The MAGA-friendly federal judge who keeps siding with Donald Trump in his Mar-a-Lago classified records case has forced prosecutors to make a stark choice: allow jurors to see a huge trove of national secrets or let him go.
U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon’sultimatum Monday night came as a surprise twist in what could have been a simple order; one merely asking federal prosecutors and Trump’s lawyers for proposed jury instructions at the upcoming trial.
But as she has done repeatedly, Cannon used this otherwise innocuous legal step as yet another way to swing the case wildly in favor of the man who appointed her while he was president.
Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith must now choose whether to allow jurors at the upcoming criminal trial to peruse the many classified records found at the former president’s South Florida mansion or give jurors instructions that would effectively order them to acquit him.
Either “a jury is permitted to examine” every record a former president swipes and claims as “personal” to determine whether it is, or jurors must be told that “a president has sole authority… to categorize records as personal or presidential during his/her presidency.”
Can’t categorize files as personal after you vacate office. Classified files are by law government property and cannot be owned by anyone. Can’t declassify files after leaving office.
This hack needs to be impeached and this trial appealed and the judge replaced posthaste.
“Hey random person! How’s about you read this document and tell me if it sounds Top Secret.”
“Okay, but in your uninformed opinion, is this document one or two levels more secret than those other declassified files?”
Another option for the prosecution is to redact classified info. It doesn’t actually matter what is in the document, just that it’s classified because a former President is disallowed to possess classified material.
For more info: classified documents have extensive
marketsmarkings. The header and footer of every page with material is marked either, Unclassified (if present in docs with higher), CUI, Secret, Top Secret, etc. In addition, the document will have markings for each paragraph on if that particular paragraph or line contains classified material and at what level. So the prosecution could definitely just redact everything above Unclassified and the remainder of the text should paint a fairly clear picture of what the document contains without revealing specific classified details.Of course this treasonous judge would probably interpret as you did because she belongs behind bars not a bench.___
Playing a bit of devil’s advocate.
We have a tendency to over classify things in general. When I was in a TS SCIF, we would mark things S/TS because we were lazy and didn’t want to go through the process to see if something was subject to disclosure.
Assuming, with a great heaping serving of salt, that there is validity to Trump’s claim, I can sort of understand putting to a jury to see if the files that Trump took were in fact classified. I can see him stealing the documents simply because it had a cover sheet and not because it was valuable. While I’m sure that he absolutely took sensitive and classified information, I’m equally sure that there is probably a take out menu or two in those boxes.
The problem is that the run of the mill citizen isn’t equipped to properly classify a document. I don’t know what probative value exists in giving the documents to jurors outside of forcing the prosecution to put them in the public record.
Jurors provide no value beyond the markings even if they are over-classified. I mean I guess you could beat out the security classification guides and a derivative classification course… But even so, the president is only an OCA while in office so the point is kinda moot. I don’t think the specific document content matters, just whether or not updated SCG exists with same content, yeah?
Basically, “this line is referencing this item in the guide, the guide still says classified, ergo this is a spill”.
Im just trying to understand your experience there. So being lazy, documents could be marked S/TS. And then following on to allowing the jurybto see whether they were classified.
This sounds to me you’re suggesting the jury should verify these documents, and assuming some are marked S/TS, come to a decision as to whether it should actually be that classification and not some lower classification allowing more general disclosure?
classified documents have extensive markets
The markets for these ones were Saudi Arabia, Russia, and maybe China.
Lol. Damn Freud up in my typos.
Face it, you want to fuck classified documents, which are also your mother.
Yo pops, that’s a real nice dong you got there. Sure would be a shame if something were to happen to it.
Judge: ignore any markings on the filed indicating top secret, classified, human intelligence, and make your own decisions on each file!
The government doesn’t really do consequences for conservatives to well.
If Trump is such an imminent threat to democracy, and his game plan is full on fascism, why doesn’t Joe Biden or the democrats simply ban him from running?
The supreme Court has already ruled (deliberately incorrectly) that a candidate cannot be barred from running for federal office unless 2/3 of Congress declares them an insurrectionist.
