“In the Bag for Donald Trump” Critiques Surface Over Judge Aileen Cannon’s Handling of Classified Documents Case
DREW ANGERER; STEVEN FERDMAN/GC IMAGES;
Andrew Weissmann, a former top prosecutor, has voiced significant concerns regarding Judge Aileen Cannon’s conduct in the ongoing classified documents case against former President Donald Trump. Weissmann highlighted specific actions by Cannon that he believes indicate bias in Trump’s favor, during a discussion on MSNBC.
Weissmann pointed to “two tells” that he argues show Cannon’s partiality. The first issue he raised was her decision not to allow the assigned magistrate judge, who Weissmann notes is far more experienced, to handle any pretrial motions. “Her refusal to have the assigned Magistrate Judge, who is far more experienced than she, handle any pretrial motions,” tips her hand that she doesn’t want anyone else involved for a reason,” Weissmann explained. He suggested that this move aims to slow down the case’s progress, particularly to avoid a trial before the upcoming election.
He also mentioned that it prevents the magistrate judge from potentially making impartial rulings that Cannon might then need to overturn, which would reflect poorly on her. In his analysis, Weissmann predicted that Cannon “will do the bare minimum for the U.S. government to avoid being reversed and removed, and won’t hold a trial before the election.” This approach, he argued, is a tactical decision to manage the case’s timeline and outcomes subtly.
Adding to the conversation, reporter and MSNBC contributor Adam Klasfeld noted how Cannon has been disproportionately favorable towards Trump’s legal team during court proceedings. For instance, while Cannon reprimanded a prosecutor from the special counsel’s office for his “tone,” Trump’s lawyer was allowed to freely cast aspersions and even delve into conspiracy theories during the hearings.
Lawrence O’Donnell, host of the segment, highlighted the irony in Cannon chastising anyone about their tone in a case that includes serious allegations like encouraging attacks on FBI agents. “Federal judges have never had to consider protecting FBI agents nationally, and her worry is the tone,” O’Donnell remarked, underscoring the unusual nature of the judge’s concerns given the case’s gravity.
Weissmann concluded his critique by pointing out the inefficiency and potentially deliberate delays in the case handling. He criticized Cannon’s justifications and the slow pace of the proceedings, which do not align with the urgency such a high-profile case demands.
These observations paint a picture of a judicial process that some believe is being manipulated to benefit a specific party, raising questions about fairness and impartiality in a highly sensitive and significant legal battle.
