Trump Scores Lucky Break With Judge Assigned to Indictment Case in Florida

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

President Donald Trump has experienced a really fortunate turn of events since his preferred judge will be presiding over his newest criminal case in Florida.

On Thursday, Trump was indicted on thirty-seven counts by Democrat Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ).

On Tuesday, Trump is scheduled to appear in court in Florida.

Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court, who was appointed by Trump, has just been given the politically driven case.

In a previous case, Cannon issued several pro-Trump judgments that infuriated those on the left.

They are now demanding that she be dropped from the Trump lawsuit.

“Trump-appointed US district court judge Aileen Cannon was listed on the summons sent to Trump yesterday, per ppl familiar — indicating she may be the presiding judge.

“Cannon granted Trump a special master during the investigation last year.

“Confirming ABC News.” according to Guardian reporter Hugo Lowell.

MSNBC commentator Joyce Alene sought to soothe the agitated Left by stating that Garland would try to remove Cannon.

According to Alene:

“I used to be an appellate chief in the 11th Circuit (where Florida is) and I litigated a few appeals where we asked the court of appeals to order a judge to recuse.

“Altho a judge’s behavior in court generally doesn’t form the basis for recusal, the 11th Circuit has ordered ‘reassignment’ where a judge leans so heavily for a defendant they call their objectivity in the eyes of the public into question.

“This is persuasive authority that Judge Cannon must step aside if the case falls to her as a permanent assignment.

“Her court & certainly the 11th won’t tolerate the damage it would do to their credibility if she failed to voluntarily recuse.”

ABC News reported:

The summons sent to former President Donald Trump and his legal team late Thursday indicates that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon will be assigned to oversee his case, at least initially, according to sources briefed on the matter.

Cannon’s apparent assignment would add yet another unprecedented wrinkle to a case involving the first federal charges against a former president: Trump appointed Cannon to the federal bench in 2020, meaning that, if Trump is ultimately convicted, she would be responsible for determining the sentence – which may include prison time – for the man who elevated her to the role.

A federal grand jury voted to indict Trump on at least seven federal charges late Thursday as part of an investigation into his handling of classified documents, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

The indictment comes after more than 100 documents with classified markings were found at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in August 2022.

Several leaks to the media about cases involving Trump have drawn criticism from a legal expert, who claimed they “further reinforce” Republican assertions that the investigations are politically motivated.

The criticism follows the disclosure of a judge’s sealed decision alleging that Trump purposefully deceived his attorney over sensitive information found at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

In a confidential brief last week, a retired federal judge said that the government had presented “compelling preliminary evidence” that suggested Trump had “knowingly and deliberately misled his own attorneys about his retention of classified materials after leaving office.”

U.S. Judge Beryl Howell, who just resigned from her position as the head judge of the D.C. district court, said in a document that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office’s prosecutors had provided enough preliminary evidence to show that the former president had committed crimes.

According to the article, this might nullify the attorney-client protections invoked by two of his attorneys.

Howell required Evan Corcoran, a lawyer for Trump, to comply with a grand jury subpoena to testify on six different lines of investigation that he had previously shielded under attorney-client privilege in her unreported filing.

Howell came to the conclusion that the prosecution’s early proof of Trump’s criminal activity satisfied the prima facie requirement needed to overcome Corcoran’s privilege. The court did stress that the prosecutors must reach a higher level of proof in order to press charges against Trump, and that they will need much more proof to establish his guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, according to the BBC.

However, constitutional specialist and professor at Georgetown Law School Jonathan Turley stated that the disclosure of the confidential document was “deeply troubling” and part of a “pattern of selective leaks that are designed to influence public opinion.”

“This is a continuation of a pattern of leaks related to the Trump investigations that extend seven years, through the Russian collusion investigation,” Turley claimed.

Turley continued, “These leaks make a mockery of the system, and they “further reinforce the narrative of Donald Trump that the Department of Justice is engaging in unethical or improper means to target him in election year.”

Turley stated that Garland has shown “no interest in investigating his own department,” adding that “These leaks have one overriding common denominator: they all tend to undermine Donald Trump and to implicate him in the alleged crime.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.






Send this to a friend