(The original language of the amendment says that 2/3 of Congress is required to allow a former insurrectionist to hold office, the SC intentionally got it backwards to allow so the treasonous Rs, not just Trump, who participated in 1/6 to avoid consequences.
So what you’re saying is that under our system, fascists are entitled to run for president?
Trump broke every rule on the book - why can’t Joe? The democrat’s weird-ass obsession with precedent, civility, and the sanctity of American politics (that were devised by 30 year old white slave owners) has made them entirely toothless and ill equipped to deal with fascism. I’ll never understand the liberal position that fascists must, at all costs, be allowed to run in elections. Stomp that shit out.
This makes me a bit excited to see a court rule that a sitting president is immune. If that happens (it won’t), I would expect Biden to immediately take full advantage of his newfound powers and publicly announce a dead or alive bounty for a whole slew of right-wing fascists currently holding or running for public office. That particular ruling could really solve this little Nazi problem that’s been developing here in the US.
“Good news, Mr Trump! You’re off the hook since one of those obviously illegal things you did were crimes because you had presidential immunity. Hey, while I have you…”
Technically Trump could be done with a simple majority, if you can get it through the senate.
A couple states did. But Trump also owns half the supreme court and they just ruled the states have to let Trump run.
If Trump is such a threat to democracy, why don’t we do away with democracy to stop him??
Joe Biden was never the candidate who was going to go tough on fascism. In fact only the most stalwart of the progressives would do that.
Also Democrats raised more money during Trumps candidacy and term in office than ever before. Hes a great monster under the bed they can point to. Its the same reason Republicans will never fix the border, even when they have a majority, they need those issues to exist so they can manufacture Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, and use it to keep the power they have.
Biden ran for president like six times and when he won was when his opponent was a literal fascist. It’s factually correct to say that the threat of Trump allows the DNC to run candidates that would otherwise lose elections. I also suspect when Democrats say things like ‘we have to beat Trump at the ballot box’ it’s because they know if Trump was locked up and Haley got the nomination, Biden would have a much lower chance of winning.
Biden would wipe the floor with Haley.
He’s still not beating Trump in swing states, and that’s with the anti Trump Republicans on his side, you live in a fantasy world if you dont realize Biden loses all the center right support he has to Haley if she’s in the general.
The judge was appointed by trump and should be automatically recused from the case.
Recusal, by definition, is to remove oneself. She isn’t going to do that.
and you can’t just handwave classification away. There is a legal process involve.
It’s a Trump appointed judge. I doubt they could even pass an intro to law class.
deleted by creator
Cannon is a partisan hack that needs removed, NOW. She has deliberately ignored the CIPA system used to substitute summations for classified materials.
I don’t understand how anyone can see someone who was appointed by one of the people involved in the case, and stands to benefit further if said person wins the case, is not a conflict of interest.
I’ve seen lawyers drop a case over a distant family member they haven’t spoken to in decades having once lived with the sitting judge in college. Something that as far as I can see has no bearing on current events at all.
I’ve seen locals get angry at a judge because they were seen eating in the same restaurant as someone involved in a case, on different sides of the building. With the partitions and seating arrangements, it’s likely neither of them even knew the other was there until someone pointed it out.
But this is totally fine. It’s fine. Everything’s fine. We’re all fine here, now. Thanks.
How are you?
I don’t understand how anyone can see someone who was appointed by one of the people involved in the case, and stands to benefit further if said person wins the case, is not a conflict of interest.
It very much is a conflict of interest!
The issue is that there doesn’t appear to be anybody both willing and able to do anything about it.
I’m feeling F.I.N.E.
Fuck Is Not Enough
Why the fuck would Juror’s need to see the files?
The content within them is irrelevant to the case, other than to determine whether if they are/were Top Secret or not, and Juror’s aren’t able to make that distinction.
You need an expert/qualified person to deem whether the content was top secret.
Then the juror’s decide on the case whether they should have been there or not.
Why the fuck would Juror’s need to see the files?
Well it sounds like it could create another lengthy appeal before trial, so that might be the entire reason…
If it comes up, she can, for example, order the documents be provided to the defense as part of discovery. I would not be shocked to learn she has the power to do something similar with the jury - but this sounds like an undeniable excuse for Smith to ask for her to be overridden by her superiors, like he did earlier in the case.
