374
Is this not potential grounds for a mistrial and a solid appeal?
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
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.
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.
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
374 points (99.2% liked)
News
35962 readers
3185 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
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. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
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 2 years ago
MODERATORS