Judge Aileen Cannon's 'pro-Trump' trial ruling is a very bad deal for Jack Smith: experts
Judge Aileen Cannon's latest ruling on the timeline for Donald Trump's classified documents case is written to appear neutral, but it's actually a really bad deal for the Justice Department, according to the all-star legal panel who joined MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace Friday night.
"The more you read it, the more it seems like a very pro-Trump order," said former federal prosecutor analyst Harry Litman, "camouflaged — which is a problem in and of itself — camouflaged as a neutral order."
Brandon van Grack, a national security lawyer, explained Cannon ultimately “flipped the process on its head” when it comes to dealing with stopgaps to avoid "graymail," or threatening to expose sensitive national security information.
"The way the process typically works throughout all my time at the Department of Justice, is that the production is made to defense counsel, cleared defense counsel for the defendant, who are not accused of compromising or harming national security,” van Grack said.
“Some of the documents can go to the defendant, but oftentimes there is some material that doesn't go to the defendant."
Wallace asked Litman if there was any possible mechanism in place to protect against Trump trying to influence the judge by ranting about it on social media, noting "if Cannon does anything Trump doesn't like, we will know.”
Yes, Litman replied. They can demand a Cannon recusal.
"The law is pretty tough to recuse someone," noted Litman. "But if she makes what they view as an elementary legal blunder, I think they'll not only appeal it but couple it with a motion to recuse her."
“But so far, she's little by little leaning slightly toward Trump, not enough for them to go forward with that kind of motion."
See the full comments in the video below or at the link here.
Leave a Comment
Related Post