That’s exactly why she’s doing it. To make the prosecutors appeal like last time, which takes time. Trump just wants to delay all his cases until after the election so he can drop them all when he’s president. This is potentially the most serious case against him, as the government doesn’t mess around with classified info, but since it’s a federal case, he’ll have the most power to drop it once he’s president.
Yes. But the prosecutors could just redact all classified material. The contents are irrelevant to the case, just the fact that they are classified. Prosecutors can just redact every line and paragraph that’s portion marked classified.
Or Biden has the ability to allow anyone to see any classified material if they need to go that far.
Or Biden has the ability to allow anyone to see any classified material if they need to go that far.
Then the terrorist base would start dishonestly whining about Biden interfering in the case.
To be clear, I don’t give a shit about their whining, but all indications are that Biden still doesn’t realize democracy is in a fight to the death and still thinks appearances matter.
And even then many of these are SCI. Just having a TS is not enough.
I thought it was only illegal for people with security clearance to improperly handle or view documents. Otherwise a journalist that published a story based on leaked documents could be prosecuted for looking at the documents.
Smith needs to call the bluff. If jurors see what’s inside, it’ll surely shock them that Trump was brazen about spreading it around. She hasn’t thought this through.
We need to stop giving in to Cannon’s blatant corruption. There must be some way to remove her.
Grounds to have her replaced? Most people know that top secret means security clearance.
That’s like demanding to see the contents of a snatched purse that clearly didn’t belong to the defendant.
That’s some pretty old-fashioned thinking. That purse could now be owned by anyone named Property of US Govt: Top Secret
There is also the whole CIPA System for presenting classified documents in summation or censored format, but Judge Cannon is at least implying that the Jury should see the entire document.
Trump’s lawyers got the prosecutor on another case fired for going on a date and we keep putting up with this woman???
Different rules depending on whos intereste you signal you’re going to serve.
While I agree with the sentiment… if you are referring to Nathan Wade, my understanding is that it was way more than “going on a date”.
More like fucking your boss (the DA, who assigned you this case) on the reg (behind your wife’s back), going on trips with your boss and being reimbursed by her for her expenses in cash, and perjuring yourself at your divorce hearing where you lied about when you started fucking your boss on the reg. There’s more that I’m sure I don’t remember. Lots of drama.
Admittedly not super relevant to the trump case but still enough of a shit show that looks bad and shouldn’t be happening. If he didn’t resign, I believe the entire office would have been kicked off the case since it’s under the DA/boss he’d been fucking. Now some other lawyer needs to take it over.
This is totally fair and I am grateful that you added a lot more context to my admittedly emotional and hyperbolic reactionary comment, while understanding the sentiment that this judge is doing unethical things that are directly affecting the case in favor to one side; in comparison to what amounts to a bad look (since there was no evidence that it was affecting the outcome of the case)
It’s unprecedented. I know what the supporters would say "so is prosecuting an ex president ". There’s a difference. A fast food CEO killing a dozen people and serving them up in 15 different locations is unprecedented. A judge wouldn’t say that the jury has to try the burgers though.
This ignorance alone should get her removed from the case. Dear Lord. There are laws and rules for how classified information must be handled. Wtf?
There are also rules for evidence, which are generally the most important rulings in a criminal trial. Allowing the documents to be left out but also used as evidence is an obvious appeal that likely wins, secret evidence isn’t allowed.
How the fuck do you prosecute this case then? Read all the jury in just to see the evidence and then back out again?
The jury needs to know if they’re classified. Why do they need to see the contents?
This is what I’m asking. What do the contents of the documents have to do with the case at hand? How do the contents of these classified documents absolve him of the charges for making false statements and obstruction of justice?
And if the jury really needs to know the contents of the files, I don’t see any issue with just swearing in a jury of already cleared TS SCI w/Poly Commissioned Officers, or just full send it and let Trump get prosecuted in a military court. I’d love to see a bunch of GWOT brass ream that dudes asshole.
The government doesn’t get to just claim things. If they want beyond all reasonable doubt that files were actually dangerous they have to show the files. They could try just going the expert testimony route, but that is a lot harder to prove. Another option would be getting Trump to agree the documents were classified, but that’s a dumb move to agree.
