Do you think a judge someone nominated should be allowed to preside over that person's trial?

[goaded]

Updates

11 d

WTF? When was I supposed to add details? Anyway, it's Judge "loose" Cannon, who's been protecting Trump from a two week trial for about a year, now.

[AngryCarl]

There is a judge presiding. Judge Cannon. Normally a judge has broad discretion over how to run a trial. Or not run it, as in this case. Of course the defence or prosecution can appeal the judge's decisions to a higher authority if they're completely unlawful but it would have to be something really egregious.

To be fair I think Cannon crossed the line of egregious a long time ago but maybe Jack Smith has a different opinion.

[Juxtapose]

Haha I am so happy that case was delayed indefinitely. This miscarriage of justice needs to be aborted and Trump needs to be excused of all charges. The Stormy Daniels trial isn't even going well either.

So many different charges yet nothing is sticking yet..

[AngryCarl]

Trump is definitely going down for false accounting. They already reserved a special luxury cell for the former President.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose Nothing's "sticking" because only one trial has even started yet. Put the accusations before juries and we'll see if they'll stick.

[Juxtapose]

One trial was delayed indefinitely, the Supreme Court is on his side and the Stormy Daniels trial is an absolute clown show. Her testimony is absolutely absurd. She says she blacked out when the sex started even though she had no drugs? And her former lawyer even says she was running an extortion racket against Trump.

It's all bullshit and all these charges are clearly Stalinist tactics to stall Trump out from campaigning or send him the jail and take away his secret service protection so he can be killed like Jeffrey Epstein.

You're not going to win and I am so happy for that.

[Juxtapose]

*to prison

[goaded]

"One trial was delayed indefinitely" by a judge Trump appointed and who already exceeded her authority to interfere in the initial investigation.

"the Supreme Court is on his side" Which is both not true (unless you mean they're helping to delay the time when Trump finally faces a jury in the Jan 6 case), and should make you ashamed to be American, where the courts are supposed to be impartial and no-one is supposed to be above the law.

"[Stormy Daniels'] former lawyer..." The one that stole from her?

Trump's lawyers didn't bother objecting to the salacious details in order to demand a mistrial.

Don't forget, the testimony was that a "sixty-year-old married man has his assistant ask a 27-year-old woman to his suite for dinner.

He greets her in his pajamas. She makes him put clothes on.

When she uses the bathroom, he surprises her in his underwear.

He tries to seduce her by saying she reminds him of his DAUGHTER.

Republicans! Party of “family values”! Here is your leader."
mastodon.online/.../112408796574233997

The Georgia case is still grinding onwards.

[Juxtapose]

It's one of the only judges who has any sense. They didn't run on a platform of being biased and they are helping stop this insanity. This is utterly disgraceful to go against the prime political candidate using Stalinist tactics. Biden and friends are even tossing around the idea of stripping Trump of his secret service protections in prison so he can be assassinated.

No, there are more conservatives on the court and they are not filled with the woke mind virus that gives some Trump derangement syndrome. The whole world is appalled by what we are doing to Trump.

Yes actually his lawyers did object and they want a retrial because the salacious details are irrelevant and clearly made up. She did not spank him with a magazine and she did not black out, it's clearly bullshit with absolutely no evidence to substantiate it.

I don't really care about the rest of the bullshit you posted.

[goaded]

There's literally audio of Trump showing people with no security clearance war plans against Iran and explaining that he could have declassified them as president, but he didn't.

[DrPepper12]

You really should consult reputable sources. Infowars and newsmax and HANNITY don't count

[DrPepper12]

Sad! As Dear Leader would say.

[dustybiker2]

If you can't be a juror with bias one most certainly shouldn't be a judge. I don't give a damn who's on trial. That's basic. in my opinion anyway

[DrPepper12]

She should have refused but she's so inexperienced and Trump fangirling that it's transparent she's in the tank

[msc545]

Sure. Once a Federal Judge takes the job, they cannot be removed except for some very outrageous behavior. So if the person that nominated them is on trial, there is no reason to assume bias.

[goaded]

Has it ever happened before, in the history of the US, that a former president faced federal criminal charges? Don't you think that the people he nominated should recuse themselves?

[goaded]

How about when "a defendant is a former business partner of their spouse's ex-Mafia employer."?

[DrPepper12]

Are you insane? Ethics say even the appearance of impropriety.

[gorydetails]

You getting mad your team’s bullshit charges are falling apart?

[goaded]

You know they're not. They're simply being delayed, using Republican donor money.

[gorydetails]

But you were fine with democrat prosecutors saying on camera they were going to get Trump, you clown.

[Juxtapose]

^^ there are people involved in these trials who literally campaigned on being biased against Trump. Absolutely lunacy.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose @gorydetails Don't you think there were people elected for saying they were going to go after Al Capone?

[gorydetails]

Was Al Capone the rival political candidate to the resident of the white house?

[goaded]

No, but like the rival political candidate to the resident of the white house, he was a crook.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose @gorydetails What will you two say "if" Trump is convicted of crimes?

That will be after a grand jury of citizens decided there was case to answer and a jury of citizens have decided he's guilty.

So far, there's just been five grand juries, iirc. They all decided there was case to answer.

[gorydetails]

Every bogus case is falling apart in front of your eyes. The FBI staged the classified documents for a photo op and bungled evidence. That case is on indefinite hold. Stormy Daniels case is falling apart. She's a complete shit show.

You tards underestimated that regular people would see through these charades.

[goaded]

Regular people, people who aren't idiots, generally trust the justice system. There are exceptions, but Trump's trials aren't them.

They could have all been over last year, if he was innocent; instead he's spent millions of donor money on delays.

[gorydetails]

Well they did trust the justice system until you dem fucktards started weaponizing it. Now, when as absolutely everyone could have predicted, it's being used against you lefties you start whining about it.

It's almost like I predicted would happen.

[goaded]

FFS, you think that the justice system is being used against "you lefties"?

[gorydetails]

It's without a doubt that the biden administration is weaponizing the justice department against his political rivals.

[Juxtapose]

Absolutely Biden is.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose @gorydetails

[RedInnocent69]

It’s kind of the nature of being a judge. Impartial, guided by law and facts.

[goaded]

Not to mention avoiding the appearance of bias. They're supposed to recuse themselves if their impartiality can reasonably be questioned. In this case, Cannon already got admonished by a higher court for improperly interfering in the investigation.