Not until then but at that point, Jack Smith can intervene and request a replacement. He is too savvy to have chosen the south Florida venue, knowing she might be selected as judge, without knowing exactly how he intends to handle the situation. He won't ask for a recusal, lest it be seen as the very politicization of the trial that he was appointed by Garland to avoid, but will let her, excuse the expression, dig her own grave.
Agreed, thanks Mim. A recusal isn't in the cards, and if Judge Cannon has the smarts to put her socks on before her shoes, she'll ask for advice from the judges on the 11th Circuit if she gets into a tight spot. We'll have to rely on Mr. Smith and his team to pull this one off despite the challenges.
Hm... I feel like she is actively opposed as well though. She has now discovered the sting of rebuke, for sure. Perhaps that will encourage her to go more cautiously, but I am so very tired of expecting better sense out of MAGA supporters.
Doesn't it look just as biased for Mr. Smith to ask for her removal after she makes a call he doesn't like as for him to make it now, before he is just "objecting to her decisions", based on her documented strong political support for Trump such as attendance at rallies in paint-face and pro-Trump hat?
It seems like now would be no more apt to look biased to Trump supporters than later, and we all know they will scream nonsense no matter how carefully crafted the steps taken. The real question then is which would save the most time? A request for recusal now or later?
“I am so very tired of expecting better sense out of MAGA supporters.” I only add, cults have never been known for anything but lunacy (cyclical insanity). Beyond true of this one.
the idea that we should be worried about the reaction of TFF's "supporters" to something that "appears" biased is ridiculous. they've already weighed in...to them, the whole thing is revenge, overreach, governmental "weaponization"...pick whatever bullshit term you like. NONE of this is ok to them.
so fuck them.
if we're talking about trying to tamp down their violent predispositions, forget it. in case anyone's forgotten, appeasement doesn't work. it might DELAY shit a little, but that's it.
You'll never find me recommending taking one action or another based on the mistaken belief that if democrats just did everything exactly so, it would be possible to meet MAGA criticisms in ways that would satisfy and silence them.
Once that is on the table though, pointing out that either way there will be faux outrage allows moving on to figure out what really will matter to reality (in this case not only legalities but also perceptions by true independents - not the pretend "I'm Republican and Daddy was and I'll vote R no matter what but this is embarrassing lately so I'll tell you I'm an Independent" folk) and move to maximize those outcomes.
The Schiff thing is a case in point. I suspect the high number of CA representatives who voted against the resolution weren't so much fed up with MAGA extremism but were guarding their seats and loathe to set a precedence of astronomical fines for misbehavior, with an eye to their own exposures. Just look at their statements afterwards.
She won’t screw up her appointment because of him. She knows all eyes are on her.
She might not play favorites for Trump, but her inexperience means she can inadvertently make a fatal decision without realizing she did.
Not until then but at that point, Jack Smith can intervene and request a replacement. He is too savvy to have chosen the south Florida venue, knowing she might be selected as judge, without knowing exactly how he intends to handle the situation. He won't ask for a recusal, lest it be seen as the very politicization of the trial that he was appointed by Garland to avoid, but will let her, excuse the expression, dig her own grave.
Exactly right, Mim.
Agreed, thanks Mim. A recusal isn't in the cards, and if Judge Cannon has the smarts to put her socks on before her shoes, she'll ask for advice from the judges on the 11th Circuit if she gets into a tight spot. We'll have to rely on Mr. Smith and his team to pull this one off despite the challenges.
Mim, you and me is on da same page
Mim, well stated. Thanks.
precisely.
Thank you Mim. Now I’m able to breathe again.
Agree. Thanks, Mim.
Exactly so, TC. She doesn't know what she doesn't know, and doesn't know how to recognize that.
Which makes her actually more dangerous than someone who is actively opposed.
We have to hope that Jack Smith's team will appeal any bad rulings and ask for a replacement on remand.
Hm... I feel like she is actively opposed as well though. She has now discovered the sting of rebuke, for sure. Perhaps that will encourage her to go more cautiously, but I am so very tired of expecting better sense out of MAGA supporters.
Doesn't it look just as biased for Mr. Smith to ask for her removal after she makes a call he doesn't like as for him to make it now, before he is just "objecting to her decisions", based on her documented strong political support for Trump such as attendance at rallies in paint-face and pro-Trump hat?
It seems like now would be no more apt to look biased to Trump supporters than later, and we all know they will scream nonsense no matter how carefully crafted the steps taken. The real question then is which would save the most time? A request for recusal now or later?
“I am so very tired of expecting better sense out of MAGA supporters.” I only add, cults have never been known for anything but lunacy (cyclical insanity). Beyond true of this one.
the idea that we should be worried about the reaction of TFF's "supporters" to something that "appears" biased is ridiculous. they've already weighed in...to them, the whole thing is revenge, overreach, governmental "weaponization"...pick whatever bullshit term you like. NONE of this is ok to them.
so fuck them.
if we're talking about trying to tamp down their violent predispositions, forget it. in case anyone's forgotten, appeasement doesn't work. it might DELAY shit a little, but that's it.
You'll never find me recommending taking one action or another based on the mistaken belief that if democrats just did everything exactly so, it would be possible to meet MAGA criticisms in ways that would satisfy and silence them.
Once that is on the table though, pointing out that either way there will be faux outrage allows moving on to figure out what really will matter to reality (in this case not only legalities but also perceptions by true independents - not the pretend "I'm Republican and Daddy was and I'll vote R no matter what but this is embarrassing lately so I'll tell you I'm an Independent" folk) and move to maximize those outcomes.
The Schiff thing is a case in point. I suspect the high number of CA representatives who voted against the resolution weren't so much fed up with MAGA extremism but were guarding their seats and loathe to set a precedence of astronomical fines for misbehavior, with an eye to their own exposures. Just look at their statements afterwards.
why would you assume she cares?
Of course surely she knew all eyes were on her before as well and look at how cautiously she proceeded then...
That was also before she got smacked down. When that happened, she did as directed.
but did she actually have a choice?