Lol, the documents are either marked classified or not - he’s not being prosecuted for having “dangerous” (whatever that means) files, he’s being prosecuted for possessing and improperly handling classified files and trying to hide evidence of this and refusing to turn them over when asked to do so.
The core of the alleged crime deals with documents that are classified, not the contents of the classified documents, it does not matter why the documents were classified, only that they are classified. Whether the documents should be classified or where to mundane to be classified in the first place is not something for the jury to consider and not what the prosecution is about; any suggestions to the contrary are smoke and mirrors meant to muddy public discourse.
All the jury needs to be able to verify about the documents possessed by Trump is whether they were marked classified or not, which is a matter of record and is generally denoted by the documents being marked as such.
The judge is being absolutely unreasonable here and the only benefit of the doubt she can be granted is that maybe she just doesn’t understand the law (which would be pretty much just as bad).
I’m pretty sure nothing in the law states that only “dangerous” classified stuff counts. The government absolutely has final say in what is classified.
Yeah it could be the Navy’s secret ice cream recipe and it wouldnt change the consequences.
Everything you just said was wrong
Another option would be getting Trump to agree the documents were classified, but that’s a dumb move to agree.
He already did, on tape
“See as president I could have declassified it,” Trump says. “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html
He didn’t choose most of these documents because of their contents, just because they’re classified to satisfy his power trip, so all the jury needs to know is that they’re genuine government documents which are classified which he didn’t have the right to take.
If this case had involved what he did with information in it then sure, but it ISN’T
Secret evidence is literally allowed all the time when dealing with secrets if the document in question is specs of nuclear weapons you redact all the strategically important info and allow them to see the header and subject matter without all the details.
I can only hope that the DOJ is investigating her for corruption.
deleted by creator
Did she actually attend rallies in Trump face paint?
I have deleted my prior post because I went back to find the picture and it has since been clarified that the one in the photo on the slate article was not, in fact, the judge.
Apologies for the accidental misinformation.
Good on you for doing the right thing and admitting your mistake. None of us is perfect.
But can we appreciate for a second the fact that this post has 4 upvotes, but me questioning your “accidental misinformation” has been down voted?Lol. typical Lemmy.
Just doing what needs to be done, nothing that should deserve praise.
Personally I just ignore up/down votes. They are pointless gamification to manipulate human interaction in favor of dopamine triggers and addiction. I’ve tried to filter them with ublock origin so i cant even see the buttons or the numbers, but it just seems to remove them for that individual post.
I’d suggest anyone especially ignore commentless downvotes, Cause you will always find random assholes that just get their shits and giggles from downvoting shit for no reason other than the fact it gives them some undeserved sense of power and control in their otherwise empty and pathetic lives.
We’re basically agreeing, just saying it different ways: voting on these websites is a joke.
Of course.
Its not meant for any useful or good purpose. Its only there as an addiction driver to get people on that dopamine high. Which has resulted in human interaction on the internet (especially places that include up/down vote or similar mechanisms such as likes) becoming more and more extreme and polarized.
Can she really do that, force the jury without security clearance to view top secret documents? Seems bullshit to me.
But what are the options? Obviously she says to let Trump go if the jury can’t see the docs. If he gets the jury see the docs, do they have to get security clearance? They have to sign an NDA of some sort?
Hopefully they can appeal and just provide summaries or redacted documents. Or get security clearance for jurors, sure.
There has to be a way to convict someone for stealing state secrets without sharing those state secrets publicly.
If it’s illegal to share classified documents, including to jury members, and the jury can’t convict without seeing all the info on the classified documents, then it is just legal to share classified documents, you would be unable to prosecute. That would be crazy.
you would be unable to prosecute
I think that’s the point
I know right? What circular reasoning this is. The government is concerned about keeping our secrets safe, so they ask for the former president to return them and must force the issue when he doesn’t, but to keep the secrets safe the judge wants them to divulge the secrets?
I do not see the relevance of the actual contents. It could have been a government encryption device or a cell phone or something.
As an alternative couldn’t they redact the crucial parts? Ex. “Submarine x, with a periscope depth of xxx is to be deployed in a xxx configuration to secure the xxx area.” Pretty easy to see the reason for the secrecy without giving the details. Although there are probably situations where this wouldn’t work.
