As part of an analysis of how U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen Cannon, reports from her courtroom show a judge who is both “prickly” and" insecure" and often has trouble understanding what lawyers from both sides try to explain to her.
The controversial Cannon – who has been accused of slow-walking Donald Trump’s obstruction of justice trial related to his alleged illegal retention of government documents – in recent hearings has pressed lawyers to remake their points over and over, which led to the New York Times’ Alan Feuer to question whether, “she does not understand the answers she is receiving or is trying to push back against them.”
“Only the best,” am I right?
She needs to stop being a judge. She is supremely unqualified and has a clear political agenda.
She’s gonna be on SCOTUS within a decade.
President DeSantis’ first pick.
deleted by creator
And I threw up in my eating mouth!
I think you’re using your mouth wrong, mate. Try holding that stuff in.
Please don’t use the word supreme anywhere near a description of Cannon.
Does
Aileen Cannon is supremely deserving of being appointed to the highest (lit.) court by being fired out of a cannon into the sun.
Fit your favor better?
Love the sentiment. Still concerned about tempting fate with that adverb though.
Any time anyone says “shoot X into the sun” I can’t help but think of how much energy it actually takes to do so. You have to shed all momentum from the orbit to actually go into free fall.
Supreme twat.
She’s only unqualified because you think that she should be fair and experienced. Neither of those attributes are desirable for trump, which is why he put her in that seat.
Hanlon’s razor.
Either way, the only resolution is disbarment/impeachment.
More like Trumpet’s cannon.
What if she’s feigning stupidity to enact malice?
You’d have to be pretty dumb to try that.
Even if she is disbarred, it won’t matter. She will still be a federal judge.
Impeachment is the only way to correct this shitshow. She isn’t qualified to work at McDonald’s.
Hanlon’s razor is dumb, especially when dealing with people known for acting in bad faith.
I mean, there is another resolution…
Conservatives, including judges, are not known for their intelligence.
That but lower the bar a few more notches still for Trump appointees.
Yet they seem to dominate when sparring with the left.
If you think spewing mostly fabricated, irrelevant nonsense is dominating, then yes. They absolutely dominate.
Edit: ooof, that post history
I think there is more going on then that. Wouldn’t you?
If I go ask ten people what they think about any wedge issue, majority of them will give right wing talking points even if they don’t lean right.
They’re winning and being ignorant to it doesn’t help any. I still see assholes on my overpass on weekends rotating topics like carbon taxes, vaccines, bill gates, WHO and so on. The supporting honks they get is soul crushing.
Can you explain what spewing mostly fabricated, irrelevant nonsense has to do with being dominate socially or politically? Cause I would argue it’s more of an obstacle to dominating in these areas.
Yes, you are correct — their rhetoric is more further-reaching, no doubt. They control the narratives, absolutely. But this isn’t because they’re being rhetoricians, it’s because:
- They lack the morality to care.
- They have the vast majority of the money and with it a greater loudspeaker.
- Selling fear and rageporn and lies and half-truths will always be easier than conveying the complexity and nuance of truth and reality.
They lack the morality to care.
And where is the morality in letting a political party without morals gain power. When was the last time that Clark Kent was a relevant archetype. The antihero is king now. But also is it real morals when there isn’t really any rules beyond social norms. All of them are corrupt regardless. I wouldn’t call some of the Democrats moral actors. They just attempt to act more as adults.
They have the vast majority of the money and with it a greater loudspeaker.
But the left also has money but why has the right used it to secure so many public areas. Like all their civil actions had so much funding. I remember individuals donating millions to the clownvoy. Charlie Kirk is successful becoming a millionaire as a college drop out who opened a political shit throwing business and introducing youth on campuses around the country to people like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson. What was the left doing?
Selling fear and rage porn and lies and half-truths will always be easier than conveying the complexity and nuance of truth and reality.
Sure, but again who gives two shits about truths and reality. We all went nuts for Plato’s allegory of the cave for a few months a while ago for a reason. Truths don’t matter, but truth does. The Republicans win because they understand this. And as I get older I think this idea that the left hobbles themselves because they’re focused on being moral and truth seekers is more of an excuse for not being as effective as they should be.
You hang out with stupid people. You have confused your friends with a random sample of the population.
Don’t be rude. Acting as if you’re more enlightened can be a defense mechanism. People aren’t stupid because they lean right on issues. Most people on the right are business owners and have figured enough out in life to become fairly successful.
You have confused your friends with a random sample of the population
Reread what you’re implying vs who I said I would ask and think about who is confused about a random sample. It seems you are under the impression I’m asking people I hang out with when that was never said.
If I go ask ten people what they think about any wedge issue, majority of them will give right wing talking points even if they don’t lean right.
Arguing with a conservative is like playing chess with a pigeon. The problem is that onlookers think the pigeon won after it shits all over the board.
The problem also is it’s up to the onlookers to decide who “won”.
