Is this not potential grounds for a mistrial and a solid appeal?
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
372 points (99.5% liked)
News
23301 readers
3615 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yep. Dudes lawyer is probably telling him to go with the flow, knowing this is a perfect setup for mistral.
Eh, by the time this goes to trial Trump could be in office. Then, as day one dictator, Trump declarse anyone who helped Ukraine at all are wartime traitors, use the guy's weird recruiting thing as evidence, and just summarily execute the guy.
Edit: she's also on the short list to be AG. She may not even be a judge when this goes to trial.
An appeal, sure.
But I doubt they’re going to get a mistrial on it. Dude is guilty as hell. Probably going to lead to reduced sentencing, though. (All though that’s still gonna be at “you’re fucked” levels,)
Edit: even if there is a mistrial, they’ll certainly be allowed to retry.
Right. A mistrial for easily avoidable reasons would be a waste of time and money.
And the Trump camp wants this?
I dunno.
Maybe they like the propaganda of trump getting shot at?
Their legal strategies are written in crayon, so maybe they just think a sentence of a second lifetime is meaningful.
That dude is getting the entire courthouse thrown at him to prove her allegiance to Fussolini is completely unwavering, again.
Fussolini
*Trumpler
*GröpenFührer
Glad to see this one set loose out into the wild again 😜
It's honestly perfect, it's suplanted my previous name of choice, "Orange Julius"
I was always partial to Mango Mussolini but GröpenFührer is pretty fun too!
Pol Potbelly.
And then he'll get a favorable appeal.
Yep, she'll do some unnecessarily bullshit to tip the scales, and accidentally cause an obviously guilty guy to walk after an appeal on procedural grounds.
For some reason, I'm not terribly torn up about that in this particular circumstance.
I mean, the guy is a piece of shit though, I'd rather him stay locked up instead of writing a book about how he tried to shoot the president.
It wouldn't be the first time a dude showed up to a place with a gun wanting to kill people, killed people, and then got away with it scott free while conservative media fawned over him.
guy is a piece of shit
I'm not going to dispute that.
I'd rather him stay locked up
And that's entirely fair. I'm just not particularly in favor of someone who tried to [do a silly little thing to] him being punished. So if he gets off scott-free, I won't be particularly upset about it.
Wait, he's being charged with attempted assassination? Did he actually aim a gun at trump? Or was he just exercising his 2nd amendment rights?
It's more of a concept of an attempt at an assassination
The Dishonorable Aileen Qanon
There we go
Cannon: Bias? That's absurd. That's an absurd reason to get in the way of my Supreme Court appointment.
Someone PLEASE, get a camera and take another picture of this woman to use.
Just use a picture of the poop emoji, it's about as much respect as she deserves
That's what I came here to say. I'm so sick of seeing that picture.
Why is it always that same photo?
Is this better?
A bit, yeah
It's the most punchable
Probably her official portrait? This is a judge, I don't think you can just grab a random picture off her Facebook or whatever.
This is a bit of a non-story.
Department of Justice already decided not to reassign the case.
Backed into a corner, the Justice Department finally took a stance on Cannon’s partiality on Oct. 21—at least in the context of the Routh prosecution. In a perfunctory, one-and-a-half-page filing, the government opposed Routh’s motion, stating that it did “not present either facts or case law requiring recusal on this record in light of the controlling standard.”
Given that the Justice Department has already ruled on this, there was no way that Cannon was going to say "You might be right, I can't be impartial." Has she done that it would have also guaranteed her removal from the documents case when it is eventually reopened. Though I suspect she'll be removed from that anyway.
cant really expect her to since her hero and benefactor was in danger /s.
Right, because this is the case that would make her care about presenting as impartial.
Not exactly on topic, but she looks like she could be a linebacker on a pro nfl team. That neck and jaw, both thick as fuck. I'm assuming the project 2025 team wrote that statement like pretty much everything that comes out of her stupid fucking mouth.