Well, can’t say she’s not effective. The case made it past the election.
Showing TOP SECRET and HIGHER documents to random people on the street HELPS American National Security!
I sort of think that showing them the secrets would actively harm Trump because it would become obvious just how dangerous the material is. I don’t think she’s really thought this thing through.
Is the gambit here that they weren’t actually that bad?
No, I think that they are actually that bad. I also think that the judge is dumb enough to have actually now placed these super important documents in the hands of 12 jurors plus some alternates in an effort to bow to her orange master. My take: she’s not actually that smart but thinks she is and she thinks she just did a “gotcha”. I believe that a jury seeing them would be shocked at what was left in a bathroom for anyone to steal.
Genuine question - do we know enough to know these were that bad?
I’d definitely believe what you’re saying too but curious how much we know about the contents.
Edit: lol at the downvotes, lemmy
The defining characteristic of US classified documents is that their release would cause some degree of damage to US national security, ranging from harmful to gravely harmful. here’s a Cornell Law writeup that squares with what I know here.
Regardless of any opinions one might have as to the use and application of classification, in the eyes of the US government taking these documents without authorization is harmful by definition.
do we know enough to know these were that bad?
We do: Trump is facing a criminal trial over them. They wouldn’t be classified if they weren’t sensitive.
If something is classified at that level that only top people can see it, then it’s bad. Not like “here is how to make a reactor” type make, but more like “here are all our spies, weapons projects, and seriously damaging information if it fell into the wrong hands”.
Which would be Trump’s tiny hands.
Yes we know from the reports of the documents that they included nuclear secrets and human intelligence sources. The later could cause people who are spying for us to be prosecuted and murdered and the mere suggestion that an idiot could leak this data has probably unfixably damaged our ability to collect intel for the next 20 years.
Within a classification level there isn’t “bad” and “less bad”.
If we prosecute anyone for leaking classified, we should prosecute anyone/everyone for leaking classified.
What’s the least bad thing that would be worth classifying and also stealing
Corporate espionage stuff. Some pile of documents a gov agency reviewed for compliance reasons, and which a competitor wants.
She is helping Trump extend the trial until after the election.
If she can help him get elected, then he can order the Justice Department to drop the case.
I think this might get her thrown off the case
It would delay things further unfortunately, but this is so egregiously wrong and in such a long list of mistakes and/or illegitimate moves meant to provide cover for Trump, I don’t think there’s any recourse but for Jack Smith to move to have her taken off the case. Even more when you consider her involvement prior to these charges when she got improperly involved with the search warrant bussiness before a higher court told her off and dismissed the whole thing. Shame she’s the one assigned to the strongest and least legally controversial criminal case against him.
Yeah this does feel like a bit of a rubicon moment for her. “Show this SCI/TS/NOFORN stuff (that Trump stole) to random yahoos from
the publicFlorida who are not vetted or security cleared.” That’s incredibly fucking stupid.
Could this be the first judge to go to jail for Trump?
I don’t really care what hole she goes into, but she needs to go somewhere that isn’t the courtroom!
Fired
Out of a cannon
Into the sun
Maybe they should move the case to DC then so there are enough active Top Secret clearances to create a healthy jury pool.
No defense/prosecutor would want a jury make up like that, they’d be too smart.
Clearance doesn’t mean someone is particularly intelligent. But I agree a jury of clearance holders would probably have pretty strong ideas regarding proper handling of it, so the defense clearly doesn’t want that.
Those people could easily imagine themselves in the hot seat and they know damn well how it would go.
Agree, not good for the defense.
Clearance doesn’t mean someone is particularly intelligent
I’m pretty sure it would weed out the bottom of the barrel idiots at least which I’m sure someone would prefer to have on the jury as they’d be easier convinced one way or the other.
Also more conservative than not.
Wasn’t this one of the main reasons for delaying the case to begin with? They had the “special examiner” review all the files to verify they were indeed top secret. I don’t understand why that person can’t just provide a summary to the jury. Letting them see the files seems like massive judicial overreach and probably illegal. Can she be disbarred for this?
