, instead of asking for campaign donations or donations to the RNC, Trump has sent out a request that his faithful followers bail him out of his civil-court losses by covering his $450+ million dollar judgment.

LOL, the suckers just might do it.

He offered interest to the banks to cover the bond. They declined. To his suckers he offers nothing.

Yesterday Donald's lawyer Sadow argued to GA Judge McAfee that Donald's statements/actions regarding fake elector scheme were made in his capacity as a private citizen campaigning for office. Claiming Free Speech! BUT Donnie's lawyers have already argued to the USSC that Donnie was on the clock when making those statements because he was trying to stop the fictional steal. Outer limit of Work-related! OOPS. Both arguments suck big donkey dongs, but OOPS.

I think she is looking for alternate fake jurors just in case.

Well we have Jack's Smith response to Judge Cannon's order to give wackadoodle jury instructions based on Trump's "post hoc" PRA defense based on Tom Fitton (not a lawyer) legal theory he cooked up two years after the criminal acts. It is a thorough beatdown and a public humiliation of Judge Cannon's improper consideration of this defense. But Jack Smith writes it in an entirely professional manner.

IMO the best part of it is calling her out in a court filing regarding her need to either dismiss the case now or reject this PRA insanity. It has not place in this trial. It needs to be decided up front. If she is just inept, this might steer her in the right direction. If she is trying to tank the case later when it is unappealable, she is on notice in this response that everyone can see that she is doing that.

Yup, telling her she needs to fix it or Smith will get a writ of mandamus compelling her to fix it.

The Presidential Records Act defense doesn't make much sense anyway. Even if the he were able claim the documents as "personal" they're still classified materials. If he had tattooed classified excerpts of these documents on his ass, he'd still be in violation of the espionage act.

The previously floated idea that he declassified the material, which would have been within his authority as president, would be a legally coherent defense if there were any evidence that he had formally done so. Of course there isn't a record of him declassifying the material because he didn't do so.

And by their nature they are not personal. Trump didn't take notes. The documents were all created by people who were not Donald, people working for We the People.

Smith finishes filing writing that Cannon should "make that decision clear NOW (my emphasis) long before jeopardy attaches..."

He doesn't presume to tell the judge the timeline of when she must act, but what is reasonable? Assuming Cannon sits on this and does not rescind her previous crapfest filing, when will Smith act?

You’ve seen how Trump operates. Everything involves playing as many angles as possible, claiming a win at the slightest glimmer of advantage, and crying foul at anything that can’t be called a win.

People pulled into his orbit do the same thing (see Rudy’s own deflect, deny, blame, …. the evidence is coming that will prove he was right and didn’t defame anyone).

If Cannon can get away with any of her machinations: It’s a win.

If it turns out that she’s an inexperienced and less-gifted jurist (check) who can’t make that work, at least she drags the process out and lends an ostensible air of legitimate contrast to the procedures of the prosecution: Also a multifaceted win.

If she continues the shenanigans and gets reversed again, she should be removed. If she does, it’s a win. Further delay and more ostensible “proof” for Trump and his supporters that the system is rigged. For them, it’s not some judge being removed for being inept; it’s a “good judge” unbiased against Trump being taken out to be replaced by one biased against him.

Except for a handful of lawyers and very powerful people of nefarious intent, people who consider voting for Trump are not interested in the nuts and bolts of the law, how it actually works, and how it should work according to the way it’s written and has been practiced. Their sense of law and justice is shot through with the way they feel people like them get treated by the system.

The “eff your feelings” crowd of grievance-mongers on the right are just like grievance-mongers on the left in that regard: the facts simply do not matter.

I would be interested in a lawyers opinion on this aspect of Smith's report. He spends considerably time asserting that this is an AD-HOC legal position that was crafted 2 years after the fact and is much different than Trump's other defenses that he has used in court filings and in his public statements. Essentially Tom Fitton talked him into this Presidential Records ACT defense and he is running with it.

Is this problematic from a legal perspective? Don't defendants often come up with new defenses as the trial approaches? Does it imply guilt when the craft a brand new defense for what he did?