I disagree. Its so much bigger than arguing with randoms online. Its about average opinion of average people.
I hope you aren’t talking about people using gish gallop.
That’s all they’ve got.
I’m sorry, who’s the current president again?
Yup and how much was the electoral process and democracy damaged?
We’re debating right now what happens if a president is in prison.
Joe Biden won. But how confident are you that he’s holding for the next ten years? Plus who owns the courts right now for the next couple decades. Ground is lost everyday. Just wait for an economic downturn.
I know it’s a very difficult concept for trumpists to grasp, but some people respect term limits, so Biden doesn’t actually hold out for the next 10 years.
Democrats hold on and don’t shit the bed.
Correct, Diaper Donny does shit the bed on the regular though.
sure, diaper Donny is an absolute turd. But a turd who somehow has built a base that has more energy and commitment than anything in any other political group. They stormed the capital when he lost. They have hobbled elections and democracy for at least the next couple elections. And that’s only because Donny is such an idiot. You’re looking at this the wrong way. Donny as you would say is an absolute moron and shits the bed. But the left still lost and is only going to win the next election because Biden has been ok as a president. If Trump wasn’t an idiot, America could be in a much different place right now. And really, it kind of is in a much different place since the democrats lost the courts for a possible a couple decades.
What
“Biden is so bad that Trump might actually get elected” is not the defence of Republicans that you think it is.
Removed by mod
How is it not a conflict of interest that “Donald Trump appointed her to the lifetime position”. ? Haven’t judges been asked to recuse themselves over less? I’m genuinely confused.
I don’t think that’s fundamentally disqualifying. What’s the proposal on who could reasonably try this case? Are appointees by political opponents okay? Only appointees pre Clinton?
The bigger problem, regardless of who is on trial, is she was never supposed to be on the bench.
Her promotion was purely ideological. It had nothing to do with her legal accumen.
It’s definitely possible Trump could have found someone who was both technically skilled AND sheep dipped well enough not to be an obvious hack. But… why bother? The Senate didn’t care enough to block her and they certainly aren’t going to impeach her.
So democracy is working as designed.
I also don’t think it’s too high of a bar for the public to want a judge not appointed by the defendant for a criminal trial.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the public had any say in the matter
Nah, the Founding Fathers specifically didn’t want a moron like Trump running things, so this is democracy breaking down.
Is anything “fundamentally disqualifying”? It appears to me that nothing is. It’s all honor code bullshit that only works when everyone is acting in good faith.
The real problem is that she was appointed in the first place. The system that made that possible was never designed to work when half the people running it are saboteurs.
In a normal court, the justices are often held in high regard, whereby whomever appointed them is hardly even a factoid.
The problem is that with Trump, he’s known for quid pro quo as well as just not even knowing the person. Odds are good that Bannon slipped her name to Trump and suddenly she’s “the most brilliant legal mind the nation has ever known. Just brilliant. Very smart.”
Besides being nominated by Trump, I’m not sure if the prosecutors had any standing to have her recused.
She was selected by the Federalist Society. Trump rubber stamped her (like he did the vast majority of appointments he made.)
I’m not sure if the prosecutors had any standing to have her recused.
Maybe not at the time, but how about now?
Living in America 🎶
GOP doesn’t hire people for their qualifications, only their perceived blind loyalty to the party
often has trouble understanding
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
‘I am no man’
To me, it looks like she’s feigning confusion just to give her yet another excuse to shit all over the prosecution. The defense made an absurd request, the judge acted like she was having trouble understanding until the prosecution said something out of frustration and Cannon hopped on him for it.
Serious question. No joke. no hyperbole. Outside of outright dismissing the case (which she already said she intends to do after the jury is seated, so double jeopardy attaches), has she made a single ruling that wasn’t heavily in Trump’s favor? Has a single dispute not ended with her somehow blaming and shitting on the prosecution?
Removed by mod
Brainless broad behind bench baffled
Cannon cannot comprehend court concepts
Lawyer: Ok, so its a futuristic movie set in the distant past in a galaxy far far away… A galaxy is a collection of planetary sytems… Earth is a planet… No. No that doesn’t mean there’s humans on … Your honour its a fictional movie… No I’m not calling you stupid… Fine hold me in contempt.
Can’t
Understand
Lawyer
Thinking^ Aileen Cannon
Can’t
Understand
Nobody’s
Thinking^ Aileen Cannon
I usually go with:
Can’t
Understand
Normal
Thinking😂
This lady is a pathetically corrupt clown
In her defense, she could also be incredibly stupid.
She’s probably stupid but that doesn’t mitigate her being corrupt.
Brainless twit is a threat to the U.S.
Take a minute to empathize with those poor worms who sufferes inside her skull.
Meanwhile in NY, he’s guilty on all counts
deleted by creator
Who’s that? Stephen’s brother?
Removed by mod
Best as far as Trump is concerned for him.
